Did Belichick do what is best for Patriots in 2006?

[NC_PATS_FAN]

Hello All,

I have been a big Patriots fan for a very long time and have been reading this forum for six years now. I am a very big Belichick Fan. Even last year when they were struggling, I liked the way He prepared the Team and how hard the team fought( the game at Pittsburgh was one of my all time favorite) . Bill Belichick always says that they are doing the best for the team to win. We all know he doesn't talk about past or future. It is all one game at a time and one year at a time.

Having said that, I don't think He did the best he could given the resources the team has for 2006 season and this may bite us big time this year. I am not complaining about David Givens and Adam Vinatieri who I think made up their minds to get out of here. But Branch was a different case and the most important thing is that Brady had a lot of trust in him. I also beleive that when the Salary Cap has increased due to CBA, Pats front office did not reflect the increase in cap value while negotiating with Branch. They were almost arrogant to ask Branch to shop himself for Trade.

I sense a lot of players are unhappy with this development and they are feeling that they have been short changed. From a players perspective, they don't care How many 1st round draft picks they have for next year. They want to win this year. Who knows how many of them are going to be back here next year? They want to win this year and so far it doesn't seem like it is going to happen. How bad was it to see Denver treat Tom Brady like some 3rd stringer by loading up on the run and daring him to beat them through the air? It did not happen ever.

But I guess the Front Office must have had some plan when they decided to get rid of the top 2 receivers of Brady. Because they just never did anything like this without a backup plan like backing up Lawyer Milloy with Rodney Harrison. I just don't see it yet. I would be pleasantly surprised if this Team makes it to Super Bowl. I don't think the Front Office and Belichick put the team in the best position to win this year.

 

[BelichickFan]

He probably didn't. In fact he definitely didn't. But it's irrelevant. That's not how Belichick, Pioli and Kraft work. If they can do what's best for this year while not hurting future years, great. In their judgement, any help this year would be more than offset but negative repercusions in the future. You asked a one dimensional question in the multi dimenstional universe of B/P/K.

 

[satz]

Don`t you think that is a bad way to run a business. If you own a business which has taken more than 10 yrs to be turned around and even in the huge success owe 100`s of millions[razor ].Will you really plan to be sucessfull for a year and give the last decade and half of work away.You should ask that if all the hardwork and the business model which brought you success is all bad.

I am hoping you would answer to my question.

Now what would another team give for belichick`s contract and rights along with piollis services as vp personals.

thanks
Satz

 

[TomBrady'sGoat]

Doing the best thing for this year would have been easy. Re-sign Vinatieri, Givens, McGinnest, Branch and maybe a couple nice free agents to backloaded deals. Ignore age on Vin, Willie, and FA's because they'll be good this year. Ooh, they could have traded away a bunch of picks too.

It's easy to sacrifice the future for the present. What's hard is to do what the Patriots aim to do: compete every year now and 5+ years down the road.

In 5 years Brady will still be in his early to mid-thirties and there would be hand-wringing about the team not doing enough to let him win in his last few great years. Most teams are eager to put the criticism off till the future and deal with the consequences then. The Pats are one of the few teams willing to deal with it now, knowing they will benefit in the future.

 

[PonyExpress]

Don't fall for the trap. There is a drum beat by bitter enemies of BB, whether agents like Tom Condon who have been jilted in the past and now manipulate the NFLPA as a vendetta, former players who are eager to see the fall of an empire that rejected them, or mentally ill columnists who, when not dumping on the home town team, enjoy punching out cripples and polishing Don King's knob (read gorgeous borges). The talent level is fine, Brady is Brady and the team is morphing like a chameleon into its new on-field personality. The Chicken Little types were saying the same thing last year after the Indy game when the Pats were 4-4.

 

[Ring 6]

This question cannot be answered until January or February.

BB made decisions that he is far more qualified to make than any of us. Those decisions can not be judged until the results are in. 3 weeks is not nearly enough time to judge, it would be like judging who wins a marathon after they run 100 yards.

 

[mikey]

I have always thought 2006 represents our BEST OPPORTUNITY to bring home our 4th Lombardi trophy.

We have one of the EASIEST SCHEDULES. Detroit, Green Bay, Houston, Tennessee .... We could easily TAKE ADVANTAGE of the schedule and compile a 14-2 record with the home field for the playoff.

We have the BEST QB in the prime of his career.

It is not going to get easier after 2006. The competition is going to get tougher with the emergence of younger guys Rivers, Cutler, Roethlisberger, Palmer ....

