Thomas: Spat with Belichick started after Week 1

[tanked_as_usual]

Okay out of those guys who has excelled since they left the Pats?

Wilfork isn't gone and doesn't count...Samuel is the only guy you can really make a case for.

don't change the subject.....they don't take care of their own.

how many SB's have the pats won since most of them left?

 

[Clonamery]

in what way does he become a 3rd round draft pick?

Madden 11. maybe.

 

[Clonamery]

mcginest, vrabel, branch, givens, seymour, wilfork, johnson, samuel, law, milloy

there's some guys in there who if it weren't for them, BB would still have zero SB's as a head coach

That's true for any team, is it not?

 

[oldskool138]

don't change the subject.....they don't take care of their own.

how many SB's have the pats won since most of them left?

How's that changing the subject? You listed a bunch of players the Pats didn't "treat right". I said that the Pats were right to let most of those players go because their skills were declining. That's not changing the subject.

How many SB's have they won? Zero. It took the Pats 42 years to win one...so? Now who's being unreasonable. Most fans are extremely lucky if their team wins one SB in their lifetime.

 

[tanked_as_usual]

That's true for any team, is it not?

absolutely.......but it still makes thomas' comments no less valid

 

[tanked_as_usual]

How's that changing the subject? You listed a bunch of players the Pats didn't "treat right". I said that the Pats were right to let most of those players go because their skills were declining. That's not changing the subject.

How many SB's have they won? Zero. It took the Pats 42 years to win one...so? Now who's being unreasonable. Most fans are extremely lucky if their team wins one SB in their lifetime.

who said anything about treating right?

taking care of your own is something every employer (myself included.....and I do) should take very seriously....I paid a guy his full salary for 18 months while he was in iraq even though I didn't have to. he came back and when business was slow and had to reduce his pay, he stayed even though he could have gotten more in a heartbeat.

now someone else made the point that the pats are no different from most other teams....and that is the most accurate assessment anyone can lay down. but there are many here who think thepats are different....but they're not

 

[oldskool138]

who said anything about treating right?

You said:

the pats don't take care of their own

In the English language, "take care" can also mean "treat right".

So what do you want? Do you want BB and his entire coaching staff fired and the Krafts to sell the team? I'm not sure what you're trying to say.

 

[tanked_as_usual]

You said:



In the English language, "take care" can also mean "treat right".

So what do you want? Do you want BB and his entire coaching staff fired and the Krafts to sell the team? I'm not sure what you're trying to say.

I don't want anything........I just think this homer idea that the pats front office is always right when it comes to its players is as ridiculous as it gets

the idea that thomas is classless (which gets made frequently in this thread) is a joke....he is no more classless than the organization itself

and no....treat right does not mean take care of.........you can do nothing to someone and be treating them right......you can't do nothing and be taking care of someone

 

[Rob0729]

That's true for any team, is it not?

Yeah, I mean would Chuck Knoll have four Super Bowls without Greene, Lambert, Ham, Bradshaw, etc.? Would Jimmy Johnson have two Super Bowls without Aikman, Smith, Irvin, etc.? Even great coaches need players to win games.

The fact of the matter is that in 2007 the Pats any one of three plays away from going 19-0 without McGinest, Johnson, Branch, Law, etc. In two of the three Super Bowl wins, the Pats were one field goal kick away from turning a regulation win to sending the game into overtime where anything could happen (and if the Pats lost the coin flip against Carolina they probably would have lost since Harrison and Wilson was out and Ty Law claims the Pats would have also lost to the Rams in the same scenario because the defense was spent). So we really shouldn't say the reason the Pats haven't won a Super Bowl since 2004 is because the they let guys like McGinest, Law (who basically missed most of the 2004 run anyway), Branch, Johnson, etc. It is a little disingenuous.

Besides, you can't hold onto players forever. Teams who tried have crashed and burned pretty bad. Look at the Cowboys and 49ers of the late 90s. The Rams fell apart this decade too. The Raiders although never sealing the deal held onto that aged team for far, far too long and Davis has continued to screw it up because it fell apart so fast and he is desperate to totally rebuild every year (although the problems with that team run far, far deeper than not knowing when to start to replace parts).

