Aqib Talib and long term commitment

[DocHoliday]

Talib and long term commitment

I thought it was interesting that Bedsrd doesn't feel Arrington will be happy with slot corner money. Gotta wonder if the second CB the Pats draft is going to be Mathieu then. He'd be the slot replacement as well as the ST ace the Pats could use in a late round pick

 

[ay-yo]

This is off the topic, but its been brought up a few times, so maybe it should be part of the conversation.
Did they play better with him, or is that just the perception and hope?

He played in 6 games, but one was J-ville where he really didn't play hardly at all. So we are really down to 5 games.
Those 5 included SF where we stunk on D, Miami who we dominated in the game he didn't play and we so-so in the one he did. Indy where Talib played poorly and was given a pass for being out of game shape. The Jets, which was a rout, but we did allow Sanchez to go 26-36-301. The 6th (and 7th if we count playoffs) was Houston, which would be a point in his favor.

Personally I think the jury is out on whether we actually played better if much better with Talib at corner. His injury issues that kept him out of many games including the AFCCG should be taken into account too.

Is it that we are so adamant in getting a corner that we are not only ignoring Talib's risk factors but also overrating his contributions? Personally I think people overrated his play during the season because it gave them hope the defense was 'fixed'.

No we did play better with Talib. Just look at what Boldin did to us before and after Talib got hurt. That pretty much destroys your whole argument. Ironically I see it as your perception and hope that we didn't play better play better with Talib b/c reality says otherwise.

 

[JackBauer]

I thought it was interesting that Bedsrd doesn't feel Arrington will be happy with slot corner money. Gotta wonder if the second CB the Pats draft is going to be Mathieu then. He'd be the slot replacement as well as the ST ace the Pats could use in a late round pick

Pity the fool who pays Arrington starting corner money.

 

[Sicilian]

No we did play better with Talib. Just look at what Boldin did to us before and after Talib got hurt. That pretty much destroys your whole argument. Ironically I see it as your perception and hope that we didn't play better play better with Talib b/c reality says otherwise.

This is based on a sample size of one game (and realistically, less than half a game with Talib actually involved). In the second half (where 75% of the Ravens points were scored), they also completely shifted gears offensively, essentially moving to the shotgun exclusively and attacking downfield. It's impossible to say how effective this would have been with Talib still in there, but it does point out that there were more factors at play than simply Talib vs. No Talib.

Not only that, it still doesn't answer the question: Was it Talib that made the defense better? Or was it having ANY halfway decent corner, allowing McCourty to shore up the safety position and Arrington to play the slot where he's better suited? The point is, no one is arguing that the Patriots need a CB, they're arguing that the CB doesn't need to be Talib given his list of risks off the field and seeming inability to stay on the field.

 

[Sciz]

Against the Ravens, it wasn't Talib coming off the field that made the biggest difference. It was Cole going on. Arrington did just fine as the #2 for most of the game (3/7, 49 yards in 66 total snaps). It was Cole that got abused (5/6, 62 yards, 1 TD in 33 snaps).

I don't think they need a Talib kind of CB. I'd much rather get someone who is a little less talented but more reliably on the field plus someone who can be a better #4 than Cole.

 

[eagle eye]

Talib was all over Anquain Boldin in the AFCCG and I think we would have won that game had he stayed on the field.

There are lots of stories about off the field stuff and the work ethic one too and then there is his injury proneness as well. I think he should be given an incentivised deal which makes him big money if he performs but not a truckload of guaranteed money.

 

[patsfan-1982]

i would be ok at 3 years and 21 million 7 per is the market for just about any starting CB

 

[Marqui]

Against the Ravens, it wasn't Talib coming off the field that made the biggest difference. It was Cole going on.

How can we definitively know that?

 

[ay-yo]

This is based on a sample size of one game (and realistically, less than half a game with Talib actually involved). In the second half (where 75% of the Ravens points were scored), they also completely shifted gears offensively, essentially moving to the shotgun exclusively and attacking downfield. It's impossible to say how effective this would have been with Talib still in there, but it does point out that there were more factors at play than simply Talib vs. No Talib.

