Pats bring CB Ty Law in for physical ????

[BradyManny]

Honestly, I didn't see Law play much last year, so if someone wants to tell me why they think he's not as good anymore, feel free. But if Belichick is entertaining the idea, I'm sure he's not basing it on what Ty has done in the past, but what he thinks he can do this year.

 

[Bobs My Uncle]

I'm not comparing anything to anything.

You said,

Frankly, if the goal is to improve the talent level on the team, I'm perplexed why anyone wouldn't want to see Law back playing for the Pats

and my reply is that your premise is wrong. Sorry if I mis-stated. I was trying not to be blunt.

The goal is not to improve the talent level on the team. The goal is to build a better team.

My example was that Dan Snyder belives the two are the same. Snyder has shown that merely improving the talent level is pointless.

I also gave examples of players, like TO, whose acquisition would improve the talent level on the Patriots, but would not improve the Patriots as a team.

I did not and do not compare Snyder to BB/SP, or Law to TO.

Just giving examples of why improving the talent level on a team is the wrong goal.

Semantics I suppose.

 

[Ring 6]

Lets not forget that Law was barely able to jog this time last year.
He was not in shape and was recovering from a foot injury, that had to have left his wheels well less than 100%.
You just dont get that back during a season.

I dont think he played real well in 2005, but I'm pretty sure he will be better in 2006.

My biggest concerns in keeping him a year ago were that at his age and with the severity of the injury would he ever recover.
In my opinion his recovery was late and affected his 05 season, but he DID recover.

I'd love to have him here in 06. If he plays like he did last year, he is worth it. If he plays like last year PLUS being 100%, he is a steal.

 

[Flying Fungi]

Is it not worth noting that the coaching staff, while still led by Belichick, is now very different from when Ty had a place? Crennel and Mangini have moved on and Pees runs the show now. Is it possible that Pees' defense is going to be sufficiently unique to either require a Ty Law, or completely avoid having a #1 CB?

Perhaps Piolichick are simply driving Ty's price up for some other fool.

Either way-I'm all set without Ty Law--I like what we have for depth right now and am confident enough in their ability to be solid providing health works in their favor.

 

[JackBauer]

Put aside the price issue, because we all know he's not getting the guaranteed 14-16 mil. he's reportedly asking for.

Do you really want to judge Ty's likely performance in 2006 by what he did three seasons and a major injury ago?

This is a classic example of getting rid of a guy one year to early instead of one year too late. I'm not sold on Ellis Hobbs, but I'd like for him to get the chance. Have you ever been on an escalator going in one direction, and pass the people going the other way? That's Law going in one direction, and Samuel, Hobbs, and Gay going in the other. We have veteran insurance in Warfield that cost us a lot less than Law. I don't know why so many people here think that signing a guy with obviously declining skills is a great move for the franchise.

Does anybody agree with me? That even if his financial demands come down to a reasonable level, that a 33 year old Ty Law probably doesn't help this team?

I agree with you. I don't think we need Law back. I guess I would be OK with it if he came dirt cheap, but I'm not as down on our secondary as a lot of other people here seem to be.

I'd rather spend the money elsewhere.

 

[Bobs My Uncle]

Is it not worth noting that the coaching staff, while still led by Belichick, is now very different from when Ty had a place? Crennel and Mangini have moved on and Pees runs the show now. Is it possible that Pees' defense is going to be sufficiently unique to either require a Ty Law, or completely avoid having a #1 CB?

Duly noted but was this not what we had last season and the season before when Law went out? A CB by committee approach.

Perhaps Piolichick are simply driving Ty's price up for some other fool.

Or perhaps they are serious about adding a player that they feel can step right in at the CB spot, be highly effective while being a big play addition on a team sorely needing such a player.

Either way-I'm all set without Ty Law--I like what we have for depth right now and am confident enough in their ability to be solid providing health works in their favor.

As long as we've got Troy around to play both ways we're all set in the depth department

 

[Bobs My Uncle]

I'd rather spend the money elsewhere.

Like where for example?

 

[JackBauer]

Like where for example?

Resign Branch, maybe restructure some contracts if need be, maybe trade for someone or sign some depth at LB.

As long as we've got Troy around to play both ways we're all set in the depth department

I think we've got decent depth this year (a lot better than last).

Samuel - Hobbs - Gay - Warfield - Scott - Andrews (assuming he projects to CB)

How many CBs are we going to keep?

 

[PatsFan37]

Let me see, we're arguing over whether a big strong smart cornerback who is totally in synch with Rodney Harrison, who can read quarterbacks and disguise coverages, who can beat up receivers and throw them off their routes, who can wrap and tackle the big tight ends and running backs, who knows Belichick's defense, who busts a gut on the field and never takes a play off, who plays injured, and who has by now fully recovered from a serious injury ... we're arguing if he'd improve a group of corners who struggled all season both to cover and to catch errant passes.

I understand the question of money. But you're saying Ty Law can't make the team?

What bizarro world is this?

 

[Bobs My Uncle]

Resign Branch, maybe restructure some contracts if need be, maybe trade for someone or sign some depth at LB.

The Pats have tons of cap room to do all that as it is, Jack.

Adding Law wouldn't stop them from pursuing these options. Availability of competant players (to either trade for or to add as FA depth) would be the true problem as those players aren't likely available to be had.

Without a doubt Law is the most worthy player that is available at this time.

 

[Bobs My Uncle]

I think we've got decent depth this year (a lot better than last).

