Greg Jennings spurned Pats offer?

[Run DMC]

Did Greg Jennings reject New England Patriots' offer? - NFL.com

"The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel's Bob McGinn reported the Packers proposed a deal that averaged $8 million per year. McGinn added the New England Patriots were willing to put up $6 million per year. "

Our cheapness is consistent, if not hilarious.

 

[Jangles]

lol why did they even bother?

Think they made that offer before or after they offered the lions a 6th round pick for Calvin Johnson and Donkeykong Suh?

 

[Brady2Moss]

 

[JMC00]

Schefter: League source adamant Patriots never made an offer to Jennings

https://twitter.com/AdamSchefter/status/313406699920826368

 

[Spergon Wynn]

This has been discussed here:

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england.../10/1014908-greg-jennings-signed-vikings.html

They were interested but never made a formal offer apparently, despite the initial article.

 

[JackBauer]

Unless the OP wants to argue the Patriots would have been smart to shell out the absurd money Jennings got from the model franchise and perennial contender Minnesota Vikings (which seems like a dubious proposition, given the market), then what is this other than the usual gaggle of malcontents whining about the Patriots being cheap?

You can certainly argue that the Patriots have exhibited questionable judgment relating to contracts in the past, but if you want to have that discussion it helps when you start off with a, you know, actual example of such.

 

[eom]

pats should have signed jennings and traded him to minny

 

[Run DMC]

I'm just amused by our shopping at walmart philosophy. I wouldn't want Jennings for that contract or Mike Wallace for his. I do think, however, it has cost us in the past. Literally, superbowls when you reflect on 2006 or our lack of pass rush or db's the last 5 years.

 

[scout]

Did Greg Jennings reject New England Patriots' offer? - NFL.com

"The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel's Bob McGinn reported the Packers proposed a deal that averaged $8 million per year. McGinn added the New England Patriots were willing to put up $6 million per year. "

Our cheapness is consistent, if not hilarious.

Yes, we should have guaranteed him the $18 million he received from the Vikings. After all, Brady needs just one receiver to put us over the top......we need a running back to put us over the top......we need a center to put us over the top.....we need a slot receiver to put us over the top....we need a .........get the point? Defense wins championships and that is where we need to be solid. Every year the Patriots were World Champions they had a great defense. Every year they lost a Superbowl, not so much.

 

[Rob0729]

Whether the Pats made the offer or not, we can all agree that the Pats blew it for not overpaying for a WR who appears to be breaking down that neither his old coach in Miami who was spending like a drunken sailor wanted and his team from last year refused to match the offer of the team that acquired him or franchise him for around $9 million.

Seriously, didn't want Jennings in the first place. I would have lived with him at $6 million a year. Don't care if the Pats low balled him because their rumored offer was really the only offer around what Jennings should have got.

Jennings was the second best WR in free agency, not because he is so good anymore, but because the free agent market for WRs sucked.

 

[Jackson 2]

Did Greg Jennings reject New England Patriots' offer? - NFL.com

"The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel's Bob McGinn reported the Packers proposed a deal that averaged $8 million per year. McGinn added the New England Patriots were willing to put up $6 million per year. "

Our cheapness is consistent, if not hilarious.

Felgie, you're back!!!!

 

[RayClay]

I like how having a winning record every year, AFC titles, playoff appearances but only three Super Bowls, is proof that what we are doing in free agency is wrong.

darn.

 

[Ring 6]

I'm just amused by our shopping at walmart philosophy. I wouldn't want Jennings for that contract or Mike Wallace for his. I do think, however, it has cost us in the past. Literally, superbowls when you reflect on 2006 or our lack of pass rush or db's the last 5 years.

So the philosophy that built the team to one that was that close to winning SBs should be replaced by the one the Redskins have used?

 

[IcyPatriot]

Felgie, you're back!!!!

No Fred is Felgie ... I think Run is Mazz.

