Anyone still miss Seymour? Final results are in

[ausbacker]

Oh, I agree with that. Seymour changes everything, but his absence is not the only issue. The Hobbs trade was a mistake, the Burgess trade was a mistake, the failure to get another ILB to keep Guyton as a 3rd down only guy was a mistake.....

The thing is that one great player can mask a lot of weakness on one side of the ball. The Steelers found that out when their best defender went down this year.

All fair comments. Guyton is useless IMO. He's a special teamer and not much more. When you have a look at the raft of talented young linebackers in the NFL and you see us trying to turn UDFA's into these guys.. I've been left scratching my head more than not.

Crable and McKenzie.. well who knows.

 

[TP76]

Many do not learn. I certainly don't think that we would be playing today if Seymour were on the squad. we would ahve been enjoying a bye week.

However, Seymour would not have helped too much today. He would have helped some of course and perhaps made the game much closer.

The defense gave the ball to the offense lots and lots of times, and the offense gave the ball to the ravens.

Would we be the 2nd seed, with the offensive woes? - that's quite a leap, considering the 13-3 Chargers. I have a hard time believing we'd be 14-2 with this offense... and its run-n-shoot symptomatic problems.

 

[Deus Irae]

The Burgess trade wouldn't have happened if we were going to keep Seymour. Given that Belichick was dumping Seymour, I don't think that the trade for Burgess was a mistake.

If you make the Burgess trade part of the Seymour deal, that just makes things worse.

Seymour for 2009 and either the franchise tag or compensation for 2010
2010 3rd
2010 5th

For
Burgess
2011 1st

 

[ATippett56]

2010 3rd
2010 5th

For
Burgess

I'd like that third and fifth back in 2010 considering all the holes on the New England Patriots roster. Derrick Burgess is extremely overrated.

 

[BradyFTW!]

You keep saying that if we didnt we the Super Bowl then this trade was a bad trade, we werent winning the Super Bowl this year whether we had Seymour or didnt have Seymour.

Definitely should factor into evaluating the trade. Maybe we were all delusional for thinking the Pats could compete for a SB even with Seymour.

 

[ATippett56]

I don't think that the trade for Burgess was a mistake.

I think the trade for Burgess was a huge mistake. The New England Patriots are without a third and fifth round draft pick in 2010 because of Derrick Burgess. The New England Patriots desperately need an upgrade at outside linebacker and a replacement on the defensive line for Richard Seymour.

 

[fumbrunner]

Oh, I agree with that. Seymour changes everything, but his absence is not the only issue. The Hobbs trade was a mistake, the Burgess trade was a mistake, the failure to get another ILB to keep Guyton as a 3rd down only guy was a mistake.....

The thing is that one great player can mask a lot of weakness on one side of the ball. The Steelers found that out when their best defender went down this year.

I don't miss the Hobbit at all. Given how little he plays in Philly, it shows that it was the right decision. The seymour trade hurt the team, no question.

 

[The Dynasty]

Definitely should factor into evaluating the trade. Maybe we were all delusional for thinking the Pats could compete for a SB even with Seymour.

The way the defense played this season did not cost the Patriots a Super Bowl that is for sure. The offense was the unit that decided the teams fate this season. Seymour could not help the offensive problems.

The Patriots decided that they wanted to get younger on defense and Seymour was not part of those plans. They knew that he was going to walk after this season and they got a first round pick (guaranteed top 15 pick, probably top 10) for him. This was a good trade for the Patriots, not a bad trade

 

[BradyFTW!]

I think the trade for Burgess was a huge mistake. The New England Patriots are without a third and fifth round draft pick in 2010 because of Derrick Burgess. The New England Patriots desperately need an upgrade at outside linebacker and a replacement on the defensive line for Richard Seymour.