Samuel - Hobbs - Gay - Warfield - Scott - Andrews (assuming he projects to CB)

How many CBs are we going to keep?

I'll have to disagree with you on this one, Jack.

I only see 3 "for sure" CB's on this roster at the moment. Samuel, Hobbs and Gay. This makes them our default starters as well. Aside from my reservations to their ability as NFL starters, given their injury history, I'm not at all comfortable relying on all 3 of them as starters for the entirity of the season. Obviously adding Law to this group would make my number a much more comfortable 4.

 

[JackBauer]

The Pats have tons of cap room to do all that as it is, Jack.

Adding Law wouldn't stop them from pursuing these options. Availability of competant players (to either trade for or to add as FA depth) would be the true problem as those players aren't likely available to be had.

Without a doubt Law is the most worthy player that is available at this time.

I'm not one to advocate spending money just for the hell of it.

I don't think Law would be a worthwhile addition, unless it is for cheap and only for a year.

 

[JackBauer]

I'll have to disagree with you on this one, Jack.

I only see 3 "for sure" CB's on this roster at the moment. Samuel, Hobbs and Gay. This makes them our default starters as well. Aside from my reservations to their ability as NFL starters, given their injury history, I'm not at all comfortable relying on all 3 of them as starters for the entirity of the season. Obviously adding Law to this group would make my number a much more comfortable 4.

I think there are very few teams in the NFL with three starting-caliber CBs (Gay, admittedly, is still somewhat of an enigma).

 

[Brownfan80]

I think we've got decent depth this year (a lot better than last).

Samuel - Hobbs - Gay - Warfield - Scott - Andrews (assuming he projects to CB)

How many CBs are we going to keep?

Last year we had Samuel, Hobbs, Gay and Scott. That's four of the six you just mentioned. On top of that we had Ty Poole, Duane Starks and Hank Poteat (though he may have been added after the injuries started, I can't recall). If 7 guys were not enough depth, then how do Warfield and Andrews (a 7th round CB project that played S in college) fix the problem that was last years CB crop? How are Warfield and Andrews better insurance/depth than Ty Poole and Duane Starks? They might be, but that's a big might. Ty Law would answer alot of those question marks. You would really want to keep Andrews as your sixth CB over Ty Law?

 

[Bobs My Uncle]

I'm not one to advocate spending money just for the hell of it.

I don't think Law would be a worthwhile addition, unless it is for cheap and only for a year.

I don't think anyone is condoning spending frivilously just for the hell of it. BB almost certainly isn't either.

You can bet that if BB signs Law it will be on BB's terms and conditions and the amount involved won't be done without serious consideration to the value that Law represents to the football team. I think we all can rest, assured of this. BB aint going to get snookered here.

 

[shmessy]

To be honest, I only got through the first 3 pages of this thread, but to that point, everyone has been talking about him coming here as a Cornerback.

That ain't happenin'. If he comes here, his real value to the team will be as a bulked up Safety....a veteran presence with attitude if Rodney cannot begin the season.

You're all wasting your time talking about BB bringing him in as a CB.

 

[Bobs My Uncle]

You would really want to keep Andrews as your sixth CB over Ty Law?

Most likely it would be Troy Brown instead of Andrews

 

[JackBauer]

Last year we had Samuel, Hobbs, Gay and Scott. That's four of the six you just mentioned. On top of that we had Ty Poole, Duane Starks and Hank Poteat (though he may have been added after the injuries started, I can't recall). If 7 guys were not enough depth, then how do Warfield and Andrews (a 7th round CB project that played S in college) fix the problem that was last years CB crop? How are Warfield and Andrews better insurance/depth than Ty Poole and Duane Starks? They might be, but that's a big might. Ty Law would answer alot of those question marks. You would really want to keep Andrews as your sixth CB over Ty Law?

Great. Either way, we're likely to have seven CBs (I think?) so it's basically a gamble on who gets injured (Starks, especially, had prior injury concerns). How do you figure that Law would address those concerns?

Also, it's not a question of keeping Andrews over Law straight up. Factoring in money, my low opinion of Law, etc., I'd rather have Andrews (unless we get a good deal on Law).

I would be more open to the possibility of Law coming here to play safety, a la Woodson, since Harrison probably won't be back to start the season (and when he does return, who knows if he'll be able to play at his previous level).

 

[Bobs My Uncle]

To be honest, I only got through the first 3 pages of this thread, but to that point, everyone has been talking about him coming here as a Cornerback.

That ain't happenin'. If he comes here, his real value to the team will be as a bulked up Safety....a veteran presence with attitude if Rodney cannot begin the season.

You're all wasting your time talking about BB bringing him in as a CB.

I must have missed the memo on this one. When did it get circulated

 

[dryheat44]

To be honest, I only got through the first 3 pages of this thread, but to that point, everyone has been talking about him coming here as a Cornerback.

That ain't happenin'. If he comes here, his real value to the team will be as a bulked up Safety....a veteran presence with attitude if Rodney cannot begin the season.

You're all wasting your time talking about BB bringing him in as a CB.

What in his history gives you the impression that Ty is shifting to safety this season and lowering his market value? In his mind, he's the top CB in the game, with 10 INTs and a Pro Bowl appearance. He's not going to switch to a position that gets paid less money.

We could see Ty come back as a safety, but it will be a few years down the line, after somebody signs him to a big money deal then cuts him after two years.