Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by NE_PATS_FAN_54, Mar 7, 2007.
Yeah, why didn't we sign Adalius Thomas last year?!!!
Hahaha... love it.
LOL. Clayton, even in naming the Pats a winner, HATES the Patriots.
How on God's green earth are we #2 behind the 49ers?
I was wondering that myself.
because the niners improved their team more. last year we were division champs and one of the best 4 teams in football. that doesn't leave alot of room to improve. the niners with their moves may have gone from average to divisional or conference contenders.
Three letters --- T B C
Yeah. It was definitely a huge mistake re-signing Richard Seymour last offseason. What were we thinking?
Because they signed Tully Banta-Cain.
I wish he'd done all the teams, not just the top and bottom five. I'dlike to see a reacp of jets, colts, steelers, bills, chargers
You're out of your mind if you believe that.
I'd say they are definitely divisional contenders. They would've been if they hadn't done ANYTHING this off-season. Their main competion is the Seahawks, a team on a downward trajetory. Also, the Niners beat them twice last year.
Hell, its not even outlandish to say they can contend for the conference. The NFC is weak. The frigging Bears (with Wrecks Grossman!) were the best NFC team last year.
That said, I still think the Pats have had the better off-season so far. Their additions fit the team perfectly, and all came at pretty good prices. I don't know that you can say either of those things about Nate Clements.
This dissapoints me. Just because a team is the most active doesn't automatically mean they are free agency winner.
Exactly; especially when media types measure your success at this time by how big a name you signed and how big a contract you gave him.
If the Pats had given A.D. 80 million then Clayton would have probably rated them above the Niners. Sad.
Clayton has been pretty irrelevant lately, do not get this 49'ers as #1 though, maybe the value of TBC being an ex patriot carries extra weight.
Who cares what Clayton and ESPN think. . . . .It's not something I'll lose sleep over.
Up to this season, the Redskins traditionally have been the most active in the FA market. It's really been productive for them . . .
Clayton uses a lot of words, but not a lot of thought.
Well, if yoiu think of it as "Who has improved themselves SO FAR since March 1?" you will understand what he is talking about. Who has improved themselves the most by the net gain of quality players and who has deproved (is deproved the opposite of improved?) themselves the most by having the biggest net loss of quality players.
I don't think of it as just who is most active, but who has helped their team the most. These are actually close to the same thing so far, as mostly quality FAs have been signed/traded for.
But overpaying for players, especially average ones, can do more harm than help. Also a team losing a player isn't always a bad thing depending on the circumstances.
Separate names with a comma.