Brady'sButtBoy
2nd Team Getting Their First Start
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2005
- Messages
- 1,900
- Reaction score
- 137
Why? Because the addition of a quality LB or WR would benefit this team more than Faulk's continued presence on a offense that has enough depth in the backfield to suffer his loss and yet still be productive.
Faulk would be coming to a new team with the label of winner and the reputation as a productive change of pace RB, giving him a some pretty decent value as trade bait.
Our team just isn't deep enough on defense, or at WR, to have the luxury this year of sitting on their hands and keeping Faulk as insurance if Maroney or Dillon go down. Bruschi will be retiring soon, Brady only has so many years in a career, Seymour is at his peak, and Dillon isn't long for being a featured back in the NFL. How many times can you be sure the stars will align again for the Pats? Picture the offense if Maroney and Dillon both stay healthy - Faulk will be a $2.5mil glorified benchwarmer. Of course it is early, but Mills has skills (as Napolean Dynamite might say), and Pass or Evans could fill in when needed as a reciever, maybe even Cobbs would make this team if Faulk was gone. No, they may not be as talented as Faulk, but collectively a couple of them they could fill the void of his leaving well enough when you consider how little Faulk may even be on the field.
The bottom line is that Faulk's playing time will be reduced significantly, he's a fumbler, he's overpaid for a third string back, and we most likely have the capacity to cover his loss. Wouldn't you rather have a trustworthy linebacker running around beside Tedy slamming everything in sight? Wouldn't a guy like that have a much bigger effect on the success of this team than Faulk will? Or how about a sure handed, tough guy receiver out-muscling DB's for a dozen touchdowns?
The impact of a quality WR (whether Branch comes in or not) or, even more so, the impact of quality LB, would greatly outweigh Faulk's subtraction from the squad. Sure, it is a bit of a risk trading a contributor like Faulk, but you have to give to get, and Faulk would be worth much more to another team than he is to us today.
Faulk would be coming to a new team with the label of winner and the reputation as a productive change of pace RB, giving him a some pretty decent value as trade bait.
Our team just isn't deep enough on defense, or at WR, to have the luxury this year of sitting on their hands and keeping Faulk as insurance if Maroney or Dillon go down. Bruschi will be retiring soon, Brady only has so many years in a career, Seymour is at his peak, and Dillon isn't long for being a featured back in the NFL. How many times can you be sure the stars will align again for the Pats? Picture the offense if Maroney and Dillon both stay healthy - Faulk will be a $2.5mil glorified benchwarmer. Of course it is early, but Mills has skills (as Napolean Dynamite might say), and Pass or Evans could fill in when needed as a reciever, maybe even Cobbs would make this team if Faulk was gone. No, they may not be as talented as Faulk, but collectively a couple of them they could fill the void of his leaving well enough when you consider how little Faulk may even be on the field.
The bottom line is that Faulk's playing time will be reduced significantly, he's a fumbler, he's overpaid for a third string back, and we most likely have the capacity to cover his loss. Wouldn't you rather have a trustworthy linebacker running around beside Tedy slamming everything in sight? Wouldn't a guy like that have a much bigger effect on the success of this team than Faulk will? Or how about a sure handed, tough guy receiver out-muscling DB's for a dozen touchdowns?
The impact of a quality WR (whether Branch comes in or not) or, even more so, the impact of quality LB, would greatly outweigh Faulk's subtraction from the squad. Sure, it is a bit of a risk trading a contributor like Faulk, but you have to give to get, and Faulk would be worth much more to another team than he is to us today.