ESPN: Pats "Gambling" with Roster (Poss. Re-post)

Discussion in ' - Patriots Fan Forum' started by PatsFanInVa, Feb 26, 2007.

  1. PatsFanInVa

    PatsFanInVa Supporter Supporter

  2. ironwasp

    ironwasp Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job

    John Clayton must have a sore backside from all those fences he sits on. His snippet on the Pats says virtually nothing, and pretty much hedges everything it does say.

    Thinner and thinner? We've upgraded both lines in the last two years; upgraded at TE; upgraded at RB.

    This year you'll likely see the cycle turn and we'll upgrade elsewhere.

    But you know who really needs an upgrade? ESPN. Because the talent on their roster is so thin, that Clayton's still a starter. That's thin.
  3. Clonamery

    Clonamery Supporter Supporter

    Bravo....well said, cheeky but well said.

    (Not cheeky at all, I just like saying it.)
  4. DarrylS

    DarrylS Supporter Supporter

    Clayton must be spending a lot of time with Borges and Felger, in fact they may be his sources of info. A quick glance of all the teams there is not a lot of love shown for any of them, predicts the Jest may revert back to 8-8 next year. Still predicts 10-11 wins for us, imo this is a premature article that might have been better written post draft and post all of the significant signings this team will make.
  5. Jimke

    Jimke In the Starting Line-Up

    The Pats are so thin at linebacker that they can't field four good linebackers

    in a 3-4 defense. If they sign and trade Asante Samuel, same situation

    at cornerback. Their wide receiving corps is Caldwell, Gaffney, an

    injured Chad Jackson and three guys named Childress, Kight, and Smith.

    Over the last two years, the Pats have lost several of their starters

    from their 2005 Super Bowl team and may lose two or three more this

    year. They have a lot of work to do to replenish their roster.
  6. jeffd

    jeffd On the Game Day Roster

    Clearly, the pats have more holes and decisions to make this offseason than most in recent years. But that could be opportunity because it allow them more flexibility with their picks and more of a chance of getting an impact player in the draft.
    The issues I have with the article are
    1. Daniel Graham, great TE and blocks like a tackle but hardly and impact player. Ben Watson and Dave Thomas should do fine. Plenty of JAGS around for the #3 spot.
    2. Mentioning TBC as a key FA loss is just stupid. I don't think I can/ need to explain further.
    3. Samuel has been franchised so the Pats realize he's too valuable to let go. I refer to the old philosophy that everything is for sale, at a price. Can anyone argue that the Pats shouldn't take a 1st rounder for a guy who they don't think they can get long term anyway? If they can agree on his value then sure keep him, obvious. If they can't then you get what you can for him and move on. I'm comfortable with Ellis Hobbs as our #1, High draft pick/ FA at #2 and Gay at #3.
  7. upstater1

    upstater1 Pro Bowl Player

    Every team has holes. Welcome to the NFL in the salary cap era. You can't hoard them after all. Look at that juggernaut San Diego, would you trade for their defensive backfield or wide receivers? I wouldn't. They are very weak around the perimeter. Look at the Colts and their front 7. Abysmal.
  8. pheenix11

    pheenix11 Supporter Supporter

    John Clayton is an idiot. I don't know how he keeps his job. Before the San Diego game someone interviewed him and asked what effect Rodney Harrison's injury would have. He said not much because the Pats have good backups like Eugene Wilson.

    Yeah Eugene Wilson is pretty good, except he was on the IR all year.

    Doesn't this moron get paid to know this stuff?
  9. PatsFanSince74

    PatsFanSince74 Supporter Supporter

    It was here before, but bears reposting.

    My favorite part is where he says threre's no way we win 12 games but should win 11 with "no trouble." Huh?
  10. Deus Irae

    Deus Irae Retired Jersey Club Supporter

    Disable Jersey

    That's not exactly what he said. If people are going to crack on someone for their reporting, they should get it right:

  11. PatsFan37

    PatsFan37 2nd Team Getting Their First Start

    #37 Jersey

    I really have to disagree with this, because it always looks this way after the end of a season. The defensive backfield is as strong as its ever been and the DL is the best in the league. Vrabel and Colvin are excellent OLB's. Not pro-bowl, but well above average and smart, big players.

    So yes, they're hurting at ILB, no question about it. But if they plug in ONE top of the line vet ILBs, and swap Seau and Bruschi and Barry Gardner (remember him, he wasn't looking so bad in TC), that'll be one of the best defenses in the league, yet again. Then, if they draft a LB and bring in another solid vet, they'll have depth and developing talent.

    They're not at all far from being the best and they've got cap room.

    Let's see what happens in a week or so.
  12. Cityofchampions33

    Cityofchampions33 On the Roster

    Yeah, I don't know why Clayton is posting his BEFORE free agency and the draft. Of course we have holes, but we're improving on a team that made it through the Chargers to the AFC Champ game. If he's going to criticize any team, do it after they make transactions and such. Also, did he forget that we franchised Asante? He's not exactly out the door just yet. Remember what he says now, because I garuntee a total 180 on next year's prediction after everything in the off-season takes place.
  13. PatsFanSince74

    PatsFanSince74 Supporter Supporter

    You're correct that I shouldn't have used quote marks without going back to the original text, but I nonetheless think that my paraphrasing was a reasonable interpretation of his original comments.
  14. Deus Irae

    Deus Irae Retired Jersey Club Supporter

    Disable Jersey

    How so? He's saying that he thinks this is a 10-11 win team, but not a 12 win team as currently constructed. How exactly is that an inane comment or one that's would make "No way we win 12 but should win 11 with no trouble" a 'reasonable interpretation'?
  15. ironwasp

    ironwasp Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job

    Its not unreasonable if you're an ESPN ass clown.
  16. tuckeverlasting

    tuckeverlasting In the Starting Line-Up

    No Jersey Selected

    you're splitting hairs here. he pretty much paraprhased what clayton wrote. as far as clayton's contention that there's "no way" we'll win 12 games, someone should tell him the difference between 11 and 12 wins is a lucky bounce. from what i've read from clayton in the past, he should stay away from any type of football predictions.
  17. Deus Irae

    Deus Irae Retired Jersey Club Supporter

    Disable Jersey

    When did a 2 game difference in the win column (10 games vs. 12) become "splitting hairs" in the NFL and its 16 game season? When did "It's going to be hard for them to stay at the 12-win level next season because they have the toughest schedule in the AFC" (Clayton's version) magically turn into "he says there's no way we win 12 games"?

    Clayton may, or may not, be a good reporter, but there's no excuse for making such huge mistakes or assumptions when you are attacking someone's accuracy and judgment.
  18. Clonamery

    Clonamery Supporter Supporter

    He's not and you're right.
  19. jeffd

    jeffd On the Game Day Roster

    Can there be one thread anymore without a pissing contest between posters about their posts. I can handle arguing but please argue about the topic, the Patriots or football in general...
  20. Fixit

    Fixit Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    There's no excuse for ending your sentence with an ellipsis rather than a period. :D

    Seriously, though, who listens to John Clayton?

Share This Page