La Canfora: Pats trying hard to keep Bodden - Texans and Steelers in it

[emoney_33]

====================================================

OK then, have your bet, and I hope it works out well.

Why so serious over any of this message board business.

messageboard or not, internet or not. It's a real human being making an outlandish statement and proposing a lopsided (in my favor) bet. It has nothing to do with the internet or messageboards. We aren't fake people posting here.

 

[emoney_33]

Re: La Canfora: Pats making late push for Bodden - Texans and Steelers in it

They could easily have kept Seymour and Wilfork, both last season and this season. All it would have taken is getting Wilfork signed earlier, which should have been done last year anyway, and then franchising Seymour.

Oh the Hubris. You need to get over your love affair with Seymour, honestly.

And I'm pretty sure the Patriots front office knows a little more about the situations than you will ever, no matter how mighty you want to make yourself seem around here.

 

[Warren94]

new update on bodden per rotoworld. He is svisiting the Texans.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

new update on bodden per rotoworld. He is svisiting the Texans.

John McClain (McClain_on_NFL) on Twitter

Bodden wants a lot of money. Unless his price comes down, I don't see the Texans committing money to him they could have used on Dunta.
3 minutes ago via web
After speaking to Leigh Bodden's agent, Alvin Keels, the Texans have decided to bring in the CB for a visit. G Wade Smith is coming today.
22 minutes ago via web

 

[Ring 6]

Re: La Canfora: Pats making late push for Bodden - Texans and Steelers in it

They could easily have kept Seymour and Wilfork, both last season and this season. All it would have taken is getting Wilfork signed earlier, which should have been done last year anyway, and then franchising Seymour.

You are making a lot of assumptions.
1) That Wilfork was willing to sign without trying the dont franchise me let me go free ploy.
2) That Wilforks demands were not significantly higher last year.
3) That it was known then that this would in fact end up as an uncapped year
4) That there is sense in tying up that much money in 2 DL, on top of Warrens contract, something we have never ever done

You seem to think there is enough money to sign every player in the NFL because there is enough to sign ANY 1 of them. Just because there is cap space to sign Bolden or to have kept Seymour doesnt mean it is the best use of the VERY LIMITED cap space. Unless you are endorsing a Redskin-esque go for broke while their is no cap and be 100mill over when it comes back.

 

[mcsully]

ESPNBoston's Mike Reiss writes Bodden could command money in the $4-$5 million per season range
Home | ProFootballTalk.com


Um, that seems like a fair amt of money for his talent? I know people here were talking about 7+ million.. I hope they bring him back..

 

[FreeTedWilliams]

I would think that Bodden in his second year with the Pats would be more effective than last year. If they can bring him back, it would pretty much settle the defensive backfield (Bodden, Butler (Whilite, Wheatley as back-ups/nickel/dime) at corner with Merriweather Chung/Sanders).

That would leave the Pats oprn in the draft to go pass rusher.

Now if they could somehow bring back btoh Bodden and Watson, then they could really go BPA with 4 out of the first 53 picks in a very deep draft.

 

[Deus Irae]

Re: La Canfora: Pats making late push for Bodden - Texans and Steelers in it

You are making a lot of assumptions.
1) That Wilfork was willing to sign without trying the dont franchise me let me go free ploy.
2) That Wilforks demands were not significantly higher last year.
3) That it was known then that this would in fact end up as an uncapped year
4) That there is sense in tying up that much money in 2 DL, on top of Warrens contract, something we have never ever done

You seem to think there is enough money to sign every player in the NFL because there is enough to sign ANY 1 of them. Just because there is cap space to sign Bolden or to have kept Seymour doesnt mean it is the best use of the VERY LIMITED cap space. Unless you are endorsing a Redskin-esque go for broke while their is no cap and be 100mill over when it comes back.

1.) The irony of you claiming I'm making assumptions in a post where you make assumptions about me is worth the read, so thanks.

2.) Wilfork was a 3-4 NT. Let's not try to pretend that he was asking for more money than the team could have afforded, especially when the team was doling out nice contracts to the likes of Kaczur. After all, that would be an assumption on your part.

3.) Belichick has made it abundantly clear that he builds his defense with a focus on the defensive line as the #1 priority.

4.) They had Seymour and Wilfork on the team about a week prior to the start of the season. They already knew that they'd fit into the then current salary structure.