 

[ausbacker]

Jennings can please himself when he catches 60 balls a season from Ponder and barely sniffs winning records for the remainder of his career. Wait a minute, that sounds like his Green Bay career (without the winning).

 

[Rob0729]

I'm just amused by our shopping at walmart philosophy. I wouldn't want Jennings for that contract or Mike Wallace for his. I do think, however, it has cost us in the past. Literally, superbowls when you reflect on 2006 or our lack of pass rush or db's the last 5 years.

The Pats were one minute from going to the Super Bowl in 2006. And that had nothing to do with Walmart shopping. It was because they mishandled the Branch situation and the league forced them to trade him.

This time in 2006, no one realistically thought Branch would actually hold out into the season or that Belichick would screw up and let him shop himself which caused Branch to file a grievance and Tagliabue force Belichick to trade him to avoid a precedence to be set.

As for DBs, that was poor drafting at the position (a trend that seems to be changing with McCourty and Dennard). Not being cheap.

 

[Run DMC]

So the philosophy that built the team to one that was that close to winning SBs should be replaced by the one the Redskins have used?

When it comes to paying for a game changing playmaker, ala, Peppers or Revis, you get what you pay for. When you have the worst ranked passing defense in the NFL 3-4 years in a row yeah you've got a problem. When any mediocre bum can throw for 4-500 yds against your crap defense you might have a problem. When you trade down in the draft year after year trying to capture "value" in the scrub category while your defense flounders, uh, yeah you have a problem. If this team didn't have Tom Brady, I doubt you'd be witnessing this level of consistent success. Brady covers up the ridiculous shortcomings of our cheap front office.

 

[Rob0729]

When it comes to paying for a game changing playmaker, ala, Peppers or Revis, you get what you pay for. When you have the worst ranked passing defense in the NFL 3-4 years in a row yeah you've got a problem. When any mediocre bum can throw for 4-500 yds against your crap defense you might have a problem. When you trade down in the draft year after year trying to capture "value" in the scrub category while your defense flounders, uh, yeah you have a problem. If this team didn't have Tom Brady, I doubt you'd be witnessing this level of consistent success. Brady covers up the ridiculous shortcomings of our cheap front office.

Peppers has been good in Chicago, but he wasn't what they paid for. He was vastly overpaid for his production.

The Pats have been to back to back Conference Championships and went to the Super Bowl. The Bears spend big bucks and draft picks to get marquee players like Peppers, Cutler, and Brandon Marshall yet haven't even gotten into the playoffs the last two years.

I say the Pats should be like the Bears and spend big bucks on flashing free agents and trades and not make the playoffs. I think it is funny that you would emulate the Bears' strategy.

 

[Run DMC]

You guys take a statement and run with it. The Bears have their problems. Defense sure as hell isn't one of them. The pats have had crap D since 2007.Total crap. Is this even arguable?

 

[Ring 6]

When it comes to paying for a game changing playmaker, ala, Peppers or Revis, you get what you pay for. When you have the worst ranked passing defense in the NFL 3-4 years in a row yeah you've got a problem.

How are the Jets and Bears doing after paying for those guys?

When any mediocre bum can throw for 4-500 yds against your crap defense you might have a problem.

If you wish to be taken seriously don't insult your own position by ridiculous exaggeration.

When you trade down in the draft year after year trying to capture "value" in the scrub category while your defense flounders, uh, yeah you have a problem.

Since BB arrived in 2000, the Patriots have allowed the 3rd fewest points in the NFL.
In the last 5 years, they have allowed the 4th fewest.
Of course since BB arrived they have won more playoff games and SB than any other team as well.
I'm not sure when you showed up as a fan, but you seem to be lacking some information.

If this team didn't have Tom Brady, I doubt you'd be witnessing this level of consistent success. Brady covers up the ridiculous shortcomings of our cheap front office.

If the team didn't have Tom Brady it would be a different team making different decisions. Teams with good QBs win, this one, in general, wins more than any other.
You seem to be creating a 'what if' to make your argument which doesn't stand up without going into a pretend land.