Law is a Chief

[RoughingthePasser]

Keep in mind that Herm is an easier coach to play for than BB. Law can stay fat, play undisciplined ball where he gets lots of interference pentalties to go with his interceptions, make lots of money and never see another championship. That was his choice vs. getting in shape, playing a better game for a better coach, earning immortality by breaking the Pats' team interceptions record, possibly earning another ring and making less money. He will not win a ring under Herm. Bottom line: easier life, more money, less accomplishment.

That is the TRUTH!

 

[smg93]

NESN this morning said 5 yrs, averaging $6M per year. Too rich for my blood.

Thanks! 6m per year is not too bad but the five year part is a bit overdone methinks. I wonder how much of that is guaranteed.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

What does 'rebuilding mode' mean by your definition?

Fair question, and, before I answer, let me say that I still think we win the AFC East this year and that "anything can happen" in January.

Now, to your question.

Every offseason, the Pats try to balance long term (next two to five years) needs and short term (winning a ring this year) needs. I'm sure that you and I would agree that they've done a better job of this than any team in the NFL in recent history. The facts speak for themselves.

So, for the Patriots, as far as I can see, "rebuilding" means putting more of an emphasis in a given offseason on the "two to five year" horizon than on the "this year" horizon. It doesn't mean that they don't want to be competitive this year, it just means that they're not putting the primary emphasis on loading the guns, as they did when they added a Dillon or a Colvin in different offseasons.

I can't look at this offseason and draw any other conclusion than that, this offseason at least, the Patriots have placed the primary emphasis on looking down the road a couple of seasons. They have allowed key parts of the championship runs to leave town when they all still had varying levels of gas in the tank rather than pay a three to five year "Super Premium" price for a player who will likely be giving "Regular" performance in a couple of years (something I support, by the way). At the same time, they have not replaced them, in the short term, with players of anything near comparable proven (emphasis on proven) quality.

If Piolichick's track record is any indication, they have young talent on the Roster that will step up under the right coaching and as part of the right organization and assume the roles of several of these players. But, that's a development that will take a couple of years. Thus, I say that, for the Patriots, it looks like they have focused on "rebuilding" this offseason.

I think that this is the right strategy, by the way. We don't want to end up like the Steelers who took 26 years to win their next SB after a phenomenal run, or like the Cowboys who took 10 years to get back to being taken seriously for an SB or the '49ers who still aren't close after 11 seasons.

Look forward to your response.

 

[basement zombie]

Great quote from Chiefs DE Jared Allen upon hearing the news:

http://www.boston.com/sports/football/articles/2006/07/23/chiefs_agree_to_terms_with_cb_ty_law/



:eat2:

Are you sure those weren't quotes from KC FANS?

 

[pats1]

Fair question, and, before I answer, let me say that I still think we win the AFC East this year and that "anything can happen" in January.

Now, to your question.

Every offseason, the Pats try to balance long term (next two to five years) needs and short term (winning a ring this year) needs. I'm sure that you and I would agree that they've done a better job of this than any team in the NFL in recent history. The facts speak for themselves.

So, for the Patriots, as far as I can see, "rebuilding" means putting more of an emphasis in a given offseason on the "two to five year" horizon than on the "this year" horizon. It doesn't mean that they don't want to be competitive this year, it just means that they're not putting the primary emphasis on loading the guns, as they did when they added a Dillon or a Colvin in different offseasons.

I can't look at this offseason and draw any other conclusion than that, this offseason at least, the Patriots have placed the primary emphasis on looking down the road a couple of seasons. They have allowed key parts of the championship runs to leave town when they all still had varying levels of gas in the tank rather than pay a three to five year "Super Premium" price for a player who will likely be giving "Regular" performance in a couple of years (something I support, by the way). At the same time, they have not replaced them, in the short term, with players of anything near comparable proven (emphasis on proven) quality.

If Piolichick's track record is any indication, they have young talent on the Roster that will step up under the right coaching and as part of the right organization and assume the roles of several of these players. But, that's a development that will take a couple of years. Thus, I say that, for the Patriots, it looks like they have focused on "rebuilding" this offseason.

I think that this is the right strategy, by the way. We don't want to end up like the Steelers who took 26 years to win their next SB after a phenomenal run, or like the Cowboys who took 10 years to get back to being taken seriously for an SB or the '49ers who still aren't close after 11 seasons.

