Welcome to PatsFans.com

Not necessarily stupid questions you were too afraid to ask

Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by Sunqueen212, Nov 14, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Sunqueen212

    Sunqueen212 Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2006
    Messages:
    236
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Ok. So I have a question about our SF pick. Someone at work mentionned that due to the event that shall not be mentionned the league couldn't take away our SF pick because it is technically still San Fran's. My question is, if SF somehow manages to piss off Goodell to have a draft pick taken away, would their 1st round pick (our goddam pick!) be on the table to be taken away? :confused:

    Please use this thread to ask and answer some of these not necessarily stupid questions.
  2. MrClutch

    MrClutch Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2006
    Messages:
    526
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    I don't know the definitive answer, but I don't see why they would take it away from us. That's pretty much no punishment upon SF, and some more for us.
  3. eom

    eom Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2007
    Messages:
    2,569
    Likes Received:
    5
    Ratings:
    +15 / 0 / -0

    I really doubt it.

    anyway, no matter what they did I think the commish would just feel sorry for them.
  4. Ice_Ice_Brady

    Ice_Ice_Brady Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2006
    Messages:
    2,346
    Likes Received:
    27
    Ratings:
    +61 / 2 / -1

    In terms of SF losing their pick, let's be realistic. We could also ask what happens if an apocalyptic war breaks out before the playoffs.

    It was my understanding that Goodell said he may change his mind and take away other picks, or change the pick they've taken away. But that was before the Patriots were compliant in turning over their tapes to the league. There is no way the Patriots don't get the Niners pick at this point. Goodell's punishment was not to hurt the Patriots by hitting them as hard as he could, but rather to set a precedent and giving a reasonable punishment.
  5. PATRIOT64

    PATRIOT64 Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2006
    Messages:
    3,775
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +7 / 0 / -0

    The 49ers are so bad they could have a camera in the defensive huddle and still not have more than 6 first downs in a game.

    The commish would have pity
  6. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,382
    Likes Received:
    138
    Ratings:
    +283 / 9 / -9

    #24 Jersey

    SF pick is ours, don't worry about it.
  7. Sunqueen212

    Sunqueen212 Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2006
    Messages:
    236
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Here's another possibly stupid question that I've been afraid to ask. People on this board keep saying that there is no way we keep Stallworth next year. Why is that? Would his cap hit be brutal for the team? Isn't he signed thru 2012?
  8. Ice_Ice_Brady

    Ice_Ice_Brady Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2006
    Messages:
    2,346
    Likes Received:
    27
    Ratings:
    +61 / 2 / -1

    His contract is backloaded, so he isn't making that much this year, but next year will start getting paid like a top 10 receiver. Is he a really good receiver? Absolutely. Is he a top 10 receiver? Certainly not.

    Patriots would be better off using that money to re-sign Moss, who is now the second most important player on the team and a once-in-a-lifetime receiver. In addition the Patriots could use Gaffney, Jackson, or Washington and wouldn't have a huge drop off in production.
  9. patsox23

    patsox23 Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    7,387
    Likes Received:
    9
    Ratings:
    +9 / 1 / -0

    Given a hefty roster bonus, his contract is, essentially, a one-year deal. We could pay the bonus, but it's more likely that, if we sign Moss, we'll let Stallworth go and work Chad Jackson into his role.

    The fantasy, of course, is that both Moss and Stallworth love it here so much that each decides to take a little less $$$ to stay in the system and keep on winning. Reality tells us that only one stays, and that one will most definitely be Randy Moss.
    Last edited: Nov 14, 2007
  10. Sunqueen212

    Sunqueen212 Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2006
    Messages:
    236
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    My third (and final) stupid question for the day is why doesn't the NFL expand the rosters from 53 to 55 or 60 in light of all the recent injuries and drop in level of competition? Isn't that the job of the competition committee? To analyze this aspect of the game? And how are the members of the the cc assigned?
  11. Hollywood_Brady

    Hollywood_Brady Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2007
    Messages:
    371
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    the 9ers are so bad that goodell will allow them to play with 12 men on offense and defense..
  12. AzPatsFan

    AzPatsFan Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2004
    Messages:
    6,006
    Likes Received:
    69
    Ratings:
    +138 / 10 / -8

    Because the contracts that they signed don't allow it. The Teams get to spend as a CAP a certain percentage of revenues on players by agreement with the players union. if they expand the roster than they would have to cut the pay of the player to accommodate the additional newcomers. Current players under contract would object to a pay cut.

    But there is no reason that more than 47 of th 53 could be active as there is no difference in pay whether the player is active or inactive for a game. In fact it is a stupid anachronism about active and inactive players. All 53 should be able to play in a game.
  13. solman

    solman Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2007
    Messages:
    1,069
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    If San Francisco is penalized a first round draft pick, their 2009 pick will be taken away.

    More likely, the punishment will be designed such that their #1 pick is not involved (i.e. They lose their #2 and #3).

    The #1 pick that they got from Indy would almost certainly NOT be taken away.
    Last edited: Nov 14, 2007
  14. nowayback

    nowayback Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2006
    Messages:
    677
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    its not their pick . its ours.
  15. Pat the Pats Fan

    Pat the Pats Fan Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2005
    Messages:
    2,858
    Likes Received:
    2
    Ratings:
    +2 / 0 / -0

    My stupid questions

    What will Belichick say on the podium accepting the Lombardi trophy to Goodell?

    What will Goodell say in his speech?
  16. Tucker

    Tucker Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2006
    Messages:
    488
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    HA! SUCKER!

    I'll get you next time Gadget
  17. Bostonian1962

    Bostonian1962 Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2004
    Messages:
    3,045
    Likes Received:
    5
    Ratings:
    +5 / 0 / -0

    No. It's not SF's pick. They traded it to the Patriots.
  18. Patriot_in_NY

    Patriot_in_NY Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2007
    Messages:
    8,525
    Likes Received:
    12
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0


    The truth is, Washington is in the somewhat in the same boat, albeit for less cash. Still, he's due to make close to 2M, for essentually a ST player that's way too much. I'm sure one and or both those guys will be asked to restructure to more reasonable deal. In terms of production in the system, Stallworth is probably closer to a 6M receiver than Kelly is to a 2M one, but still neither are worth that kinda coin.

    My bet is probably Stalworth will be moving on. I hope not, but it's very possible.
  19. sdaniels7114

    sdaniels7114 Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2006
    Messages:
    5,742
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +7 / 0 / -0

    While we're on the stupid question subject, when an attempt at an on-sides kick is likely, why doesn't the return man just start making the fair catch signal before the ball is even kicked? Once he's made that signal, it doesn't matter who gets to the ball first, his team still keeps it. How come that can't be used to prevent an on-sides kick? Or have I just invented a new defensive tactic?
  20. godef

    godef Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    3,118
    Likes Received:
    6
    Ratings:
    +6 / 0 / -0

    Actually, that's a good question... on the other hand, if the Patriots had already traded their own 1st round pick away, what would Goodell have done in regard to punishing BB for spygate?
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>