 

[tanked_as_usual]

no....you don't hold onto players forever, but you also don't let them all go, either.

when was the last time the pats decided to actually keep someone?

the pats would likely have had a 4th SB (2006) if they held onto deion branch. for the price of jarvis green and james sanders, the pats could have held onto asante samuel.

maybe you should keep some of your star players beyond the QB

 

[MoLewisrocks]

with a team that communicates the way the pats do, sometimes it is the only way.

How they communicate with us has no relationship with how they communicate with players. The vast majority of players who have played for Bill will tell you that they always know where they stand with Bill because he never bull****s players. They may not like what they hear from time to time, but it's his honest appraisal of them. He doesn't string guys along with bs flattery and then pull the rug out from under them as many coaches and organizations do. There is a difference between coddling and communicating, Bill communicates just fine but if you need to be coddled then he made a mistake ever signing you. He's looking for self motivated selfless players who just want to help this team win.

the pats don't take care of their own, so I don't blame the guy for putting it out there. to those players who were here for the 3 SB's, there is something to go back on.....positive memories that outweight the exit for guys like mcginest, vinatieri, etc.....but to a guy like thomas, the pats have not been much more than their last team.

None of these players is owed anything based on memories. Bill appreciates their efforts generally moreso than fans or mediots because he witnesses their effort first hand, but each season is an entity in it's own and he does what he believes is best for this team in the long and sometimes short run based on that. Guys who play ball, who are reasonable in their own expectations and who continue to meet his (which because of his use of roleplayers doesn't mean they have to remain all pro starters to have a spot here as long as they also don't irrationally demand to be compensated as something they are not or balk at being held accountable). Guys who have realistic expectations finish their careers here. Guys who don't move on.

much in common with tomlinson....huge salary next year that they both know they will never see......I'd do my laundry in that instance, also. better than spouting sour grapes afterwards.

There is no difference whether your whining is airing laundry or sour grapes beyond how the fans and media perceive it. It's all excuses for your own performance or situation.

Another comment Holley shared was that Bill has always listened to his veteran players WHEN their comments have merit based on their track record. If a guy isn't doing what he's being asked to do and he wants to discuss how he could be better utilized, Bill isn't listening... Guys who have earned his respect by doing their jobs as directed and taking the criticism inherent in analyzing that performance to heart and making improvements and adjustments as coached...those are the guys whose opinion he values. He can't be bothered listening to self absorbed whiners who want to tell him how their former team used to do it...

In those instances maybe the player should have opted to stay with his former team, only in AD's case that wasn't an option because Ozzie didn't want him, let him walk, didn't offer him a deal...which along with Ray's comments speaks volumes in hindsight.

 

[tanked_as_usual]

Yeah, I mean would Chuck Knoll have four Super Bowls without Greene, Lambert, Ham, Bradshaw, etc.? Would Jimmy Johnson have two Super Bowls without Aikman, Smith, Irvin, etc.? Even great coaches need players to win games.

The fact of the matter is that in 2007 the Pats any one of three plays away from going 19-0 without McGinest, Johnson, Branch, Law, etc. In two of the three Super Bowl wins, the Pats were one field goal kick away from turning a regulation win to sending the game into overtime where anything could happen (and if the Pats lost the coin flip against Carolina they probably would have lost since Harrison and Wilson was out and Ty Law claims the Pats would have also lost to the Rams in the same scenario because the defense was spent). So we really shouldn't say the reason the Pats haven't won a Super Bowl since 2004 is because the they let guys like McGinest, Law (who basically missed most of the 2004 run anyway), Branch, Johnson, etc. It is a little disingenuous.
Besides, you can't hold onto players forever. Teams who tried have crashed and burned pretty bad. Look at the Cowboys and 49ers of the late 90s. The Rams fell apart this decade too. The Raiders although never sealing the deal held onto that aged team for far, far too long and Davis has continued to screw it up because it fell apart so fast and he is desperate to totally rebuild every year (although the problems with that team run far, far deeper than not knowing when to start to replace parts).

no its not disingenuous at all. one could easily argue that having deion branch on the team in 2006 would have made the difference in getting the pats to the SB. one could also argue that keeping a guy like asante samuel allows the pats to draft someone like kendall langford or jamaal charles instead of wheatley.......taking care of things early with wilfork allows you to not make idiotic ploys like drafting ron brace.....