Look forward to your response.

I don't get why so many fans see the Patriots having an annual requirement to do a certain task. Just because they signed Harrison/Colvin one year and traded for Dillon the next doesn't mean they are looking to sign a big name each year. Just because they keep a Randall Gay or Mike Wright on the roster doesn't mean they are looking to retain a UDFA each year.

 

[cstjohn17]

I didn't mean to thoroughly disgust or embarass anyone but I guess I would disagree (respectively of course) with almost everything you said.

Teams might be not marking a "W" in the column next the the Patriots but they certainly aren't saying "Holy Crap, its the Patriots and their 26th ranked defense, we are doomed. Man did they shore things up with the additions of T Buck and Warfield. And they made these moves despite being so close to the cap."

Secondary depth is more that just numbers, do you really want to see Chad Scott trying to cover someone? The Pats CBs are all average to slightly above average, no real top end players, although Hobbs has 'Potential".

We can agree special teams was not an area of strength, the coverage units should be better but it appears the return game won't be. While ST did not help the Patriots I thought the weakness of the defense against the pass was a higher priority.

I not saying that they should have overspent for Ty Law or any other player but to objectively look at last years roster and say that minor tweaks to a 10-6 team were all that were needed is flat out homerism.

In the end it comes down to expectations. Personally, I want to see the Patriots win Superbowls not just compete for wild card spots. There were some good players available at positions of need, a key addition here or there would have made this roster awesome instead of "solid".

This forum is great, Go Patriots. The football off-season is almost as good as the real season.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

I don't get why so many fans see the Patriots having an annual requirement to do a certain task. Just because they signed Harrison/Colvin one year and traded for Dillon the next doesn't mean they are looking to sign a big name each year. Just because they keep a Randall Gay or Mike Wright on the roster doesn't mean they are looking to retain a UDFA each year.

hard to argue with that, but I'm not sure what it had to do with my post

 

[Jacky Roberts]

Good for Ty, bad for KC. Those poor Chief fans think he's the final piece of a Super Bowl puzzle. Good lord, for that money? Thanks for passing Patriots. Use that money to sign Branch and find some LB depth.

 

[pats1]

hard to argue with that, but I'm not sure what it had to do with my post

So, for the Patriots, as far as I can see, "rebuilding" means putting more of an emphasis in a given offseason on the "two to five year" horizon than on the "this year" horizon. It doesn't mean that they don't want to be competitive this year, it just means that they're not putting the primary emphasis on loading the guns, as they did when they added a Dillon or a Colvin in different offseasons.

To me, that sounds like a direct correlation between "not adding a big name" and "rebuilding."

Thus, the Patriots added big name free agents before this year, therefore those weren't rebuilding seasons. This year they didn't add a big name player, therefore this is a rebuilding year.

If you want a trend, look no further than Beioli putting together a team that they feel can compete for a championship in the current year while not mortgaging their future in the process. 3 out of the last 5 years, they have been successful in doing so. The only obvious rebuilding year, and the only we'll see for a long while was 2000. The changes they needed to make just couldn't be made in one offseason.

 

[pats1]

I not saying that they should have overspent for Ty Law or any other player but to objectively look at last years roster and say that minor tweaks to a 10-6 team were all that were needed is flat out homerism.

I think that's far too simple a view on things. 2006 is a totally different season than 2005, with all kinds of new variables. To say X number of personnel improvements equals X number of more wins just doesn't work. Ask the Jets how replacing Nugent with Brien worked. They thought, since it was Brien who lost it for them in the second round in Jan. 05 against hte Steelers that Nugent would give them that one extra win.

As we know - that didn't happen. Why? Aging and injury-prone players. Noodle Arm. Curtis Martin. Mawae. Fabini. Others.

Even that brings up a whole new point with the Patriots that I have stressed before. In 2005, injuries were clearly part of their downfall. Who's to say the same number of injuries won't occur, true, but gone are Starks and Poole, and relegated to the bench are Hawkins, Guss Scott and Chad Scott. Returning are Harrison, Koppen, Light, Gay, a healthy Dillon and Brady, a recovered Bruschi, etc. Add those to the draftees and free agent additions, and it's really irrevelant to try and compare certain aspects of last years' team (passing defense, as you noted) with the current squad.

