Really shocked and confused by some of these roster moves

Sivy · Sep 1, 2012

I heard they were lookin to bring in T.O.

WhiZa · Sep 1, 2012

mgteich said:
Slater doen't play WR anymore than he plays safety. He is one of the best special teamers in the nil, but I wouldn't want if on the field as a position player.

You don't think he will get one pass thrown to him this year? I'm not saying he's going to be in the mix at WR, but it was just a response to who is Brady going to throw to

WhiZa · Sep 1, 2012

Froob said:
They aren't close to the cap tho so I don't see why that would matter unless Bob is suddenly nickling and diming. I don't see branch back maybe chiefs?

Patriots are very financially conscious and every penny matters to them. Branch wasn't going to live up to his contract in their mind so they cut him, and the Patriots can take that same million+ dollars and find a guy they think can replace him or if they want to extend Welker that million+ dollars could come in very handy.

cmasspatsfan · Sep 1, 2012

scott99 said:
I appreciate all of th responses. Obviously I won't be responding to any negative comments aimed at me personally, that's just a waste of time.

My main concern about the WR position is depth. Lloyd or Welker go down with an injury, and then we'd be truly ****ed. Sure they can pick up some receiver waived by another team, but how long until those receivers learn the playbook ? A possible Hall Of Fame WR couldn't learn it in a year or trying. Yet, we cut 3 WR's that know the playbook really well and all 3 had meshed with Brady in the past. IF other teams sign those guys, they are gone forever. Gaffney JUST had his best season EVER, why not keep him as your #3 WR ? Even if he missed the first 2 or 3 games, you have an excellent #3 WR who can start if Lloyd or Welker go down. Now the best option is Edelman. Hopefully Gaffney comes back after the first game if he doesnt sign with someone else.

Demps, there have been ZERO reports of a MAJOR injury. And as far as spending a FULL season to learn to be a football player, he already is. He already showed what he can do as a RB and Return man in the NFL. He had the longest run for the Pats in the preseason, and he only played 2 games. He showed he'd be a great option out of the backfield on the wheel route, and it's a loss of an explosive weapon that we can't replace with anyone on the roster, especially as a return man, that upsets me the most. Until I read an article that says he blew out his ACL or MCL or both, I'm gonna be pissed about this move. Why sign him if you're not gonna use him. I guarantee he is even more pissed than I am about this move, and is questioning himself why he signed with the Pats. I bet he wishes he signed with a team that wouldn't hide him away for a full year. Weird move, and I'm not surprised there have been no reports of a major injury. I'd love to see an interview with Demps on his thoughts of this move, but like the Soviet Union of old, you will not hear a peep from Demps on this move.

You make some good points but the problem is theres only 53 spots and Bill has to keep the players that give them the best chance of winning. If someone goes down you worry about it then, Im sure they have plan A, plan B and so on for every position if someone goes down. You cant stack you roster with depth at every position especially if one area is a weakness.

Ring 6 · Sep 1, 2012

WhiZa said:
Patriots are very financially conscious and every penny matters to them. Branch wasn't going to live up to his contract in their mind so they cut him, and the Patriots can take that same million+ dollars and find a guy they think can replace him or if they want to extend Welker that million+ dollars could come in very handy.

I strongly disagree. If Branch makes the team better, he is on the roster regardless of salary. History proves that and you have to look no further than the same position a year ago.
To suggest we weakened the team to save money is wrong.

Ring 6 · Sep 1, 2012

scott99 said:
I appreciate all of th responses. Obviously I won't be responding to any negative comments aimed at me personally, that's just a waste of time.

My main concern about the WR position is depth. Lloyd or Welker go down with an injury, and then we'd be truly ****ed. Sure they can pick up some receiver waived by another team, but how long until those receivers learn the playbook ? A possible Hall Of Fame WR couldn't learn it in a year or trying. Yet, we cut 3 WR's that know the playbook really well and all 3 had meshed with Brady in the past. IF other teams sign those guys, they are gone forever. Gaffney JUST had his best season EVER, why not keep him as your #3 WR ? Even if he missed the first 2 or 3 games, you have an excellent #3 WR who can start if Lloyd or Welker go down. Now the best option is Edelman. Hopefully Gaffney comes back after the first game if he doesnt sign with someone else.

