Poll: Could Pats FO done anything better?

[jacksonfan]

Jacksonfan here. Longtime reader, first time writer. My poll questions is this:
Given the fact that we lost Deion Branch, let Givens walk, wouldn't pay Ty Law what it would have taken to land him, didn't take any high round linebackers in recent drafts, and didn't lock up Vinatieri several years ago, could the Patriots Front Office (Belichick, Pioli) done better. This is a frustrating question for me, since it seems we could really use a Ty Law, and Deion Branch right now, not to mention some speedier linebackers, and it seems at least, like we would have had the cap room to sign these guys. What do you think? Sometimes I just don't get the Pats FO, but most of the time it turns out that they knew what they were doing all along. What's your take?

 

[BelichickFan]

They thought Branch would play this year. Jackson and Caldwell were fine replacement for Givens. Adding Gabriel was pretty good for the point in the offseason they did it. Of course in retrospect they may draft Greg Jennings with their #2 and not trade up. Or even draft Colston in the 6th round - but they don't have the benefit of hindsight when they're making the decisions.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

i thought we'd beaten this horse to death many times out here two months ago. my answer today? "Yeah, sure. so what?"

 

[Tunescribe]

Losing Vinatieri doesn't bother me any longer, though I wish they would have extended Givens and Branch long before it came to their leaving. It'd be great to still have Law, but he's a greedy money-grubbing problem child.

 

[DarrylS]

Sometimes I just don't get the Pats FO, but most of the time it turns out that they knew what they were doing all along. What's your take?

Not sure what you are looking for, but we are 6-2 and have a few injuries. I have felt from the onset that this team will will between 11-13 games, I am not sure of what your concern is. Every team has some weaknesses, but overall this is a very strong team that will only get better as the season progresses. I would have liked to see Ty stay, but he wanted too much cash. Deion, got his big payday in Seattle and essentially reneged on his contract, if the pats rewarded him for walking out how do you deal with the rest of the guys in the locker room? They had no choice, Givens was worth more to the lowly Titans than he was to the Patriots. Vinateri essentially extended his career 3 or 4 years by going to a dome.

This is not new info, but blaming the front office for some poor execution on Sunday nite is not the answer.. the answer is with the game plan of the coaching staff and execution of the players.

 

[jacksonfan]

In response to the who cares reply, I can understand your sentiments. What bothers me though is that when theres an obvious move they could make which would appear to put them over the top and give them the best chance to win another superbowl, they never do it. Now, I know I'm gonna get killed for this, but the way I see it, they keep a disciplined fiscal approach and put a value on every position and stick to their guns, they never overpay for a guy no matter what, and this seems to yield a solid, competitive team every year. But this year, I feel that since they had the cap room, if they'd ponied up a little extra for Law, and rewritten Branch's contract, this would have really made a difference and given them that little extra talent that would have put them over the top. Perhaps we would have been able to cover Indy's receivers better or maybe Branch would have not let that last throw bounce off his hands and we would have tied the game. I just think that the Front Office needs to be more flexible in special situations. I think exceptions to the rule should have been made for Branch and Law, that's all. I mean, why do all the right things to make yourself a solid, competitive team, and then not do those little extra things (i.e. signing Law and Branch) to put yourself over the top.

 

[TomBrady'sGoat]

I have to give the front office a pass on Deion. They seemed to have allocated money for him and planned to resign him. There wasn't really any way for them to know his agent was going to insist on tearing up the final year of the contract, and there was no way they could have done it.

As for Vin, yeah in hindsight I wish that 2 years ago they had re-signed him to a 3 or 4 year extension. I'd like to have him around still for this year and maybe next. They had to eventually move on from him though.

Caldwell is a fine replacement for Givens. Maybe I'm weird but I kinda like the guy. Hopefully Jackson develops and pushes Caldwell down a rung on the depth chart.

They deserve credit for getting Gabriel for a 5th when they really needed a receiver.

Ty Law chose KC over NE. the money was about the same. I guess the Pats could have offered more and made the decision easy on him. Aging vets tend to be best if you can get them for short years/money. deviate and you often find yourself regretting it.