I think Burgess is, in a vacuum, worth a 3rd and a 5th. I just don't get the overarching strategy when you take the Burgess and Seymour trades together, though. The former says that you're willing to sacrifice the future to win now, and the latter says that you're willing to sacrifice now to win in the future. By making both trades, we didn't really accomplish either goal.

 

[fumbrunner]

I think Burgess is, in a vacuum, worth a 3rd and a 5th. I just don't get the overarching strategy when you take the Burgess and Seymour trades together, though. The former says that you're willing to sacrifice the future to win now, and the latter says that you're willing to sacrifice now to win in the future. By making both trades, we didn't really accomplish either goal.

Except that Burgess came cheaper and Seymour was as good as gone after the season. The problem was that Burgess was not an adequate replacement for Seymour.

 

[ATippett56]

I think Burgess is, in a vacuum, worth a 3rd and a 5th. I just don't get the overarching strategy when you take the Burgess and Seymour trades together, though. The former says that you're willing to sacrifice the future to win now, and the latter says that you're willing to sacrifice now to win in the future. By making both trades, we didn't really accomplish either goal.

Considering Burgess is an UFA in 2010, he was not worth a third and fifth round draft picks in 2010. Also, Burgess will turn 32 years old at the start of the 2010 NFL Season. If Belichick is willing to overhaul the defense via the Seymour trade then Burgess is not part of the future with the New England Patriots. The aforementioned draft picks will be sorely needed in 2010.

 

[WhoaDirty]

Definitely should factor into evaluating the trade. Maybe we were all delusional for thinking the Pats could compete for a SB even with Seymour.

The Seymour sadly was not the reason we didn't make the SB this year. Unless he was to be used on the OL, 3rd WR, and possibly punter.

 

[mgteich]

NO ONE thought that Burgess would be an adequate replacement for Seymour.

Except that Burgess came cheaper and Seymour was as good as gone after the season. The problem was that Burgess was not an adequate replacement for Seymour.

 

[Deus Irae]

I think Burgess is, in a vacuum, worth a 3rd and a 5th. I just don't get the overarching strategy when you take the Burgess and Seymour trades together, though. The former says that you're willing to sacrifice the future to win now, and the latter says that you're willing to sacrifice now to win in the future. By making both trades, we didn't really accomplish either goal.

Burgess was barely worth the 5th round pick. A 3rd and 5th was highway robbery. And, the funny thing is that the omniscient Bill Belichick got robbed by the senile Al Davis.

 

[fumbrunner]

NO ONE thought that Burgess would be an adequate replacement for Seymour.

Yeah, that was the problem. The club's brass underestimated the impact of not having Seymour on the D-line. The team has excelled in plugging in players over the years. This was one example where it didnt work so well obviously.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Considering Burgess is an UFA in 2010, he was not worth a third and fifth round draft picks in 2010. Also, Burgess will turn 32 years old at the start of the 2010 NFL Season. If Belichick is willing to overhaul the defense via the Seymour trade then Burgess is not part of the future with the New England Patriots. The aforementioned draft picks will be sorely needed in 2010.

Exactly- thats exactly what I was trying to say, maybe I didnt do a good job saying it

 

[crowell33]

A washed up malcontent like Seymour is not what this team was missing. We already have one of those. His name is Adalius Thomas.

 

[ATippett56]

A washed up malcontent like Seymour is not what this team was missing. We already have one of those. His name is Adalius Thomas.

Derrick Burgess is not much better. One tackle in today's game.

 

[SeymourTrophies]

If Seymour sucked when he was with us, how exactly would you describe Warren's contributions?

We were gashed all game long on the side where Seymour would have been, and there is no doubt he would have done what he does best, stop the run. Jarvis Green/ whoever else just doesn't cut it. Mayo also had several missed tackles in the gaps. Ray Rice is good, but he is not that good.

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

Well if there's one silver lining, it's knowing that even with Seymour we wouldn't have done much better.

I think we could have had our whole 2003 defense for these playoffs and we still would have lost. Our offense was worse than the Bengals were yesterday.