OPINION: Moss silence likely strategic

[oldskool138]

Re: Not Franchising Moss Backfires

really dont understand the rationale, if we franchise him we hold the leverage, now he holds the leverage, we should of protected our asset,its obvious a deal is not in place, even if we has a disgruntal moss for a year at 7.9 million its better than having a whole new set of recievers brady has to get use to again,, not good

Well, it looks like the defense is going to have a bunch of new players on it this year too. This is clearly a rebuilding year for the Pats. They can get away with it because they will win the division and get to the playoffs (keeping us fans happy, so they think) while at the same time building for a younger, more athletic team going forward.

This is a good thing people. We've been saying for a while that the Pats need younger players at a bunch of positions....Personally, I hoped they would have spread it out over a few years but, in Bill we trust, right?

 

[patsgo]

Re: Not Franchising Moss Backfires

brady gets by with the reche caldwells of the world

i agree with the general consensus: franchising randy is a slap in the face

a slap in the face?? there are about 10 players franchised now, moss shoulnt blame the pats he should blame NFLPA, samuel payed under a tag how did that work out for him, if you did tag him and he loafed that would sent a signal to every one in the league he s back to his old form, so who would give him the dough the following year if he loafed??? the tag is part of football . sorry randy, and with a deal not in place it looks like we made a big mistake not franchising him, also if we franchised him we could of matched the deal or recieved compensation a 1rst and 3 rd draft picks, tell me the upside for not franchising especially if he walks

 

[WhiZa]

Re: Not Franchising Moss Backfires

What backfired? It has been said the only reason you don't franchise someone is because you already have a deal ready. You are going to hear from the media that Moss is planning on visiting other teams, but it means nothing until he does it. Nothing has backfired atm.

 

[WhiZa]

Re: Moss silence likely strategic

this may be a long shot, but if the Pats need to sign 1 or 2 more WRs, could they be holding off on Moss to entice someone to come to the Pats and get more opportunities to be Bradys top guy.

This kind of reminds me of Stallworth last year. Coming in he received #1 WR money AFTER his first year. The Moss comes in and the Pats are able to not pick up his bonus. Kind of a sneaky way to get a good WR at a low price their first year.

 

[JoeSixPat]

Re: Not Franchising Moss Backfires

Franchising a player who agreeed to a prove it, affordable one year contract would ensure that we'd never again sign a player of that caliber for an affordable price.

Would the strategy of not franchising him backfire for one season? Yes.

Would your strategy of franchising him backfire for the next 5 seasons? Yes

 

[patsgo]

Re: Not Franchising Moss Backfires

What backfired? It has been said the only reason you don't franchise someone is because you already have a deal ready. You are going to hear from the media that Moss is planning on visiting other teams, but it means nothing until he does it. Nothing has backfired atm.

if hes visiting other teams it backfired, the pats dont hold the leverage, if he signed at 12 01 on friday then it was a good move, him shopping his services is not a good thing for the pats you dont understand that??? if he was franchised he wouldnt be able to shop

 

[RayClay]

Re: Not Franchising Moss Backfires

if hes visiting other teams it backfired, the pats dont hold the leverage, if he signed at 12 01 on friday then it was a good move, him shopping his services is not a good thing for the pats you dont understand that??? if he was franchised he wouldnt be able to shop

I'm sure they agreed not to franchise him when he agreed to that ridiculous cut in salary.

 

[WhiZa]

Re: Not Franchising Moss Backfires

if hes visiting other teams it backfired, the pats dont hold the leverage, if he signed at 12 01 on friday then it was a good move, him shopping his services is not a good thing for the pats you dont understand that??? if he was franchised he wouldnt be able to shop

I agree with that, but it's all speculation so I haven't lost sleep over it.

 

[MrBigglesWorth]

Re: Not Franchising Moss Backfires

I think it is going to backfire on Moss. IF he does somewhere else he will not see the full contract of the team he signs. Sure he sees the guaranteed money, but you have to think that if he were to stay with Brady he'd see the entire length of the contract.

 

[patsgo]

Re: Not Franchising Moss Backfires

Franchising a player who agreeed to a prove it, affordable one year contract would ensure that we'd never again sign a player of that caliber for an affordable price.

Would the strategy of not franchising him backfire for one season? Yes.

Would your strategy of franchising him backfire for the next 5 seasons? Yes

are we the only team that uses the franchise tag?? no so i guess all the other teams would have the same problem to??? thats part of the football process, if you dont use it youll end up loosing players like asante, he played under the tag and if we didnt tag him last year hed be gone,so what good will it do you get by not franhising players??? ill tell you ,nothing, moss is out shopping now per espn so please tell me how that helped us???

 

[PittPatriot]

Re: Moss silence likely strategic

It is totally shortsighted to call Moss greedy. He has broken personal records and has been a major part of record-setting offenses. He is easily one of the best ever at his position and deserves to be compensated as such.