 

[denverpatsfan]

Apparently there still are some hard feelings between Law and BB. Can't see why he would sign with KC over us. The guy already has more money than he needs for the rest of his life and his kids lives. He must have a man crush on Herm or something.

Very disapointed. They better use that money to extend Branch.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

So, for the Patriots, as far as I can see, "rebuilding" means putting more of an emphasis in a given offseason on the "two to five year" horizon than on the "this year" horizon. It doesn't mean that they don't want to be competitive this year, it just means that they're not putting the primary emphasis on loading the guns, as they did when they added a Dillon or a Colvin in different offseasons.

To me, that sounds like a direct correlation between "not adding a big name" and "rebuilding."

Thus, the Patriots added big name free agents before this year, therefore those weren't rebuilding seasons. This year they didn't add a big name player, therefore this is a rebuilding year.

If you want a trend, look no further than Beioli putting together a team that they feel can compete for a championship in the current year while not mortgaging their future in the process. 3 out of the last 5 years, they have been successful in doing so. The only obvious rebuilding year, and the only we'll see for a long while was 2000. The changes they needed to make just couldn't be made in one offseason.

you make a good point. maybe we're arguing about the word "rebuild." in my post, I clearly was trying to define it differently for the Patriots than for other teams, since I think they've indeed redefined how you build a team in the post cap era. In that context, then, I have no choice but to agree with your description of 2000 as a unique "rebuilding" year as traditionally defined.

But, to me, what distinguishes the Patriots from other teams (and what other teams are increasingly emulating) is a disciplined, ongoing process of weighing the immediate present against the future, year after year. when, in a given year, the future seems to take precedence over adding immediate production, I'm calling it "rebuilding." With all the room they still have under the cap, the simple answer may be that they just don't think the talent is out there this year, but they've still let a lot go.

the patriots have succeeded in large measure by mixing three elements: acquiring "big names;" turning "little names" into "big names"; getting the most out of "little names" through coaching and their system.

this year, for whatever reason, they let a bunch of "big names" go and took a pass on another (Law) while their "replacements" are still in development or completely new to the team, without adding their obvious replacements, whether "big names" or not.

 

[cstjohn17]

I guess "Hope springs eternal" and there is no true way to measure one year against the next. It reminds of the song from the NFL Network "Tomorrow, tomorrow, we are all un-defeated..."

My original point, along with my tirade was once in while it would be nice if we were thrown a bone, like when we got Dillion, something to get jazzed about.

Ok, no more Ty Law from me. Time to concentrate on important stuff like who will be the 4th RT or 5th Safety.

 

[Tunescribe]

Secondary depth is more that just numbers, do you really want to see Chad Scott trying to cover someone? The Pats CBs are all average to slightly above average, no real top end players, although Hobbs has 'Potential". ... I thought the weakness of the defense against the pass was a higher priority.

I agree. The defensive backfield is my biggest concern of any unit on our team going into this season.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

I agree. The defensive backfield is my biggest concern of any unit on our team going into this season.

Same here. And I think we saw last season that depth alone is scant comfort when it can't or won't play at least efficiently. Ty may be a money grubbing pain in the butt, but he can play on an island more effectively than any of the current corners if he has to. That said, things did improve late in the season when the front 7 stabilized and Hawkins stopped the revolving door at SS.

Last night I was listening to two guys on Fox radio (no idea who they were) discussing the Chief's decision to spend big on Ty as the missing link. They scoffed at the plan saying that the trend away from investing heavily in shutdown corners, fueled by the emphasis on offensive PI, had led to most teams refocusing their attention on strengthening the front 7 and bolstering the pass rush which enables decent corners to play very well. While even great corners are marginalized when playing behind a less than stellar pass rush.

Felt Peterson who is an elite offensive talent evaluator/collector by nature had once again failed to appreciate what it takes to build a solid D, and likened the failed bandaid approach taken last season when Surtain was added at substantial cost to making the same mistake twice. Apparently the chatty Allen, a 4th rounder, has begun to emerge as a force on the line, but he is at present the lone bright spot on that front 7 pending Hali's debut and he will need to be tied up ASAP at substantial cost because of the increasing value placed on that position.