As for the linebackers, I find it hard to complain about a good rotation. they just better address the position in this year's draft. Tully may be the only currect LB who will be on the team in 3 years, and he might be gone after this year anyway.

It is what it is. They could definitely have done better. At the same time, they could have done much worse. sometimes the moves you don't make are just as beneficial as the ones you do.

 

[cstjohn17]

I agree with you, and will likely also get killed for this. More could have been done to put the team in a position to win a championship. The team should still be in the running but it looks more like a one and done playoff team than a Superbowl champion. I don't want to be the Atlanta Braves and just make the play-off each year, we are lucky and spoiled to have won 3 titles but have an unique opportunity to win even more. IMO little was done to plug obvious offseason holes (CB depth, no top WRs and lack of speed at LB).

But as PatsFanSince74 said, not much we can do about it now. All I will be doing is enjoying the rest of regular season, 8 straight games at 1:00 is very sweet. It ends with another AFC East title and the playoffs, life is not so bad.

In response to the who cares reply, I can understand your sentiments. What bothers me though is that when theres an obvious move they could make which would appear to put them over the top and give them the best chance to win another superbowl, they never do it. Now, I know I'm gonna get killed for this, but the way I see it, they keep a disciplined fiscal approach and put a value on every position and stick to their guns, they never overpay for a guy no matter what, and this seems to yield a solid, competitive team every year. But this year, I feel that since they had the cap room, if they'd ponied up a little extra for Law, and rewritten Branch's contract, this would have really made a difference and given them that little extra talent that would have put them over the top. Perhaps we would have been able to cover Indy's receivers better or maybe Branch would have not let that last throw bounce off his hands and we would have tied the game. I just think that the Front Office needs to be more flexible in special situations. I think exceptions to the rule should have been made for Branch and Law, that's all. I mean, why do all the right things to make yourself a solid, competitive team, and then not do those little extra things (i.e. signing Law and Branch) to put yourself over the top.

 

[psychoPat]

There seem to be three aspects to front office work:
Drafting ...
Retaining / Extending ...
and Free Agents.

Belioli's drafts may well be the best among all 32 clubs over his tenure. (You know all the names.)

Of those dismissed or "allowed" to leave, i miss only Givens and Branch -
because of that special affinity between QB and WR, of which Manning-Harrison is the archtype.
Branch is the villain there. Yes, David should have been extended at reasonable money
before he even heard what Tennessee would pay.

I think the FO's STREET free agent recruiting has been outstanding.
Of the various celebrity UFAs in recent years, i wish only
that John Lynch ... Derrick Mason ... and Javon Walker had whispered Yes.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

In response to the who cares reply, I can understand your sentiments. What bothers me though is that when theres an obvious move they could make which would appear to put them over the top and give them the best chance to win another superbowl, they never do it. Now, I know I'm gonna get killed for this, but the way I see it, they keep a disciplined fiscal approach and put a value on every position and stick to their guns, they never overpay for a guy no matter what, and this seems to yield a solid, competitive team every year. But this year, I feel that since they had the cap room, if they'd ponied up a little extra for Law, and rewritten Branch's contract, this would have really made a difference and given them that little extra talent that would have put them over the top. Perhaps we would have been able to cover Indy's receivers better or maybe Branch would have not let that last throw bounce off his hands and we would have tied the game. I just think that the Front Office needs to be more flexible in special situations. I think exceptions to the rule should have been made for Branch and Law, that's all. I mean, why do all the right things to make yourself a solid, competitive team, and then not do those little extra things (i.e. signing Law and Branch) to put yourself over the top.

Assuming that mine was the "who cares" reply to which you refer,my point was that a lot of us who cared a lot spent a lot of time discussing this two months ago. now it's water under the bridge, the season is in full swing and we're 6--2, whatever piolichick might have done better. to summarize my views as expressed then: can't figure letting number Four go; it would have been nice to keep givens and mcginest, but there are reasons why you'd let them go too; i regret that we didn't get law; brady obviously is better with deion but he's making do just fine. back to the season now, OK?

 

[Pats726]

I have to give the front office a pass on Deion. They seemed to have allocated money for him and planned to resign him. There wasn't really any way for them to know his agent was going to insist on tearing up the final year of the contract, and there was no way they could have done it.

