What is definitely missing from this year's roster

[jeffbiologist]

Through these successful years there was a common thread that is missing from this year's team.....Not one established vet came here for "the hometown discount" or "one year for the ring" veteran minimum type. The only notable vet added was Lynch and he was Tanks' replacement....and came in FULL PRICE. Now the question is ....WHY??
Could it be because of last year's scandal?
Could it be because we didnt want more vets?(I dont think so)
Could it be that BB's message is getting old?
Are we now cutting costs(keeping lots of rookies)to resign some of our own vets?
Or could it be that players simply dont have the faith that we can compete for the ring this year?
I think this an obvious question to ask without any real answers. If anyone that knows our cap status could follow up it would be appropriate. Thanks.

 

[spacecrime]

Re: What is definately missing from this year's roster

Or could it be that players simply dont have the faith that we can compete for the ring this year?
I think this an obvious question to ask without any real answers.

No, quite obviously you do not.

NFL players think the Patriots can't compete. That's why they are signing with the Cardinals and Lions and Raiders instead. For a shot at a ring.



Does Patsfans have a humor forum? You could be the moderator.

 

[Mainefan]

Re: What is definately missing from this year's roster

Jeffbiologist, I know you haven't noticed, but the Patriots just got younger and stronger. It was time. As for older veterans, there are still a couple out there we might grab. Be patient. Those who are knowledgeable and experienced who spend their entire time trying to field the best team possible have demonstrated that they are not fools.

 

[DaBruinz]

Re: What is definately missing from this year's roster

Through these successful years there was a common thread that is missing from this year's team.....Not one established vet came here for "the hometown discount" or "one year for the ring" veteran minimum type. The only notable vet added was Lynch and he was Tanks' replacement....and came in FULL PRICE. Now the question is ....WHY??
Could it be because of last year's scandal?
Could it be because we didnt want more vets?(I dont think so)
Could it be that BB's message is getting old?
Are we now cutting costs(keeping lots of rookies)to resign some of our own vets?
Or could it be that players simply dont have the faith that we can compete for the ring this year?
I think this an obvious question to ask without any real answers. If anyone that knows our cap status could follow up it would be appropriate. Thanks.

Could you please explain who the notable vets were this past Free Agency? John Lynch doesn't count because he wasn't on the market during free agency. Also, Lynch didn't come at full price since he was making a lot more than 1.2 million with Denver.

As for cutting costs, the Pats have over 10% of their salary cap in dead money. They are also at about 5.7 million. They gave Ty Warren a contract extension already. Wilfork's should be on the horizon.

All you have is supposition with nothing to really back it up.

 

[LoganMankinsPancakeBlocks]

Re: What is definately missing from this year's roster

Another possibility is there just weren't any or as many hungry vets available in free agency this year who could help out significantly.

Zach Thomas is the only one I can think of, and it's pretty clear he chose the Cowboys because he didn't want to go to a divisional rival of the team he spent his entire career with, not that he thought the Patriots couldn't compete for a ring.

 

[patsgo]

Re: What is definately missing from this year's roster

Through these successful years there was a common thread that is missing from this year's team.....Not one established vet came here for "the hometown discount" or "one year for the ring" veteran minimum type. The only notable vet added was Lynch and he was Tanks' replacement....and came in FULL PRICE. Now the question is ....WHY??
Could it be because of last year's scandal?
Could it be because we didnt want more vets?(I dont think so)
Could it be that BB's message is getting old?
Are we now cutting costs(keeping lots of rookies)to resign some of our own vets?
Or could it be that players simply dont have the faith that we can compete for the ring this year?
I think this an obvious question to ask without any real answers. If anyone that knows our cap status could follow up it would be appropriate. Thanks.

if i were you id stick to biology

 

[bradmahn]

Re: What is definately missing from this year's roster

Tank Williams, Lewis Sanders, Fernando Bryant, Victor Hobson, Flynn, Welbourne... all of these players came here as free agents for minimum-type deals. Flynn or Welbourne may be back, Williams was nearly assured of a roster spot before his injury, Sanders made the team, and Bryant and Hobson didn't.

They came, they just weren't good enough to beat out the other talent.

 

[jeffbiologist]

Re: What is definately missing from this year's roster

Could you please explain who the notable vets were this past Free Agency? John Lynch doesn't count because he wasn't on the market during free agency. Also, Lynch didn't come at full price since he was making a lot more than 1.2 million with Denver.