Not to mention KC has potential trouble brewing on an aging high powered offense.

Made me feel a little better. Now we just have to hope Rodney gets back and Richard doesn't miss his seasonal 5 game stretch, and Beisel emerges as a stud and the injury bug doesn't strike the front 7.....our Oline improves with good health, a #2 WR steps up, Watson emerges and Dillon and Maroney can run for 1200+ yeards between them.

Ty would have allowed for some breathing room if the price had been right. Still interested to see just what too much really was....

 

[AzPatsFan]

It over.

We won't have to read interminable posts from pseudo-fans about players whose reputations remain when the player and the skills do not. What Ty law did three or four years ago does not have anything to do with what Ty Law can do in 2006.

No one stays the same, and Ty at 33, is not what he was.

Somehow everyone talks about the 31st place pass defense. What was the last half's pass rating? Not 31st. The measure of a Defense is whether it can stop the run, first, last, and always. In the first half last season it couldn't stop the run without TJ and Tedy, and then Rodney.

Letting teams pile up meaningless passing yards in catchup mode is the yards you want to give up. They did in the second half. The run Defense lept to the top five despite the bad first half yardage yielded.

The youngsters in the secondary are now at least three deep at both safety and corner. Rookie mistakes have been paid, and Super bowls were won two out of the last three years with youngsters starting, save for Rodney. It was offensive turnovers that lost the Denver game. The Defense played well enough to win if not asked to stop two 1st and goal to go from the one.

Nor was Christian Faurias at 34. Now he is the "blocking TE" for the Skins. I always appreciated Fauria pass catching till it disappeared at age 32, but he never could block better than a wide receiver yet he was a TE. I'm sure Christian appreciates the pre-retirement bonus.

Andre Davis caught 9 passes last year. At 29 why pay him much more than a young player with better prospects? Dwight used to catch lots of passes as well as be a threat as a returner. He had the opportunity to become the long distance pass catcher but he didn't. Bye Dwight.

Matt Chatham was a very good reserve; he wanted to be a starter but the Pats played him occasionally as such when injuries forced them. They judges him as a good reserve but not an adequate permanent starter.

Willie Mcginnest is a near HOF player but that was a few years ago. He could probably play part time for a few years but the transition has to come. His presence was stunting the development of TBC and Biesel via freeing Vrabel to play inside.

As we enter the new season no rookie or newcomer on Defense is being asked to be the savior. The two youngsters that are being asked to step up are 4th and 5th year young veterans at LB. TBC and Besiel have had spot starts learned the Defense and are being relied on to step forward but if they do not succeed there are still vets able to take their place. If EITHER TBC or Monty succeed the weakest part of their Defense is both solid which it is, and deep which is the worry.

This upcoming team could be the strongest Pats team of the dynastic run. I expect everyone will agree by the mid point of the season.

 

[bbaptiste]

This upcoming team could be the strongest Pats team of the dynastic run. I expect everyone will agree by the mid point of the season.[/QUOTE]

Man, are you crazy?!!!

Please, let me have what you're smoking!! I'm not one to bemoan the state of the Patriots. They are a playoff team, but are they a Super Bowl team (as was asked in a previous post on this thread)? There are too many "ifs" to call the Patriots a dominant team. As we saw last year, the Patriots are vulnerable to the big play over the top - a situation that the Belichick philosophy cannot countenance in order for the defense to succeed.

I have no problem that Ty Law took the money and ran. The NFL is a business. Teams and individuals must act in their own self-interest. Let your company try to low-ball you on your salary, will you give a hometown discount? Sometimes you have to spend for quality, the bargain basement philosophy only will take you so far - especially when you're the team with the most cap space in the league. My hope is that now the free agency period is effectively over, that the Pats use their cap space to secure and extend the deals of core members of the team, and not wait until guys reach the penultimate or last year of their deals.

Ty, we could have used you. Good luck!!

My two cents.

 

[fgssand]

It over.

We won't have to read interminable posts from pseudo-fans about players whose reputations remain when the player and the skills do not. What Ty law did three or four years ago does not have anything to do with what Ty Law can do in 2006.

No one stays the same, and Ty at 33, is not what he was.