As for Vin, yeah in hindsight I wish that 2 years ago they had re-signed him to a 3 or 4 year extension. I'd like to have him around still for this year and maybe next. They had to eventually move on from him though.
Caldwell is a fine replacement for Givens. Maybe I'm weird but I kinda like the guy. Hopefully Jackson develops and pushes Caldwell down a rung on the depth chart.
They deserve credit for getting Gabriel for a 5th when they really needed a receiver.
Ty Law chose KC over NE. the money was about the same. I guess the Pats could have offered more and made the decision easy on him. Aging vets tend to be best if you can get them for short years/money. deviate and you often find yourself regretting it.
As for the linebackers, I find it hard to complain about a good rotation. they just better address the position in this year's draft. Tully may be the only currect LB who will be on the team in 3 years, and he might be gone after this year anyway.
It is what it is. They could definitely have done better. At the same time, they could have done much worse. sometimes the moves you don't make are just as beneficial as the ones you do.

I agree with the sntiment of this..totally...What could have been done to get Branch to stay?? He had a contract wanted this year to be ripped up; refused to negotiate..what was the FO to do?? IN my opinion..Branch is and always will be a total phony. I give them credit gfor getting Gabriel as well..a good pickup. As for Law, has anyone seen him lately making any good plays in KC?? I haven't..he's on his last legs there..and NOT the TL of a few years ago...yes..one can always do better looking back..but that is always the case.

 

[jacksonfan]

All I can say is that this is a discussion board where anyone is allowed to post their thoughts. Maybe a few months ago when people were discussing this topic I wasn't reading this board much. But it doesn't take away my right to talk about it now if I want to. If you don't want to talk about it now, then skip my post, don't reply to it. But, don't act like you control what gets posted to this board. I certainly wouldn't do that to you. Post whatever you like, and let me do the same.

 

[PATSNUTme]

All I can say is that this is a discussion board where anyone is allowed to post their thoughts. Maybe a few months ago when people were discussing this topic I wasn't reading this board much. But it doesn't take away my right to talk about it now if I want to. If you don't want to talk about it now, then skip my post, don't reply to it. But, don't act like you control what gets posted to this board. I certainly wouldn't do that to you. Post whatever you like, and let me do the same.

First let me say welcome to the board.

Yes, you can post what you want ( within limits). However, people can also reply to your post in a manner that they choose (wthin limits). That's just the way it works. You can respond or ignore those replies and vice versa.

I'm personally sick and tired of second guessing threads that have no bearing on the Jest game that we play this Sunday. IMO, there will be plenty of time in the off season to second guess the front office, the OC, the DC and anyone else.

My question to those who seem to want to do this constantly (not you JF- you have not been here that long) is: When we win the SB, will you be willing to go back and find all the threads and post that you made second guessing the team and repost them the day after, so we can all have a good laugh?

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

All I can say is that this is a discussion board where anyone is allowed to post their thoughts. Maybe a few months ago when people were discussing this topic I wasn't reading this board much. But it doesn't take away my right to talk about it now if I want to. If you don't want to talk about it now, then skip my post, don't reply to it. But, don't act like you control what gets posted to this board. I certainly wouldn't do that to you. Post whatever you like, and let me do the same.

Gently folks, lets not get too sensitive, either of you. You both could have chosen to ignore the post of the other, you've made your responses, no need for a peeing match. Our favorite team is on track to lock up a playoff berth. They also been improving as the weeks go by (Yes, even with Indy - 5 turnovers and the hottest offense in the league comes away with a one score win? - Dungy and company were biting their fingernails up until the final turnover). The bright side to that loss, the Pats are back under the national radar and Indy gets to suffer with all the media hype.

As far as people we wish were here, negotiation is a two way street, "it is what it is" in the words of the bling fella. We don't begin to know all the hoops jumped through to retain or land the guys folks want.

Another look at the bright side, this is a really young team. Counting the practice squad, the Pats kept 10 rookies, they recently brought back another rookie to the Practice Squad and let one go to keep 10 on the roster - roughly one 6th of the roster is rookies. Start thinking about 2nd and 3rd year players and this FO is doing an amazing job of finding young talent to develop - TBC and Yates are good examples.