No other WR does more for his team and his salary should reflect that. We would not have won in Indy last year without him.
Now let the :bricks: fall where they may...the Pats will be ok with or without him.

 

[Drewwho]

Re: Moss silence likely strategic

I for one hope there is a deal in discussion or in place, but you cannot for one minute think they would not have announced a deal if one was really done by now.

 

[JoeSixPat]

Re: Not Franchising Moss Backfires

are we the only team that uses the franchise tag?? no so i guess all the other teams would have the same problem to??? thats part of the football process, if you dont use it youll end up loosing players like asante, he played under the tag and if we didnt tag him last year hed be gone,so what good will it do you get by not franhising players??? ill tell you ,nothing, moss is out shopping now per espn so please tell me how that helped us???

*sigh* Many teams use the franchise tag. If that's your point then you can't see the forest through the trees.

Let me ask you a question.

How many teams signed signed a $10 million a year player for an outrageously discounted one year contract intended to give them a chance to prove they still were a top caliber player?

Would you ever like to see the Patriots have the ability to sign a player of such high talent at such a low risk, low price contract ever again? Why would they do that knowing that their show of good faith would be rewarded with a franchise tag designation?

If your answer is "no" and you have no problem sending a loud message to all players in similar situations for the forseeable future, then YES - you'd be correct in calling for the team to use the franchise tag.

Of course Belichick DIDN'T use the tag - do you honestly think there wasn't a strategic reason he chose not to? Do you think he went insane overnight?

Or do you think, in the long-term - which is always how Belichick approaches things - that there was a strategic reason why Belichick felt that made that decision.

 

[blackglass3]

Re: Not Franchising Moss Backfires

are we the only team that uses the franchise tag?? no so i guess all the other teams would have the same problem to??? thats part of the football process, if you dont use it youll end up loosing players like asante, he played under the tag and if we didnt tag him last year hed be gone,so what good will it do you get by not franhising players??? ill tell you ,nothing, moss is out shopping now per espn so please tell me how that helped us???

Wow, you really are a Negative Nelson. Who would know what's going on better, BB and Pioli or that nerdy looking cryptkeeper?

I'll continue to trust BB and Pioli and not overreact. You should try it.

 

[JoeSixPat]

Re: Not Franchising Moss Backfires

Wow, you really are a Negative Nelson. Who would know what's going on better, BB and Pioli or that nerdy looking cryptkeeper?

I'll continue to trust BB and Pioli and not overreact. You should try it.

My advice to Patsgo on this one would be not to tax his mind trying to understand the nuances of the recruitment of top players at reasonable prices and how that affects a team's ability to compete in the salary cap era.

I would just ask him to focus on the question of whether he believes Belichick went temporarilly insane by not tagging Moss.

Whether Patsgo can comprehend the reasons, I would expect he can at least comprehend that Belichick DID have a reason. Shouldn't that be enough?

 

[marty]

Re: Moss silence likely strategic

I for one hope there is a deal in discussion or in place, but you cannot for one minute think they would not have announced a deal if one was really done by now.

Yea, actually I can see reasons that they might not announce right away. What I don't see is the advantage to Moss for not announcing that there is NO deal. So I guess I'm in the camp of "they've got a deal" but are waiting until other teams go through their buying frenzy of the 1st few days.

 

[Sean Pa Patriot]

Re: Moss silence likely strategic

Again we assumed Adam Vinateri was coming back, and look what happend.. After yesterday I was positve until Adam Schefter confirmed that Moss and the Pats are not a synch anymore.. I wont listen to Clayton, but Mike Smith has a pulse on the Pats..

 

[patsgo]

Re: Not Franchising Moss Backfires

My advice to Patsgo on this one would be not to tax his mind trying to understand the nuances of the recruitment of top players at reasonable prices and how that affects a team's ability to compete in the salary cap era.

I would just ask him to focus on the question of whether he believes Belichick went temporarilly insane by not tagging Moss.

Whether Patsgo can comprehend the reasons, I would expect he can at least comprehend that Belichick DID have a reason. Shouldn't that be enough?

ther is no one i would want coaching the pats other than belicheck and pioli as talent guru, that said , we do have a right to question their moves , dont we? football in the nfl is tough business its not about keeping pampered athletes happy thats my point, with your rationale no club should frnchise plaers because it might upset them, geez, also moss took a discount but the pats helped him by giving him a second chance , so he should owe the pats something for that, if my memory serves me right there wasnt a big demand for his services

 

[teamplay]

Re: Not Franchising Moss Backfires

. . .even if we has a disgruntal moss for a year. . .

You're kidding, right?

 

[PromisedLand]

Re: Moss silence likely strategic

I guess it's possible, but If Randy isn't signed, it's probably because they haven't reached an agreement.

lol - are you related to Yogi Berra? Maybe you meant, "if there hasn't been an announcement about an agreement it's probably because there isn't one?"

But, I think it's an interesting theory. Possible, but not likely IMO.