Somehow everyone talks about the 31st place pass defense. What was the last half's pass rating? Not 31st. The measure of a Defense is whether it can stop the run, first, last, and always. In the first half last season it couldn't stop the run without TJ and Tedy, and then Rodney.

Letting teams pile up meaningless passing yards in catchup mode is the yards you want to give up. They did in the second half. The run Defense lept to the top five despite the bad first half yardage yielded.

The youngsters in the secondary are now at least three deep at both safety and corner. Rookie mistakes have been paid, and Super bowls were won two out of the last three years with youngsters starting, save for Rodney. It was offensive turnovers that lost the Denver game. The Defense played well enough to win if not asked to stop two 1st and goal to go from the one.

Nor was Christian Faurias at 34. Now he is the "blocking TE" for the Skins. I always appreciated Fauria pass catching till it disappeared at age 32, but he never could block better than a wide receiver yet he was a TE. I'm sure Christian appreciates the pre-retirement bonus.

Andre Davis caught 9 passes last year. At 29 why pay him much more than a young player with better prospects? Dwight used to catch lots of passes as well as be a threat as a returner. He had the opportunity to become the long distance pass catcher but he didn't. Bye Dwight.

Matt Chatham was a very good reserve; he wanted to be a starter but the Pats played him occasionally as such when injuries forced them. They judges him as a good reserve but not an adequate permanent starter.

Willie Mcginnest is a near HOF player but that was a few years ago. He could probably play part time for a few years but the transition has to come. His presence was stunting the development of TBC and Biesel via freeing Vrabel to play inside.

As we enter the new season no rookie or newcomer on Defense is being asked to be the savior. The two youngsters that are being asked to step up are 4th and 5th year young veterans at LB. TBC and Besiel have had spot starts learned the Defense and are being relied on to step forward but if they do not succeed there are still vets able to take their place. If EITHER TBC or Monty succeed the weakest part of their Defense is both solid which it is, and deep which is the worry.

This upcoming team could be the strongest Pats team of the dynastic run. I expect everyone will agree by the mid point of the season.

I agree and here is why:

A) Their draft..I said it on day one by the way - this draft has the potential to be one of the mist successful drafts ever. From "blue chippers" such as Maroney & Jackson & Thomas along with Mills, Andrews and Mincey are really looking to bring quality players that just may step right in and help a lot, in their rookie years.

B) Walking wounded returns - most, if not all of our starters will return to form. Getting STARTERS back helps out any team, these are starters that have started and starred on Superbowl Champion teams - Dillon, Koppen, Light, Graham and Harrison - that is a boatload of talent. Plus, quality players from the past return healthy as well - Gus Scott, Randall Gay, Sanders, Claridge and many more. Also, things have a way of evening themselves out so, look for a year that is relatively injury free for a change.

C) Last years draft class and this years underrated free agent pick ups will surprise. The free agents that I feel are underrated are Reche Caldwell, Tebucky Jones on special teams The rookie players that played will have that year of experience under their belt and play at a much higher level - Mankins, Hobbs and Kaczur to name a few.

 

[desi-patsfan]

confirmed by ESPN @8PM EDT.

IMO, this, for all intents and purposes, makes it four big losses (plus Givens, McGinest and Number Four) that we have come nowhere near to replacing this offseason since we could have resigned Law after not coming anywhere near to replacing him with three guys who gave it their all. With the return of Law, I would have argued that we held our own.

I'm beginning to think that Piolichick is indeed in rebuild mode and that we should start to scale down our expectations for 06, despite my impassioned denunciations of anyone who said that a month ago...

THis has to be a joke right? Rebuilding mode? I didnt know we lost Brady and BB. When did that happen?

 

[spacecrime]

THis has to be a joke right? Rebuilding mode? I didnt know we lost Brady and BB. When did that happen?

It's the same logic that has us with FOUR big losses. He includes Ty as a loss because we didn't sign him.

Every year some people have to go nuts about something. THey'll take what they can get.

We lost Givens/Vinatieiri/Ted Washington/Lawyer Milloy/TOm Ashworth/whoever and now we can't compete. Our run is over. We are rebuilding. The team will decline further. yadda yadda yadda.

Drive you nuts if you listen to them.

At least they feel betterabout this year's pats team than they did about the 2001 team and the 2003 team around training camp time.