 

[PATRIOTS-80]

Bodden visting the Texans today.

per Reiss

Bodden set for visit to Texans - Patriots Blog - ESPN Boston

 

[VJCPatriot]

ESPNBoston's Mike Reiss writes Bodden could command money in the $4-$5 million per season range
Home | ProFootballTalk.com


Um, that seems like a fair amt of money for his talent? I know people here were talking about 7+ million.. I hope they bring him back..

Only 5 million per season? Sign him up to a 5 year deal!!

 

[Ring 6]

Re: La Canfora: Pats making late push for Bodden - Texans and Steelers in it

1.) The irony of you claiming I'm making assumptions in a post where you make assumptions about me is worth the read, so thanks.

2.) Wilfork was a 3-4 NT. Let's not try to pretend that he was asking for more money than the team could have afforded, especially when the team was doling out nice contracts to the likes of Kaczur. After all, that would be an assumption on your part.

3.) Belichick has made it abundantly clear that he builds his defense with a focus on the defensive line as the #1 priority.

4.) They had Seymour and Wilfork on the team about a week prior to the start of the season. They already knew that they'd fit into the then current salary structure.

1) Do you dispute that you need to assume those things to arrive at your conclusion? Its pretty much a fact.
2) Are you saying that whatever a players asks for you give them if you can afford it? And that you shouldn't resign any 3mill players so you can get all of the $8mill players you can afford? Not trying to put words in your mouth but you sound as if a roster shouldn't include any average starting players so you can overload on 'stars'. Are you saying you feel the Pats consistent personell strategy through the last decade is bad?
3) Please show me where he made that abundantly clear. Prior to about 2003-2004 he has never coached a team that used its biggest resources on the DL. Drafting Warren and Wilfork were out of character for him. (Especially with Seymour already here) I dont think 2 draft picks are a case of abundantly clear. I would argue they were the best players on the board, not reaches to fill a priority you have decided he has.
I suppose if it is abundantly clear, you can correct me, show some quotes where he said that, some moves he has made, something more than turning 2 draft choices into a referendum.
4) You didnt say last year you said last year AND this year. We have a lot of moves to make. Seymours tag would be something like 12 mill I think. We have 12 mill more in moves to make that we wouldn't be making if we followed your plan. Its a lottle premature to say we could have afforded both until we see what we do with that 12 mill, and see what the cost of that 'affordable' plan in other players would be.

 

[Deus Irae]

Re: La Canfora: Pats making late push for Bodden - Texans and Steelers in it

1) Do you dispute that you need to assume those things to arrive at your conclusion? Its pretty much a fact.

Obviously I dispute it, and it's clearly not a fact.

2) Are you saying that whatever a players asks for you give them if you can afford it? And that you shouldn't resign any 3mill players so you can get all of the $8mill players you can afford? Not trying to put words in your mouth but you sound as if a roster shouldn't include any average starting players so you can overload on 'stars'. Are you saying you feel the Pats consistent personell strategy through the last decade is bad?

Getting a contract done doesn't automatically involve caving into all player demands, as you well know.

And you are trying to put words into my mouth. In fact, that's precisely what you're attempting to do.

3) Please show me where he made that abundantly clear. Prior to about 2003-2004 he has never coached a team that used its biggest resources on the DL. Drafting Warren and Wilfork were out of character for him. (Especially with Seymour already here) I dont think 2 draft picks are a case of abundantly clear. I would argue they were the best players on the board, not reaches to fill a priority you have decided he has.
I suppose if it is abundantly clear, you can correct me, show some quotes where he said that, some moves he has made, something more than turning 2 draft choices into a referendum.

It's been discussed before on this board. Parcells builds from the linebackers first and Belichick builds from the D-line.

Here's just one spot where I noted a BB quote on the matter, for example. Actually, you posted in the thread, as a matter of fact:

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/10/240182-future-patriots-d-3-4-tipping-point.html#post1387901

4) You didnt say last year you said last year AND this year. We have a lot of moves to make. Seymours tag would be something like 12 mill I think. We have 12 mill more in moves to make that we wouldn't be making if we followed your plan. Its a lottle premature to say we could have afforded both until we see what we do with that 12 mill, and see what the cost of that 'affordable' plan in other players would be.

Yes, last year and this year. Last year, the team traded him away when it didn't need to. This year, they could have franchised him in an uncapped season.

There's nothing "premature" at all involved.