Did Belichick do what is BEST for the Patriot in 2006?

Does "best" mean surrounding Brady with Troy Brown and Reche Caldwell?

Does "best" mean getting rid of Jerry Rice and John Taylor in the prime of Joe Montana's career?

I don't know.

.

 

[mgteich]

I suggest that we might have signed an additional player out there or traded for one who might have cost us $6M this year and $2M next. Does anyone believe that pioli could find NO such player that could help us this year and next? What about $8M this year and $2M next? These contracts would not in any way have sacrificed the future. There may even have been room for two such players. It is not a matter of having a long term view; it is a matter of stubbornly keeping to principles, principles that worked incredibly well before the CBA was extended. The sacrifice was not of the present for the future. It was the present traded for principles. We may still win it all this year, but there is no question in my mind that pioli could have traded for or signed one or two additional players to 2-year contracts, as he did Gabriel and Caldwell.

It appears that the reality of a much larger salary cap has not been incorporated into the patriot's long term strategy. However, perhaps it has been considered. As many have posted, perhaps the patriots have decided that they would not pay the increased 20% to players in the market this year or next, waiting for the market to settle, moving money forward in the meantime. The problem with that strategy is exactly what everyone is pointing out. We are giving almost every other team an advantage over the patriots in 2006 and probably 2007. I am not talking just about the Washington's. No one had to sacrifice the future to spend the huge amount of extra money available this year and next. There is all the extra available because the cap increased in a huge way, and the only place to spend it was on new players or extensions. Over time, the whole salary structure will change. For now, it only affects new contracts.

No, we don't have the situation of MLB. But we also don't have the cap situation of before the extensive increase in cap money made available by the extension of the CBA.

I am not arguing with the FO decision. However, I think that we should face the reality.

He probably didn't. In fact he definitely didn't. But it's irrelevant. That's not how Belichick, Pioli and Kraft work. If they can do what's best for this year while not hurting future years, great. In their judgement, any help this year would be more than offset but negative repercusions in the future. You asked a one dimensional question in the multi dimenstional universe of B/P/K.

 

[BelichickFan]

Does "best" mean getting rid of Jerry Rice and John Taylor in the prime of Joe Montana's career?

Not that we should compare The Twig with Rice but playing along - did Rice refuse to show up and play in the prime of Montana's contract ?

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

Obviously not, but then doing something like that to Borges and Felger would mean losing him for a few years.

 

[MrBigglesWorth]

I think belichick is looking at when ty warren and vince become free agents. even though it's years down the road if you wanna keep those two then you're gonna have to pay alot. I do however wonder what their plan is long term if they are going to make a big splash with free agency next year. The skill positions definitely took a hit this past season and as belichik said after the first superbowl, they need to get faster. i firmly believe they need to import a solid/top notch wr, lb, or cb and then adress those needs in the draft. They've relied solely on the draft for too long and it's beginning to catch up.

 

[DaBruinz]

I think its hilarious when people claim that BB and Pioli didn't do what was best for this team.

Would it have been better to treat Branch the SAME as they treated Seymour and Brady ? Or should they have treated Branch BETTER?

In case people missed it, when the Patriots extended BOTH Seymour and Brady, the Patriots still required them to play out the last year of their rookie contract. So why should the Pats treat Branch any different? Branch is NOT better than Seymour or Brady.

This wasn't about MONEY so much as it was about Chayut making a name for himself at the Patriots expense. The reason I say it wasn't about money is because NO ONE knows how much the Patriots would have offered Branch had Chayut actually attempted to negotiate with the Patriots. The Patrots offered Branch very reasonable extensions and he turned them down without a counter. And then he held out, refusing to report unless the Patriots guaranteed not to Franchise him.

Also, lets not forget that the Patriots made an honest attempt to sign Derrick Mason the year before.

The Patriots are very well aware of the new dynamic and they attempted to sign their players for respectable (not overpaid) money.

 

[MrBigglesWorth]

I think its hilarious when people claim that BB and Pioli didn't do what was best for this team.

Would it have been better to treat Branch the SAME as they treated Seymour and Brady ? Or should they have treated Branch BETTER?

In case people missed it, when the Patriots extended BOTH Seymour and Brady, the Patriots still required them to play out the last year of their rookie contract. So why should the Pats treat Branch any different? Branch is NOT better than Seymour or Brady.

This wasn't about MONEY so much as it was about Chayut making a name for himself at the Patriots expense. The reason I say it wasn't about money is because NO ONE knows how much the Patriots would have offered Branch had Chayut actually attempted to negotiate with the Patriots. The Patrots offered Branch very reasonable extensions and he turned them down without a counter. And then he held out, refusing to report unless the Patriots guaranteed not to Franchise him.

