Super Bowls aren't won on flashy free agent signings
 

NFL.com news: Super Bowls just aren't instantly won in free agency

I guess the Pats might have come close in 2007,but the article is right on......all you need are a couple of not-so-much Household names in skill positions of need and you can win it all.

Thats likely to be the path that Belichick goes down only being a few minutes from winning it all with a secondary that only few people outside of NE can name the players.

Re: Super Bowls aren't won on flashy free agent signings
 

Belichick likes depth in the roster. I think he'd go the route of taking a few decent veterans rather than paying one elite player if he has the chance. Look at what Carter was able to do for us last season. There is a lower risk with adding depth of proven veterans than poor depth with an elite player at a position.

Re: Super Bowls aren't won on flashy free agent signings
 

I'll admit I didn't read the article, but the Pats did win the Super Bowl after landing prized free agent Roosevelt Colvin. I consider Rodney Harrison a big time catch that year too.

Sure, Colvin got hurt in like the second game, but the Pats still won.

From the Patriots perspective, most of our flashy pickups have been from trades (Moss, Welker, Dillon).

Re: Super Bowls aren't won on flashy free agent signings
 

I,like most in here would love one of these proven studs,either on offense OR defense to come to NE.

But chances are the Pats are defending AFC Champions and may go the low profile way through FA and another offseason of dissapointment for Patriot fans who want the glamourous guys to come only to find out that lightly known player such as Jack Mehoff is the FA we sign.

Question is would you rather have one or 2 big names to use most of the cap space up? or a few WTFs who have proven to be good players on the other teams but not very well known by fans who are not consumed with knowledge of every player in the NFL?

Re: Super Bowls aren't won on flashy free agent signings
 

We could use a deep threat, "household name" or not.

Re: Super Bowls aren't won on flashy free agent signings
 

You could add Rodney Harrison to that list as well

However the article is based on what the Super Bowl Champions had done in the offseason before their title for the past 5 years.

Re: Super Bowls aren't won on flashy free agent signings
 

I get the point: you can't just sign a bunch of new guys to fill a ton of holes and think they'll all immediately come together cohesively. But would anyone on here seriously argue that Mario Williams (just an example) wouldn't immediately make our defense better?

Re: Super Bowls aren't won on flashy free agent signings
 

I can think of some "flashy" free agents who have helped to win Super Bowls with their new team:

Corey Dillon (ok, he was a trade, not a free agent)
Charles Woodson
Deion Sanders (In fact, he won Super Bowls back to back years as a flashy free agent acquistion for the 49ers in 1994 and the Cowboys in 1995)
Charles Haley
Reggie White (although not immediately)
Jeremy Shockey
Jonathan Vilma (another trade)
Darren Sharper
Drew Brees (took several years)
Keyshawn Johnson (another trade)
Simeone Rice (although he was more of a flashy reclaimation project)
Marshall Faulk (another trade)
Shannon Sharpe
Rod Woodson
Plaxico Burress

A lot of flashy free agents tend to bomb or disapoint with their new teams, but there are plenty of examples of free agents or trades of flashy players who played key roles with their new team winning a Super Bowl.

Re: Super Bowls aren't won on flashy free agent signings
 

Did you even read the article?

It is based on a trend for the past 5 years and the recent years of the NFL...not historical

Re: Super Bowls aren't won on flashy free agent signings
 

I didn't read the article, but I listed a lot of flashy players acquired in free agency or via trade that won Super Bowls in the last five years including Plaxico Burress, Drew Brees, Charles Woodson, Darren Sharper, and Jonathan Vilma.

Besides, the last 5 years is such an arbitrary number. The last few years there hasn't been many big name free agents because of the uncapped year and the lack of a lockout. There hasn't been a free agent class like this one in a decade. Prior to this year, the only truly flashy free agent that I can think of being available in free agency is Julius Peppers in the last 2-3 years. Oh yes, Nmandi Asomougha.

So I agree with the premise of the article. Because over the last 5 years there has been very few flashy free agents, none of the non-existent flashy free agents helped a team win a Super Bowl. Seriously, the article is flawed when it doesn't acknowledge that over the last few years there hasn't been a lot of flashy free agents.

In fact, some of the flashy free agents listed in the article were crapshoot QBs like Matt Cassel and Kevin Kolb who neither started more than one season when they were acquired and neither were free agents (both were trades). Ignoring the fact they weren't free agents, the only reason they were flashy was because they were QBs. Any other position and they wouldn't have netted what the teams traded them got nor gotten huge QBs. They were just potential franchise QBs in a QB starved league.

I'm glad I didn't read the article before I responded because it is a weak arsed article with incorrect information and a major point ommitted (free agency over the last five years has been devoid of marquee talent unlike this one).

Personally, I don't think getting flashy free agents guarantee much of anything, but plenty have helped teams win Super Bowls. There is no magic formula on this. Some marquee free agents pan out great. Some fail miserably.