Does this just make too much sense? (Andre Johnson wants out of Houston)

AzPatsFan said:

I agree, those drafts were terrible. The draft picks of those years used for the likes of Wes Welker, Randy Moss and Adalius Thomas were all major disappointments. Guys who never did a damn thing in a Pats uniform.

Why none have even been selected to the Canton Hall of Fame; and only two have even the prospect of doing so.

Total terrible drafts.

/sarc off

Click to expand...

I'm glad that you turned off the sarcasm, because you totally missed the point of the post.

First off, Adalius Thomas was a free agent acquisition which had nothing to do with draft picks whatsoever. Secondly, most consider him the biggest failure of a free agent acquisition in the history of the team, considering what it cost them. I'm not sure that bringing Adailus Thomas into the discussion is doing much for your argument, as irrelevant as Thomas is to any of it.

I don't believe that you read through the thread or placed this post into the proper context, as it was in response to someone else's comment.

We were talking about the draft selections in the years of 2006-2009...and they completely sucked. No one would even come close to disputing that. It doesn't mean that I was ripping on Bill Belichick or that I didn't give him credit in many other posts pertaining to his draft selections overall. Why you chose to select my comments which were very impartial and fair out of any other posts in the thread is beyond me, but don't worry--I wasn't meaning to insinuate that Belichick has done a bad job; it was actually quite the opposite.

We're good here, I am still a Patriots homer for the most part.

supafly said:

Either way, I am certainly satisfied with Belichick's overall draft history--although periods like the one that Deus brought up (2006 thru 2009) saw awful results. Perhaps it was the poor scouting, or an inability to adapt to the loss of Pioli (just throwing out ideas)? Maybe it was nothing more than the luck of the draw?

It seems like it's been addressed on some level, so that's definitely reason for optimism in the future. I think we've had some decent draft classes that are at least on par or higher, than the majority of other NFL teams.

Click to expand...

Very interesting that you chose to discredit and not choose this post, @AzPatsFan, yet you didn't have any problem cherry-picking one post that you felt spoke poorly of Belichick.

Sometimes certain people are so worried about who is a homer and who is a chicken little that you fail to look at things in the proper context. It's okay to admit that there were some poor drafting classes, while understanding that we're a great drafting team overall--really, it is. The reality is that it's the truth.

For the record, I believe that Belichick has done a great job of drafting due to where we seem to pick every year, and the statistics seem to back that up as N.England is generally in the top 5-10 of all drafting teams in the past decade+. That doesn't change the fact that the draft classes were terrible from the years of 2006, 2007, 2008, and 2009.

I can understand you wishing to include the draft trades in 2007 for Welker/Moss, but we weren't talking about that subject. Even if we were, that was only one year which evens 2007 out. 2006-2009 was still a piss poor drafting period for this team, but that's in the past and hardly matters anymore.

supafly said:

Very interesting that you chose to discredit and not choose this post, @AzPatsFan, yet you didn't have any problem cherry-picking one post that you felt spoke poorly of Belichick.

Sometimes certain people are so worried about who is a homer and who is a chicken little that you fail to look at things in the proper context. It's okay to admit that there were some poor drafting classes, while understanding that we're a great drafting team overall--really, it is. The reality is that it's the truth.

For the record, I believe that Belichick has done a great job of drafting due to where we seem to pick every year, and the statistics seem to back that up as N.England is generally in the top 5-10 of all drafting teams in the past decade+. That doesn't change the fact that the draft classes were terrible from the years of 2006, 2007, 2008, and 2009.

I can understand you wishing to include the draft trades in 2007 for Welker/Moss, but we weren't talking about that subject. Even if we were, that was only one year which evens 2007 out. 2006-2009 was still a piss poor drafting period for this team, but that's in the past and hardly matters anymore.

Click to expand...

I didn't want to rag on you specifically. I wanted to collectively rag on those who seem to think that they are much smarter and better drafters than Belichick just because they read a Draft Report or two.

I never even raised the issue directly of having to change your emphasis in the real world occasionally, as the team situation varies.

Back in those days, BB had an Aging Super Bowl team that needed "patching" to stay on top. So you emphasize Drafting people who can contribute immediately, in favor of the talent that might take a couple of seasons to develop but ultimately might turn out better in the long run.