Demps, there have been ZERO reports of a MAJOR injury. And as far as spending a FULL season to learn to be a football player, he already is. He already showed what he can do as a RB and Return man in the NFL. He had the longest run for the Pats in the preseason, and he only played 2 games. He showed he'd be a great option out of the backfield on the wheel route, and it's a loss of an explosive weapon that we can't replace with anyone on the roster, especially as a return man, that upsets me the most. Until I read an article that says he blew out his ACL or MCL or both, I'm gonna be pissed about this move. Why sign him if you're not gonna use him. I guarantee he is even more pissed than I am about this move, and is questioning himself why he signed with the Pats. I bet he wishes he signed with a team that wouldn't hide him away for a full year. Weird move, and I'm not surprised there have been no reports of a major injury. I'd love to see an interview with Demps on his thoughts of this move, but like the Soviet Union of old, you will not hear a peep from Demps on this move.

Gaffney most likely is the 3rd WR and is only off the roster for flexibility.
Branch could also be back for the same reason.
Both are more likely that BB just decided to cut all the WRs and play without them.
As far as Demps, I'm sorry you are upset the player got hurt, but he is hurt.

Deus Irae · Sep 1, 2012

AndyJohnson said:
I strongly disagree. If Branch makes the team better, he is on the roster regardless of salary. History proves that and you have to look no further than the same position a year ago.
To suggest we weakened the team to save money is wrong.

This would be a brand new thing if your claim were true.

TruthSeeker · Sep 1, 2012

AndyJohnson said:
Gaffney most likely is the 3rd WR and is only off the roster for flexibility.
Branch could also be back for the same reason.
Both are more likely that BB just decided to cut all the WRs and play without them.
As far as Demps, I'm sorry you are upset the player got hurt, but he is hurt.

Andy, I always appreciate your responses, I always enjoy reading your threads. But I have to question your last comment. Yes I'm upset Demps was hurt, BUT was the injury IR worthy ? When Brady went down with his torn ACL and MCL, he wasn't immediately interviewed after the game telling the press he was ok and excited about his progression, same for Welker. Demps was, and was quoted as saying he's ok and excited about his progression (something to that effect, I'm sure someone will dig up the quote).

So it's not so simple as your last sentence. It's not a simple, oh well he blew out his knee so I'm upset he was IR'd. There is no evidence of a MAJOR injury, so why waste a whole year of not being able to use an explosive weapon, if he might miss 1 or 2 games. Very baffling move of signing him to the highest signing bonus for an undrafted free agent ever, to IR'ing him.

Sporin · Sep 1, 2012

My favorite part of cutdown day is how utterly convinced some fans are that they know better than the coaches who should stay or go.

The coaches who spend 20 hours a day evaluating the players first hand for weeks on end. The coaches who know all the ins and outs, medical details, and contract ins and outs.

Surely the Internet jockeys who might attend a practice or 2 know better.

Right?

I'm not saying BB is beyond reproach, but he's sure as heck better informed to make these hard decisions then anyone else.

PatsFanDan · Sep 1, 2012

I would agree with those that question Slater being expected to fill even the 4th WR role on this team. The fact is he isn't likely going to be that guy when all is said and done.

There are rumors floating that Miami wants to sign Gaffney but Gaffney's preference is to re-sign with the Pats once healthy.

Now these are rumors and it's anyone's guess if they can be substantiated at this point. But if they are true, I would have to think there was some sort of gentlemen's agreement made between Belichick and Gaffney when they cut him. Hence, I would expect him to be re-signed sometime between now and week 2 assuming he is by that point healthy enough to assume that #3 WR role.

Bottom line, I don't expect the Pats to go into this season (ok, maybe week 1) with only what they currently have at WR. But like everyone else here, I'm not a GM, I only play one here on internet message boards.