 

[Ring 6]

Re: La Canfora: Pats making late push for Bodden - Texans and Steelers in it

Obviously I dispute it, and it's clearly not a fact.



Getting a contract done doesn't automatically involve caving into all player demands, as you well know.

And you are trying to put words into my mouth. In fact, that's precisely what you're attempting to do.



It's been discussed before on this board. Parcells builds from the linebackers first and Belichick builds from the D-line.

Here's just one spot where I noted a BB quote on the matter, for example. Actually, you posted in the thread, as a matter of fact:

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england...patriots-d-3-4-tipping-point.html#post1387901



Yes, last year and this year. Last year, the team traded him away when it didn't need to. This year, they could have franchised him in an uncapped season.

There's nothing "premature" at all involved.

OK, this will be my last post because you are starting this childish hold your breath and never admit you are wrong path.
Responding to your points:
1) I don't know how you can conclude anything with making the assumptions that are necessary to your conclusion. To say they should have signed Wilfork last year and not accept that you must assume he was wiling to sign is just ignorant.
2) The only reasoning you offered for signing Wilfork last year was
"Let's not try to pretend that he was asking for more money than the team could have afforded"
This is why I ask the question if you think we should sign the player to whatever he asks because we can afford it. You just implied that is the only consideration.
Asking 'are yo saying.....' is not putting words in your mouth, it is asking for clarification, which you, naturally , failed to provied.
3) "Its been discussed on this board" is the lamest 'piece of evidence' that can be offerend. A quote about BB explaining that defending the run starts with the DL doing their job, then the LBs then the DBs, is having BB explain the exact same thing any coach would. Do you think Parcells would say it starts with the LBs and whether they do their job impacts the DL doing theirs? Of course not.
It is very far from proving that
"Belichick has made it abundantly clear that he builds his defense with a focus on the defensive line as the #1 priority."
It only proves that he understands a DL doing or not doing their job affects the LB. It doesnt indicate whether it is harder to find a 2 gap DL than a LB who can do all of the things a LB does, whether you make the DL the focus of building your defense, and ignores the passing game as well.
He spoke about the importance of DLineman once is hardly 'abundantly clear that it is the #1 priority.
If I go find a quote about how important punting and field position is can I call it abundantly clear that he feels the punter is the #1 priority? I know I've heard him say 'it all starts with field position" and I know he has credited the punter and the special teams for wins because of that.

4) Remarkably, you have decided that keeping and franchising Seymour for $12 million is better than whatever that $12 million will be used on and don't even need to know what it is used on to decide. If thats not premature lets start discussing how we will do in the 2030 draft because all of those picks have been born.

 

[Deus Irae]

Re: La Canfora: Pats making late push for Bodden - Texans and Steelers in it

OK, this will be my last post because you are starting this childish hold your breath and never admit you are wrong path.
Responding to your points:
1) I don't know how you can conclude anything with making the assumptions that are necessary to your conclusion. To say they should have signed Wilfork last year and not accept that you must assume he was wiling to sign is just ignorant.

You listed more than one "assumption", Andy, and claimed them all as facts. They weren't. It's really that simple. As for Wilfork's willingness to sign, are you then saying that I should not take Wilfork's repeated statements that he wanted a new deal as being honest? In other words, Andy, are you saying that I should assume he was lying?

2) The only reasoning you offered for signing Wilfork last year was
"Let's not try to pretend that he was asking for more money than the team could have afforded"
This is why I ask the question if you think we should sign the player to whatever he asks because we can afford it. You just implied that is the only consideration.
Asking 'are yo saying.....' is not putting words in your mouth, it is asking for clarification, which you, naturally , failed to provied.

No, Andy, this is not correct. You are misrepresenting the discussion, again.

3) "Its been discussed on this board" is the lamest 'piece of evidence' that can be offerend. A quote about BB explaining that defending the run starts with the DL doing their job, then the LBs then the DBs, is having BB explain the exact same thing any coach would. Do you think Parcells would say it starts with the LBs and whether they do their job impacts the DL doing theirs? Of course not.
It is very far from proving that
"Belichick has made it abundantly clear that he builds his defense with a focus on the defensive line as the #1 priority."
It only proves that he understands a DL doing or not doing their job affects the LB. It doesnt indicate whether it is harder to find a 2 gap DL than a LB who can do all of the things a LB does, whether you make the DL the focus of building your defense, and ignores the passing game as well.
He spoke about the importance of DLineman once is hardly 'abundantly clear that it is the #1 priority.
If I go find a quote about how important punting and field position is can I call it abundantly clear that he feels the punter is the #1 priority? I know I've heard him say 'it all starts with field position" and I know he has credited the punter and the special teams for wins because of that.