The BB Draft critics never even consider such real world concerns, but they do exist. No one notes that when he was in full [never utter those words], re-building mode Bill's emphasis changed again, and he stripped the aging team down, he could metaphorically swing for the fences once again. The so called draft performances improved.

I chose your post to comment on just because you expressed several of the contrasting ideas succinctly, and not because singled you out for criticism.

I too am an a fan, but never take my pre draft opinions too seriously, and I am surely in the camp described with derision as "homers".

AzPatsFan said:

I didn't want to rag on you specifically. I wanted to collectively rag on those who seem to think that they are much smarter and better drafters than Belichick just because they read a Draft Report or two.

I never even raised the issue directly of having to change your emphasis in the real world occasionally, as the team situation varies.

Back in those days, BB had an Aging Super Bowl team that needed "patching" to stay on top. So you emphasize Drafting people who can contribute immediately, in favor of the talent that might take a couple of seasons to develop but ultimately might turn out better in the long run.

The BB Draft critics never even consider such real world concerns, but they do exist. No one notes that when he was in full [never utter those words], re-building mode Bill's emphasis changed again, and he stripped the aging team down, he could metaphorically swing for the fences once again. The so called draft performances improved.

I chose your post to comment on just because you expressed several of the contrasting ideas succinctly, and not because singled you out for criticism.

I too am an a fan, but never take my pre draft opinions too seriously, and I am surely in the camp described with derision as "homers".

Click to expand...

Fair enough.

Sometimes, I think it's okay to just call it as it is, even though it's understandable and natural for all of us to want to stick up for any of Belichick (or the team's) failures.

In the case of the poor '06--'09 draft classes of a 4 year span, I understand wanting to take the trades of Welker and Moss into account for the 2007 draft. Obviously, A.Thomas doesn't count due to the fact that he didn't have anything to do with trades or the draft, and was simply a FA acquisition.

Even then, it simply balances out the draft class of 2007-- so 2006, 2008, and 2009 would still be monumental failures in my opinion. As a whole, you're right to point out the differences of 2007, but it hardly matters that much, since the 4 year period was downright awful.

As a whole, it's important to remember that Belichick has been highly successful, and we should all be appreciative of that fact.

Ivan said:

For some reason i trust Tom Brady's judgement on who to throw to and when to throw to them more than i do your view of just throw it up there and hope for the best. Brady doesn't throw jump balls, he throws to receivers who are open or breaking open, and that's why Belichick trusts him to run his offense.

Click to expand...

That's what I said,thanx. Except I said jump balls that are planned and timed to our favor to where they are much higher percent than 50/50

PatFanCraig said:

That's what I said,thanx. Except I said jump balls that are planned and timed to our favor to where they are much higher percent than 50/50

Click to expand...

Where did you get Ivan's quote from? Is this from this specific thread? Where are we talking about jump balls?

Ivan said:

I think it is amazing that the Colts went 11-5 with Curtis Painter and still got Andrew Luck...........

Click to expand...

Guys, it's pretty simple. Without Brady, Bill Belichick's record would be a lot worse. Without Joe Montana, Bill Walsh's record would be a lot worse. You can say the same thing about any coach who has had a great quarterback. That's why they're great quarterbacks - they presumably make their teams a lot better.

This is no shame on the HC. Think Phil Jackson's record would be what it is if he didn't coach Michael Jordan and Kobe Bryant? Think Joe Torre's record would be what it is if he didn't have Mariano, Jeter, etc., on his team? Great players make coaches better.

The flip side is also true. Even though the Pats were 5 games worse in 2008 than they were in 2007 because Brady was out, they were still 11-5 with a total scrub playing QB. Belichick had built a very, very good *team* by that point that didn't need an all-world QB in order to be good. They were good enough with a scrub QB to still put up a solid record.

Belichick is a *great* coach, and a *great* builder of teams. His record speaks for itself. He doesn't lose credit because he has Tom Brady. He made the ballsy call to play Brady even when the $100 million Bledsoe came back from injury. He has been, over his tenure with the Pats, one of the very best drafters in the league. There are reasons besides Tom Brady why this team is a perennial Super Bowl contender.

You guys make it seem like it's either/or. It's not binary. Brady has made Belichick even better. Belichick without Brady is still great. Maybe without Belichick Tom Brady is still a great NFL QB. We won't know because he's never played without BB. But both are great.