Not only that, it still doesn't answer the question: Was it Talib that made the defense better? Or was it having ANY halfway decent corner, allowing McCourty to shore up the safety position and Arrington to play the slot where he's better suited? The point is, no one is arguing that the Patriots need a CB, they're arguing that the CB doesn't need to be Talib given his list of risks off the field and seeming inability to stay on the field.

From the Andy Johnson post I originally quoted

. . . Did they play better with him, or is that just the perception and hope? . . . .

. . . Personally I think the jury is out on whether we actually played better if much better with Talib at corner. . . .

. . . . Is it that we are so adamant in getting a corner that we are not only ignoring Talib's risk factors but also overrating his contributions? . . .

I agree with you Sicilian that we don't need Talib specifically we need anybody who is a quality #1 CB. My problem is with Andy's post which questions whether the team was better with Talib or without him. To me that is utter non-sense.

If we sign Talib I hope the Pats protect themselves by putting in some sort of clause that will void the contract is he gets the year suspension. Or extra money for every game started to protect against injuries. However I don't think the CB market is as great as everybody says.

Gamble - if cut by Carolina he is the guy I want the most, over Talib. I don't see Carolina going after any big name FA CB's since they'd be cutting him to get cap space.

Grimes - a much bigger injury risk than Talib. Not sure of Falcons cap situation but they will want to retain or replace him

Nnamdi - can he still play? we don't know. Is 31. I don't watch the Eagles but it's possible his athleticism is starting to go.

DRC - not as good a player as Talib. A better athlete than a CB. If the price is 5 mil a year I'd take him but I think it will take more than that to sign him. We'll see. Certainly a viable option. Call it a hunch but if the Eagles cut Nnamdi they'll want to retain this guy.

Sean Smith - wants 10 per year, I don't think I'd give him much more than 5-6. Also the Dolphins traded away Vontae Davis during the season and have lots of cap room. You have to think they're going to retain him or look to sign another top FA CB.

Derek Cox - Has played in 73.4%. This guy is also an injury risk.

 

[Sciz]

How can we definitively know that?

Because they weren't abusing Talib's replacement. They were abusing Talib's replacement's replacement. The issue in that game wasn't the lack of a top-end CB, it was the lack of CB depth, namely a #4 CB that played terribly.

 

[letekro]

Because they weren't abusing Talib's replacement. They were abusing Talib's replacement's replacement. The issue in that game wasn't the lack of a top-end CB, it was the lack of CB depth, namely a #4 CB that played terribly.

Right, Talib's replacement was Dennard, who played fine. The problem was that Arrington was forced to play Smith, which I'm assuming caused safety help to his side the entire game, and also, as you point out, Cole was forced to play Boldin, which was a comical mismatch.

 

[supafly]

My problem is with Andy's post which questions whether the team was better with Talib or without him. To me that is utter non-sense.

I don't think that Andy or anyone is questioning the fact that the secondary was better down the stretch, which included particpation from Talib.

What he is questioning is "how much" of that progress we can actually attribute to Talib vs the other 4 moves that were made (Arrington to the slot full-time, McCourty as a safety, Dennard starting as an outside CB, and the removal of Chung from the secondary altogether).

 

[supafly]

Because they weren't abusing Talib's replacement. They were abusing Talib's replacement's replacement. The issue in that game wasn't the lack of a top-end CB, it was the lack of CB depth, namely a #4 CB that played terribly.

I couldn't agree more. That's also why I am not as concerned as others about exactly 'who' will be the CB1.

If Belichick improves upon the position altogether which will add much better depth and competition, that can all be sorted out in training camp and for the first portion of the season when things are still developing.

Adding an effective CB who can play decently in man coverage along with a seasoned vet would go an awful long way, and that isn't even bringing up the possibility of Dowling being able to play in more than 6 games. Add in a higher round draft pick for even more competition and the whole corps of the CB role could be much more effective.

Some addition(s) to the safety position would also allow the flexibility of moving McCourty back to CB if an injury situation occurs and there are no better options, so I think there are still many options that most are overlooking.

 

[tonyto3690]

While I agree with Sciz, they clearly targeted Cole, we did have trouble sticking with Boldin who could just go up over whoever was guarding him.