Yes, if you ignore the actual quote, and you ignore the fact that Belichick has spent #1 picks on Wilfork, Seymour and Warren, and you enjoy his quotes in press conferences and the like....

If you ignore all of that and focus on the fact that I noted the discussion had been had in other threads and posted one as an example....

If you ignore all that and play your games, you might have a point. In the real world, though, you don't.

4) Remarkably, you have decided that keeping and franchising Seymour for $12 million is better than whatever that $12 million will be used on and don't even need to know what it is used on to decide. If thats not premature lets start discussing how we will do in the 2030 draft because all of those picks have been born.[/QUOTE]

It's not premature at all. Of course, you're choosing to ignore the current CBA status, so this has become just another instance of you serving as the team shill rather than as a reasonable poster.

 

[Ring 6]

Re: La Canfora: Pats making late push for Bodden - Texans and Steelers in it

You listed more than one "assumption", Andy, and claimed them all as facts. They weren't. It's really that simple. As for Wilfork's willingness to sign, are you then saying that I should not take Wilfork's repeated statements that he wanted a new deal as being honest? In other words, Andy, are you saying that I should assume he was lying?



No, Andy, this is not correct. You are misrepresenting the discussion, again.



Yes, if you ignore the actual quote, and you ignore the fact that Belichick has spent #1 picks on Wilfork, Seymour and Warren, and you enjoy his quotes in press conferences and the like....

If you ignore all of that and focus on the fact that I noted the discussion had been had in other threads and posted one as an example....

If you ignore all that and play your games, you might have a point. In the real world, though, you don't.

4) Remarkably, you have decided that keeping and franchising Seymour for $12 million is better than whatever that $12 million will be used on and don't even need to know what it is used on to decide. If thats not premature lets start discussing how we will do in the 2030 draft because all of those picks have been born.

It's not premature at all. Of course, you're choosing to ignore the current CBA status, so this has become just another instance of you serving as the team shill rather than as a reasonable poster.[/quote]

As I said that was my last post, Ihave no more interest in reading your childish arguments to position yourself to not admit you are wrong.
Do me a favor the next time someone has a difference of opinion with you, and you listen and accept the possiblity that there is another person in the world that could be right, let me know so I can read your posts. Until then go ahead and use the old standby that anyone who disagrees with you has an agenda.
You just got done telling me that since I think we built the 2003-2004 Champions heavily in the draft and don't agree with you that Josh Miller, Larry Centers and Keith Traylor singlehandedly brought us a Lomabrdi that I am a homer.
That tactic gets old, fast. You have reduced it to if we disagree the weather it is homerism. Carry on, have fun.

 

[Deus Irae]

Re: La Canfora: Pats making late push for Bodden - Texans and Steelers in it

As I said that was my last post, Ihave no more interest in reading your childish arguments to position yourself to not admit you are wrong.
Do me a favor the next time someone has a difference of opinion with you, and you listen and accept the possiblity that there is another person in the world that could be right, let me know so I can read your posts. Until then go ahead and use the old standby that anyone who disagrees with you has an agenda.
You just got done telling me that since I think we built the 2003-2004 Champions heavily in the draft and don't agree with you that Josh Miller, Larry Centers and Keith Traylor singlehandedly brought us a Lomabrdi that I am a homer.
That tactic gets old, fast. You have reduced it to if we disagree the weather it is homerism. Carry on, have fun.

I read every post with an open mind, whether it's a 'pro-Patriots' position or an 'anti-Patriots' position, Andy. That's the difference between us. Your post here is a perfect example. You take something from another thread, twist it from what I said, and post it here as if it has relevance and truth, and you do that because you think it's just remotely possible that someone's not 100% buying into the company line.

If you don't like being called a homer, quit being one. It's really that simple.

Also, for the record, it's you who tends to initiate our 'discussions'. I generally try to avoid responding to you unless you've directly quoted me. I already know that your position will almost always be some derivative of "BB must be right, because he's never wrong!", so I don't generally need to explore your position any further.