The best thing to do is realize these concerns boiled up again because the club lost a poorly played game to an unbeaten team. Hated rivals or not, it's past and the Jest are coming to spread seasonal joy to Patriot Land, I'm thinking the Pats don't let up the same way they did in September.

Edit: Silly me, I forgot to say 'bout time y'all got in here and joined the fray! Welcome.

 

[jacksonfan]

Thanks for the welcome, and you guys are right, I could have ignored the other post and vice versa. Not trying to start a pi$$ing contest, I always hated reading those. I look forward to some good discussion about our team, and as much as I complained about the FO, I do agree they made a very good trade to get Gabriel, and a good draft pick in Jackson, and that they did plan on keeping Branch, and were going to pay him after his contract was up. Let's hope the Pats can continue to improve the second half of the season, and be ready to make a serious run in the tournament.

 

[patpatriot]

If the Pats have to face either Indy or Denver in the playoffs, odds are they will lose. Those teams are currently better than the Pats. IMO, yes the FO screwed up by not making "above and beyond" offers to a few critical players who would have raised our talent level to that of the cream of the crop. Specifically, they should have overpaid Javon Walker enough to make him get on the plane out of Denver. IMO, this one player would have made the difference in the Pats season. Other critical players they could have signed include Vinitrator...how many of of seriously believe that Ghost would make a critical game winning kick in the play offs? Now Indy has that advantage...a double loss.

 

[cstjohn17]

Thanks for the welcome, and you guys are right, I could have ignored the other post and vice versa. Not trying to start a pi$$ing contest, I always hated reading those. I look forward to some good discussion about our team, and as much as I complained about the FO, I do agree they made a very good trade to get Gabriel, and a good draft pick in Jackson, and that they did plan on keeping Branch, and were going to pay him after his contract was up. Let's hope the Pats can continue to improve the second half of the season, and be ready to make a serious run in the tournament.

Just curious why would you say trading for Jackson was a a good move? I feel the opposite, more to do with value than Jackson as a player. If the Pats would have kept their picks they could have done something like this
#52 - WR Greg Jennings, CB Richard Marshall, CB Devon Hester
#75 - WR Derek Hagan, S/LB Jon Alston, S Anthony Smith. LB Clint Ingram

Jackson likely has more upside than any of these players but personally once you get out of the top 20 I would rather have more picks. The trend in most drafts is to have elite players at picks 1-12, good players from 13-25 and then a bunch of solid playes from 25- 75. I actually hope that the Pats trade back at pick 32 and end up with one 1st round, two 2nd rounders and two 3rd rounders.

 

[RayClay]

I think it would just be perfect symmetry to merge this with the "are we spoiled" thread.

The answer is; yes we could have made some costly moves to make us slightly better halfway through this season.

Of course if that had been our strategy since we inherited that pile of dead money from the Carroll era...............

We wouldn't have a playoff contender worth tweaking.

You can't have it both ways, people.

 

[Mike the Brit]

I have come -- reluctantly -- to the conclusion that, smart as they are, the Pats have badly misplayed things when it comes to dealing with contracts for players.

Basically, the Pats have tried to leverage value out of rookie contracts. The downside is that they have clearly built up resentment in players at the end of their rookie contracts so that they insist on top dollar. Moreover, rookies are not playing at full potential in the first or even the second year of their contracts. So the Pats only get them at their best for two years (three in some cases in the past).

I believe that the opposite strategy would pay dividends: be generous in giving players new contracts once they have established themselves (e.g. in their second year as a starter). Of course, the other side of that is that those contracts would not be the top dollar that the players would receive if they were out on the open market.

I believe that if you can dangle the carrot of a $6m - $10 million signing bonus before a player, he knows that if everything goes wrong tomorrow he and his family will be secure. I can't believe that such a player will find it hard to accept $5 million per rather than $6 million.

 

[BradyManny]

Jackson likely has more upside than any of these players but personally once you get out of the top 20 I would rather have more picks.

The consensus was Jackson was a borderline top 20 pick. Like you said, he's got a whole lot more upside. I think the whole "we should've picked Greg Jennings" stuff is pretty short-sighted, CJ has a chance to be a #1.