Pats are usually right when they let a player go

[JD10367]

Heck, it started with Chad Eaton when he went to Seattle.

The Pats have let players go either because of age, or price tag. In both cases, almost every player has gone on to smaller and lesser things (as opposed to bigger and greater). The lone exception so far has been Vinatraitor... but, after all, he's "just a kicker". (And even he seems to have tailed off quickly in Colts-land.)

IF Wilfork's price is right, he'll stay. If not, he'll go. And Brace may not be as good as Vince, but I bet he'll be servicable.

The loss of Branch did probably hurt them that year but, as with the loss of Samuel last year, IMO it's not the loss of the player that hurt but the inability of the team to adequately replace him, which is a different thing. It's not like they NEEDED Deion Branch or Asante Samuel; they simply needed a decent WR or a decent CB. For whatever reason, in those seasons, the Pats thought they could make do with what they had at WR and DB respectively, and that wasn't borne out due to inefficiency and injury.

 

[5 Rings for Brady!!]

Heck, it started with Chad Eaton when he went to Seattle.

The Pats have let players go either because of age, or price tag. In both cases, almost every player has gone on to smaller and lesser things (as opposed to bigger and greater). The lone exception so far has been Vinatraitor... but, after all, he's "just a kicker". (And even he seems to have tailed off quickly in Colts-land.)

IF Wilfork's price is right, he'll stay. If not, he'll go. And Brace may not be as good as Vince, but I bet he'll be servicable.

The loss of Branch did probably hurt them that year but, as with the loss of Samuel last year, IMO it's not the loss of the player that hurt but the inability of the team to adequately replace him, which is a different thing. It's not like they NEEDED Deion Branch or Asante Samuel; they simply needed a decent WR or a decent CB. For whatever reason, in those seasons, the Pats thought they could make do with what they had at WR and DB respectively, and that wasn't borne out due to inefficiency and injury.

Yup. BB/Pioli always flooded camp with players that should of, could of, replaced so and so. It has always been a numbers game. When it works out they look smart and when it does not work out people are obviously unhappy.

We brought in people for the next two seasons who all looked equal on paper to Branch. But as BB likes to say, when things are on paper, you can only fly your paper airplanes against their paper airplanes. You don't play Patriots Football on paper.

 

[mgteich]

Given Branch's known production for the patriots, please list the players that YOU THOUGHT were equal on paper to Branch, and YOU THOUGHT would be as productive.

When Branch held out, the team scrambled and did the best they could. The Front Office couldn't afford Branch and couldn't afford the first and salary Moss would have cost at the time.

Apparently, you are one of those who thought at the time (and perhaps now) that our front office is so good that almost anyone can fit in and replace the production of players that leave.

I think that we need a dose of reality. It is difficult to replace the production of productive players that leave. It is somewhat irrelavant that the FUTURE performance of those players is not great. The team is replaceing their past prodcutive performance. It will be difficult to replace Seymour or Wilfork or Mankins or Gostkowski as it has been difficult to replace Law, Samuel, and McGinist. This year we are dealing with replacing the production of a 2007 Vrabel and even a 2007 Bruschi.
===============================

I understand those that think that losing Wilfork is no big deal because Brace is an adequate replacement. I just strongly disagree.

Yup. BB/Pioli always flooded camp with players that should of, could of, replaced so and so. It has always been a numbers game. When it works out they look smart and when it does not work out people are obviously unhappy.

We brought in people for the next two seasons who all looked equal on paper to Branch. But as BB likes to say, when things are on paper, you can only fly your paper airplanes against their paper airplanes. You don't play Patriots Football on paper.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Given Branch's known production for the patriots, please list the players that YOU THOUGHT were equal on paper to Branch, and YOU THOUGHT would be as productive.

When Branch held out, the team scrambled and did the best they could. The Front Office couldn't afford Branch and couldn't afford the first and salary Moss would have cost at the time.

Apparently, you are one of those who thought at the time (and perhaps now) that our front office is so good that almost anyone can fit in and replace the production of players that leave.

I think that we need a dose of reality. It is difficult to replace the production of productive players that leave. It is somewhat irrelavant that the FUTURE performance of those players is not great. The team is replaceing their past prodcutive performance. It will be difficult to replace Seymour or Wilfork or Mankins or Gostkowski as it has been difficult to replace Law, Samuel, and McGinist. This year we are dealing with replacing the production of a 2007 Vrabel and even a 2007 Bruschi.
===============================

I understand those that think that losing Wilfork is no big deal because Brace is an adequate replacement. I just strongly disagree.

I disagree. The could have afforded or found ways to keep Branch, Law, Samuel. They just chose not to. Reasons could have been value-based, market, upside, etc. Clearly by dole-ing out the $$ would have had an impact on future. Look at the Redskins. They shell out big bucks all the time and the find ways to squeeze players under the cap. Pats can do the same thing if they want to.

You can always find ways to keep players. It's the impact on the roster & future cap considerations that are influencers in the decision making process.

 

[THE SLAMMER]

What is you take on Jonathon Stupar?

He is a big hit in Buffalo and leads the NFL in receptions

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

What is you take on Jonathon Stupar?

He is a big hit in Buffalo and leads the NFL in receptions

Stupar is as Stupar does.

 

[THE SLAMMER]

Stupar is as Stupar does.

Can I quote you on that?

 

[jmt57]

What is you take on Jonathon Stupar?

He is a big hit in Buffalo and leads the NFL in receptions

I wouldn't expect that to continue. He's a special teams player; unless something has drastically changed in twelve months I don't know why he would suddenly be an NFL starter. Preseason can produce stats that make a lot of borderline players look like pro bowlers, when in reality they are simply this year's Mr. August.