 

[supafly]

While I agree with Sciz, they clearly targeted Cole, we did have trouble sticking with Boldin who could just go up over whoever was guarding him.

Which was Cole the majority of the time.

Boldin played great, so he should be given credit too, but if the secondary had any kind of depth last season it may have been a different story. That's what I assume will be addressed the most, maybe not necessarily even a big name player to replace Talib--but a couple/few players who can play man coverage effectively enough. It can be addressed both ways.

I imagine they'll try and retain Talib, but if that doesn't work out and they go after a lesser talented player initally, this place will freak out without even seeing the finished product or any other additions in the CB/S roles, which may be much better than last year.

 

[VJCPatriot]

Well we know that Talib fits in with our defense. He gets it. Whether or not his character issues will rear their ugly head, that's the big question. I mean how uncomfortable is it having one guy - Dennard who may see jailtime, and another who could be suspended at any time for another infraction - Talib as your starting corners?

I think we might see the use of the Transition tag. Either that or the Pats craft a contract with protection built-in like they did with Lloyd. One guy that might be worth pursuing with a prove-it deal would be Nnamhdi Asomugha. I find it hard to believe that a guy who was elite for so long could suddenly drop off a cliff. If he fits the system, he would be a classic 'buy low' and get huge rewards reclamation project type of player. Didn't we do something like that with Randy Moss?

 

[Brady_to_Moss]

Aso will likely be released and isn't what he use to be and their other CB DRC is a FA as well

 

[zipster9]

Well we know that Talib fits in with our defense. He gets it. Whether or not his character issues will rear their ugly head, that's the big question. I mean how uncomfortable is it having one guy - Dennard who may see jailtime, and another who could be suspended at any time for another infraction - Talib as your starting corners?

I think we might see the use of the Transition tag. Either that or the Pats craft a contract with protection built-in like they did with Lloyd. One guy that might be worth pursuing with a prove-it deal would be Nnamhdi Asomugha. I find it hard to believe that a guy who was elite for so long could suddenly drop off a cliff. If he fits the system, he would be a classic 'buy low' and get huge rewards reclamation project type of player. Didn't we do something like that with Randy Moss?

Talib is a good CB (not great) when healthy. Well, he was hurt 2x while playing 1/2 season with Patriots. Then, his past issues.

I dont think everybody should harp on signing Talib, as he is not the only option. Especially, if he wants 8+m/yr.

There are some good prospects in the draft. Why not try that route? Sure, we had bad history in picking CBs. But, maybe it's time to move up the board to try to select a top-3 CB? Xavier Rhodes looks like a very good choice. He plays press and man coverage very well, and is tall, and is fast.

 

[Ring 6]

No we did play better with Talib. Just look at what Boldin did to us before and after Talib got hurt. That pretty much destroys your whole argument. Ironically I see it as your perception and hope that we didn't play better play better with Talib b/c reality says otherwise.

Well the facts don't. And Talib played about 8 plays in the AFCCG. Bolden caught 5 paases, not exactly something you can be sure he wouldn't do with Talib in there, and Talib would not have always been on him.
I'm looking at how we played when he was on the field, not guessing at what would have happened it he were when he wasn't.
You also seem to be ignoring that part of the reason we weren't better with him is that he was injured almost as much as he was healthy, which is a big concern. He can't help us from the sidelines.

 

[Ring 6]

From the Andy Johnson post I originally quoted



I agree with you Sicilian that we don't need Talib specifically we need anybody who is a quality #1 CB. My problem is with Andy's post which questions whether the team was better with Talib or without him. To me that is utter non-sense.

.

Its ironic that I question whether it was reality or perception that we played better with Talib and you offer nothing more than your opinion, which is obviously subject to misperception.
Of course we put better talent on the field with Talib out there, but that isn't the point or the question. The point is whether we actually played better football when he was on the field and that is debatable.
Of course we need to sign a corner, but given the suspension risk, cost, injury concerns, and fact that how he actually played doesnt equal the perception making Talib that one is questionable.
The reality is, for whatever reason, health, out of game shape at first, etc, he didn't show on the field what you think his ability is.