 

[emoney_33]

Re: La Canfora: Pats making late push for Bodden - Texans and Steelers in it

This year, they could have franchised him in an uncapped season.

There's nothing "premature" at all involved.

This is classic. They did not know for a fact it would be an uncapped year when they traded him. That alone throws your assertion out the window without so much as the need to discuss all the other factors like Wilfork.

 

[emoney_33]

Re: La Canfora: Pats making late push for Bodden - Texans and Steelers in it

I read every post with an open mind, whether it's a 'pro-Patriots' position or an 'anti-Patriots' position, Andy. That's the difference between us. Your post here is a perfect example. You take something from another thread, twist it from what I said, and post it here as if it has relevance and truth, and you do that because you think it's just remotely possible that someone's not 100% buying into the company line.

If you don't like being called a homer, quit being one. It's really that simple.

Also, for the record, it's you who tends to initiate our 'discussions'. I generally try to avoid responding to you unless you've directly quoted me. I already know that your position will almost always be some derivative of "BB must be right, because he's never wrong!", so I don't generally need to explore your position any further.

The arrogance on you is astounding. Andy says you can't just assume that Wilfork was willing to sign. And your interpretation of that factually correct statement is "should I assume he's lying". No, just don't assume period. Learn how to leave room open for the unknown. You post all the time with this arrogant beating your chest mentality. You ignore posters who use facts to prove you wrong. You put your 2 cents into any discussion just to be a contrarian even though in the same discussions you admit to not feeling that way. You contradict yourself in different threads in your attempt to disagree with EVERYTHING. Then anyone who doesn't agree with you is instantly a homer or a shill.

I can't believe you really said you read every post with an open-mind and actually believe it

 

[Ring 6]

Re: La Canfora: Pats making late push for Bodden - Texans and Steelers in it

I read every post with an open mind, whether it's a 'pro-Patriots' position or an 'anti-Patriots' position, Andy. That's the difference between us. Your post here is a perfect example. You take something from another thread, twist it from what I said, and post it here as if it has relevance and truth, and you do that because you think it's just remotely possible that someone's not 100% buying into the company line.

If you don't like being called a homer, quit being one. It's really that simple.

Also, for the record, it's you who tends to initiate our 'discussions'. I generally try to avoid responding to you unless you've directly quoted me. I already know that your position will almost always be some derivative of "BB must be right, because he's never wrong!", so I don't generally need to explore your position any further.

I agree that I do respond to your posts that pidgeon hole everything into a negative slant. As I said I no longer care to diminish my enjoyment of the board by having you reduce everything to an argument that anyone who disagrees with you has an agenda.
See the difference is that BB is right way more than wrong. You know as well as I do that I have never said he is always right.
I usemy objectivity to recognize that when the facts are not yet in, BB is more likely to be right than wrong, so the sanest approach is to give him the benefit of the doubt. You, on the other hand, have decided to use this board as a vehicle to raise your self esteem by trashing BB and then making the circular argument that anyone who doesnt agree with your criticism has a pro-Patriot agenda.
As I said carry on....I already know the script:
Deus trashes the Pats
Poster points out he is wrong (or just gives another side)
Deus 'proves he is right' by saying anyone who disagrees with his trashing has a homer agenda.
Its a perfect approach, you can never be wrong because you are the only person in the world who honestly gives an objective opinion. Must be lonely in that ivory tower of yours.

 

[Ring 6]

Re: La Canfora: Pats making late push for Bodden - Texans and Steelers in it

The arrogance on you is astounding. Andy says you can't just assume that Wilfork was willing to sign. And your interpretation of that factually correct statement is "should I assume he's lying". No, just don't assume period. Learn how to leave room open for the unknown. You post all the time with this arrogant beating your chest mentality. You ignore posters who use facts to prove you wrong. You put your 2 cents into any discussion just to be a contrarian even though in the same discussions you admit to not feeling that way. You contradict yourself in different threads in your attempt to disagree with EVERYTHING. Then anyone who doesn't agree with you is instantly a homer or a shill.

I can't believe you really said you read every post with an open-mind and actually believe it

You are threading very close to losing this argument by being called a homer, and having every point you have made voided in one felt swoop as lacking integrity because you know you are wrong but just want to defend the Patriots.
It doesn't matter that your side of the argument is no more defensive of the Patriots than his. You disagree with Deus, therefore you are a BB ballwasher. Its the only ending of this story, other than the one I just created: Ignore the ignorant.