Who do you think came up with the 3 year extension concept? Were they sure of Seymour the player being a consistent impact player or the kind of leader they wanted in their locker room, Pioli would have locked him up long term in an an even friendlier 6 year extension. Instead they went with the unusual, incremental deal because it gave them time to assess whether he would remain healthy enough to warrant the committment or play well enough injured to warrant the committment or become the kind of positive force leader who warrants that committment. I said that the time and that time would tell how they viewed him. It did. He was not as bad a performer on the field as his critics claimed nor nearly as impactful on or off it as his proponents continued to insist. Much like Milloy before him he became an inconsistent effort player and somewhat of a negative leadership concern in the locker room.
He never recovered from being stung by the mere concept of behavior consequences, he didn't consistently deliver the kind of performance that his level of compensation demands, he commiserated and eventually bonded with of all people the clown who derided his selection on draft day because of their growing shared resentment for a man they believed snubbed or marginalized them. Whenever he felt threatened by critics he played the talent vs. scheme card. He didn't impact or save the 2002, 2005, 2006, 2007 or 2008 defenses sufficiently to warrant a top 3 deal. This team historically played as well with or without him in the lineup. His own teamates stopped electing him a captain. To claim him as a difference maker after Belichick moved on is wishful thinking heard mostly from those who would brook no criticism of him when he was here. Richard was a gifted athlete for sure. He was also increasingly an inconsistent effort performer who readily embraced the excuse card, subtely in public but not so subtely so in private. Just ask Borges since he fed him vendetta ammo any time his arsenal was running low over the last 5 seasons.
I love the revisionist assumptions made here on Pioli's behalf as well. Scott far moreso that Bill addressed publicly what went into the process of retaining or acquiring a player and how they gauged committment to playing championship football based not only on a players on field performance but his performance in the locker room and at the negotiating table. He may be more of a value and system hardass than his mentor... And while Bill had final say on all football operations matters, and it was Scott's mission to find him players that fit the system both via draft and FA, both frequently acknowledged that their relationship worked on both a personal and professional level because they adopted a policy of never signing or drafting or extending or cutting ties with a player unless they both agreed on the decision. That included the superstars, value addeds and total busts. Scott has been gone 9 months and it hasn't been all hearts and flowers at his new gig, either.
Yeah, Richard could have helped... had he actually been an all in team player and leader. You could say the same thing about any player who isn't here any longer in large part because he wasn't.
Yeah. Those losses had nothing to do with the defense. Oh, and we held the Colts to just 35 points! What an accomplishment. Very stout defense we have here in Foxboro.