As for the Demps injury, none of us has or is going to have enough info to know how seriously he is hurt. It may come out at some point. But this is the Pats we are talking about. Take anything and everything a guy says about any injury with a grain of salt.

WhiZa · Sep 1, 2012

AndyJohnson said:
I strongly disagree. If Branch makes the team better, he is on the roster regardless of salary. History proves that and you have to look no further than the same position a year ago.
To suggest we weakened the team to save money is wrong.

A player getting over paid (no matter by how much) is weakening the team plain and simple.

Sfpat · Sep 1, 2012

scott99 said:
Andy, I always appreciate your responses, I always enjoy reading your threads. But I have to question your last comment. Yes I'm upset Demps was hurt, BUT was the injury IR worthy ? When Brady went down with his torn ACL and MCL, he wasn't immediately interviewed after the game telling the press he was ok and excited about his progression, same for Welker. Demps was, and was quoted as saying he's ok and excited about his progression (something to that effect, I'm sure someone will dig up the quote).

So it's not so simple as your last sentence. It's not a simple, oh well he blew out his knee so I'm upset he was IR'd. There is no evidence of a MAJOR injury, so why waste a whole year of not being able to use an explosive weapon, if he might miss 1 or 2 games. Very baffling move of signing him to the highest signing bonus for an undrafted free agent ever, to IR'ing him.

New Orleans put Nick Toon on IR. He had a hammy early in camp but was good enough to practice last week. I doubt if his injury was "season ending"

TheBostonStraggler · Sep 1, 2012

AndyJohnson said:
I strongly disagree. If Branch makes the team better, he is on the roster regardless of salary. History proves that and you have to look no further than the same position a year ago.
To suggest we weakened the team to save money is wrong.

That is a very relative statement. I agree that BB is looking at the ability to win as of prime importance. However, he would (and has) weakened the team in the short term to save money/strengthen (potentially) the team in the long run. For example, let's say Branch would help us win this year. Yet it would cost 3 years at 5 million per year to get Branch. Would we sign him?
I realize that is an exaggerated example but I think the point is still clear: cuts can be made in favor of money versus a victory this Sunday.

But in this specific case, I agree with you. The smallish cost of Branch leads me to believe he would be here if BB thought it was a net positive to the team. IMO BB believes the roster flexibility is the greater net positive.

Ring 6 · Sep 1, 2012

WhiZa said:
A player getting over paid (no matter by how much) is weakening the team plain and simple.

Not unless you have something else to do with that money.

If you have 15mill of cap room, and can sign Wayne Hunter for 1mill to start at RT or Vollmer for 10 mill you have a stronger team with Vollmer.

I think what you are getting at is the opportunity cost of the expense, but at this point there is nothing to do with the excess money you would get by such a strategy as cutting the better player because he makes more money than the lesser player.

mgteich · Sep 1, 2012

We always have something else to do with the money. We can save it until next year. That is one of the team-friendly terms in the new CBA.

AndyJohnson said:
Not unless you have something else to do with that money.

If you have 15mill of cap room, and can sign Wayne Hunter for 1mill to start at RT or Vollmer for 10 mill you have a stronger team with Vollmer.

I think what you are getting at is the opportunity cost of the expense, but at this point there is nothing to do with the excess money you would get by such a strategy as cutting the better player because he makes more money than the lesser player.

Really shocked and confused by some of these roster moves

Sivy

In the Starting Line-Up

WhiZa

Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

WhiZa

Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

cmasspatsfan

Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

Ring 6

PatsFans.com Supporter

Ring 6

PatsFans.com Supporter

Deus Irae

PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club

TruthSeeker

PatsFans.com Supporter

Sporin

Practice Squad Player

PatsFanDan

Practice Squad Player

WhiZa

Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

Sfpat

In the Starting Line-Up

TheBostonStraggler

Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

Ring 6

PatsFans.com Supporter

mgteich

PatsFans.com Veteran

Similar threads