Also, lets not forget that the Patriots made an honest attempt to sign Derrick Mason the year before.

The Patriots are very well aware of the new dynamic and they attempted to sign their players for respectable (not overpaid) money.

That's all fine and dandy, but what have they done to address the linebacker position the past two seasons?

 

[Pats726]

Does "best" mean getting rid of Jerry Rice and John Taylor in the prime of Joe Montana's career?
I don't know.
.

Firstly it os GROSSLY unfair to call Branch and Givens Taylor and Rice..if you are doing that I guess you know little of either player..but beyonf that stupid comparison, the Patriot's did not get rif of either..Givens CHOSE to
leave for more money and Branch REFUSED to play for the team. That is hardly getting rid of players. If you really believe that you know squat..

 

[DaBruinz]

That's all fine and dandy, but what have they done to address the linebacker position the past two seasons?

Hmm.. They've drafted 2 kids who they felt could fit into the system. Unfortunately neither panned out. The Pats obviously also felt that drafting Maroney, Jackson, and Mankins brought more value than the linebackers that were available in the draft at the time they drafted.

Do you really think that LB is the Patriots biggest issue? I don't. Do they need to get some young talent in there? Yes. Definitely.

I've been guilty of questioning the BB/Pioli moves just like others have. But, in the end, I know that they have infinitely more Football wisdom than I do. Heck, you could add all of the football "smarts" that is proclaimed on this board and we probably don't know half of what BB and Pioli knows.

 

[MrBigglesWorth]

Hmm.. They've drafted 2 kids who they felt could fit into the system. Unfortunately neither panned out. The Pats obviously also felt that drafting Maroney, Jackson, and Mankins brought more value than the linebackers that were available in the draft at the time they drafted.

Do you really think that LB is the Patriots biggest issue? I don't. Do they need to get some young talent in there? Yes. Definitely.

I've been guilty of questioning the BB/Pioli moves just like others have. But, in the end, I know that they have infinitely more Football wisdom than I do. Heck, you could add all of the football "smarts" that is proclaimed on this board and we probably don't know half of what BB and Pioli knows.

I think the biggest issues are as follows:

1. Wide receiver production

2. Lack of making plays(turnovers) on defense

 

[mikey]

I think its hilarious when people claim that BB and Pioli didn't do what was best for this team.

The question is: Did Belichick do what is best in 2006?

When he traded Branch for a 2007 first round pick, is Belichick doing what is best for the team in 2006 or 2007?

You have to be more specific in your response.

Did Belichick do what is best for the Patriots in 2006 or for the future?


.

 

[RhodyPatFan]

This is whats funny. People want the team to get younger at LB and improve the LB core but want to keep guys like Willie around. Can't be both ways. Adam didnt want to be here and that was pretty clear. That was as much an Adam leaving as a Pats decision not to bring him back. Givens is overpaid and was a 7th round pick. Deion also wanted to get more money that he is worth and didnt want to play his final year of the contract. Should we just pay everyone who doesnt want to play the rest of their contract? Thats a dumb way to run a team. Hey if Maroney has a good rookie season lets rip up his deal and give him a new one. Yah thats smart business.

 

[MrBigglesWorth]

This is whats funny. People want the team to get younger at LB and improve the LB core but want to keep guys like Willie around. Can't be both ways. Adam didnt want to be here and that was pretty clear. That was as much an Adam leaving as a Pats decision not to bring him back. Givens is overpaid and was a 7th round pick. Deion also wanted to get more money that he is worth and didnt want to play his final year of the contract. Should we just pay everyone who doesnt want to play the rest of their contract? Thats a dumb way to run a team. Hey if Maroney has a good rookie season lets rip up his deal and give him a new one. Yah thats smart business.

Funny thing is. Roman Phifer is not brought back. Ted Johnson retires. Then Tedy Bruschi is out for a period of time. So they bring in Monty Beisel. Then they bring in Chad Brown. So one year goes by and mistakes are made. So be it, people make mistakes.

So the second year comes and Monty is released. McGinest leaves. Tedy is back. Vrabel it's uncertain if he's in or outside lb. Still no inside lb. they have tbc. So the off season they could have tried to address the situation but no real attempt is made and they have to call Seau and bring him in.

First year is a mistake, Second year is shame on you, hopefully third year something will be done.

 

[RayClay]

It's 2006 guys.