As for cutting costs, the Pats have over 10% of their salary cap in dead money. They are also at about 5.7 million. They gave Ty Warren a contract extension already. Wilfork's should be on the horizon.

All you have is supposition with nothing to really back it up.

You answered part of my question with your question....THERE ARE NO notable vets. Lynch's 1.2M isnt what I consider a hometown discount either(I compare Bruschi's 2M/2yr deal).
My point is were they right when they added only 1 draft pick and a bunch of vets last year? They went 16-0 so I would say overwhelmingly--YES. They strayed so far away from their own "winning model" it is very curious, leading to the title of the thread. Now they can say alot of crap about "their types of guys" etc, but on the same day you cut Chad Jackson(who will now forever be a posterchild for posts like mine) how can you argue with a "youth/athleticism movement"???
Now 10% is ALOT of dead $$ if the cap is at or over 100M....and they signed Warren LAST YEAR, why bring him up??
This isnt supposition, this is a clear and obvious change of direction from last year. Thats why I proposed the question, not the any one person has the answers.....just so that we can all talk about it without looking like either zombies or heretics.

 

[jeffbiologist]

Re: What is definately missing from this year's roster

No, quite obviously you do not.

NFL players think the Patriots can't compete. That's why they are signing with the Cardinals and Lions and Raiders instead. For a shot at a ring.



Does Patsfans have a humor forum? You could be the moderator.

Hey funny boy, can you tell me why they changed their ways so quickly? What we did last year worked right? Why would you change? Are you telling me that we COULDNT do the same as last year or are you telling me that they didnt want to? Either answer is very curious to me. Telling me they want to get younger and more athletic on the day they release CJackson just doesnt wash....

 

[DaBruinz]

Re: What is definately missing from this year's roster

You answered part of my question with your question....THERE ARE NO notable vets. Lynch's 1.2M isnt what I consider a hometown discount either(I compare Bruschi's 2M/2yr deal).
My point is were they right when they added only 1 draft pick and a bunch of vets last year? They went 16-0 so I would say overwhelmingly--YES. They strayed so far away from their own "winning model" it is very curious, leading to the title of the thread. Now they can say alot of crap about "their types of guys" etc, but on the same day you cut Chad Jackson(who will now forever be a posterchild for posts like mine) how can you argue with a "youth/athleticism movement"???

You mis-read my statement. I was asking you to NAME all these "notable" vets you are talking about.

Why would Lynch take a "home town discount" with the Patriots? Fact is that he didn't take one to stay with the Broncos and he came to the Pats.

Dude, wake up already. This "argument" of yours has no validity at all. You are just fumbling around with your argument and its getting OLD.

Now 10% is ALOT of dead $$ if the cap is at or over 100M....and they signed Warren LAST YEAR, why bring him up??
This isnt supposition, this is a clear and obvious change of direction from last year. Thats why I proposed the question, not the any one person has the answers.....just so that we can all talk about it without looking like either zombies or heretics.

I brought Warren up because he was supposed to have been a free agent coming up. It called keeping talent.

It IS supposition and no matter what you delude yourself with, its not a clear change from the way the Patriots have run the team over the years. And last year had more to do with a lackluster draft with little talent than it did anything else.

 

[DaBruinz]

Re: What is definately missing from this year's roster

Hey funny boy, can you tell me why they changed their ways so quickly? What we did last year worked right? Why would you change? Are you telling me that we COULDNT do the same as last year or are you telling me that they didnt want to? Either answer is very curious to me. Telling me they want to get younger and more athletic on the day they release CJackson just doesnt wash....

Listen. They did NOT change their ways. Why can't you get that through that thick skull of yours. There was very little in the way of talent available on the free agent market. How is that the Patriots fault? Answer? Its NOT. The Patriots have used whatever means necessary to add players to their team. They done it with free agents. They've done it with draft picks. They've done it with waiver wire pick ups. They've done it with UDFAs.

Why doesn't it wash? Because they cut ONE PLAYER who is young? They also cut John Lynch. What does that tell you?

Man, you just love grasping at non-existant straws.

 

[DaBruinz]

BTW, Jeff, you might want to check history a bit.

2006 - Pats added 7 Rookies via the draft and a UDFA in Pierre Woods
2005 - Pats added 5 Rookies via the draft, a UDFA by the name of Mike Wright
2003 - Pats added 7 Rookies via the draft.

So, I'm not sure how them adding 7 this year really falls into your idea of them changing their ways.