 

[Deus Irae]

Strange quote here :

Adalius Thomas details falling out - Patriots Blog - ESPN Boston

"“The way they coach things and do things may be totally different than how I see it,” he said. “There is a checks and balance system that really is not going to marry up because regardless of what you see as a player on that play, it really doesn’t matter if someone else sees it differently. Unless you’re on the field, there are a million things going on at one time. So when you see something and you go, you don’t have time to sit back and think or whatever."

Sounds to me like he's admitting he's just not smart enough on the field to play the way the Patriots want him to play. The game is too fast for him mentally.

He came fully developed from a team that ran an attacking defense pretty much non-stop. It wasn't a Vrabel situation where a rarely used player had a chance to learn a system before all his hard-wiring in the older system had taken place. It was a situation where a player had to unlearn one system and then learn another.

More importantly, probably, is that his abilities are really well designed for an attack style. He's big, fast and powerful. However, he's not going to be overly 'quick' as a result of how thick he is. It's one thing to cover when you only have to do it for a second or two. It's a completely different animal when you have to stay with your man for 3-5 seconds.

 

[Patspsycho]

I thought of that too, what a pity, the guy was supposed to be the key cog of our defense. So we have lost Seymour, Thomas, and Wilfork (maybe), arguably 3 best defensive players in one year. That's following the loss of Samuel, Vrable, Harrison, and Bruschi. We essentially lost top 7 defensive players in 2 years. Don't think I can ever recall a championship team disintegrate ( or self-distruct if I may) this fast, ever.

Yeah we disintegrated into the 5th ranked defense, points allowed. This is the end of the world unless we return to #1 ranked overall.

 

[tanked_as_usual]

There is no difference whether your whining is airing laundry or sour grapes beyond how the fans and media perceive it. It's all excuses for your own performance or situation.

Another comment Holley shared was that Bill has always listened to his veteran players WHEN their comments have merit based on their track record. If a guy isn't doing what he's being asked to do and he wants to discuss how he could be better utilized, Bill isn't listening... Guys who have earned his respect by doing their jobs as directed and taking the criticism inherent in analyzing that performance to heart and making improvements and adjustments as coached...those are the guys whose opinion he values. He can't be bothered listening to self absorbed whiners who want to tell him how their former team used to do it...

In those instances maybe the player should have opted to stay with his former team, only in AD's case that wasn't an option because Ozzie didn't want him, let him walk, didn't offer him a deal...which along with Ray's comments speaks volumes in hindsight.

so when asante samuel says the pats don't take care about their players, is it because of his failure to perform? NO

maybe.......samuel has a very valid point.....or his he also bitter?

 

[tanked_as_usual]

Yeah we disintegrated into the 5th ranked defense, points allowed. This is the end of the world unless we return to #1 ranked overall.

please don't tell me you really believe the pats 2009 defense was the 5th best in the NFL......in 2009, the pats defense was beaten every way possible

 

[MoLewisrocks]

so when asante samuel says the pats don't take care about their players, is it because of his failure to perform? NO

maybe.......samuel has a very valid point.....or his he also bitter?

He's bitter because they didn't give him shut down corner money. Despite the fact that he isn't... He has unrealistic expectations and he cared more about money than winning. Same deal with Branch. Samuel will end up much the same too, and one day he will be saying the same thing about Philly that Deion will be saying about Seattle. Wasn't my fault...they misused or abused or somehow derailed my career...when the sad fact will be they simply didn't live up to the potential those team convinced themselves they had... Branch had durability issues. If we kept him there is no guarantee he plays when we need him to. Asante had his own issues and ballhawking ability they gave him the time and oppirtunity to develop aside, one of those bit us in the ass twice in his last game here...

 

[BritPat]

no....you don't hold onto players forever, but you also don't let them all go, either.

when was the last time the pats decided to actually keep someone?

Kaczur? Moss? Warren? Sanders?

the pats would likely have had a 4th SB (2006) if they held onto deion branch. for the price of jarvis green and james sanders, the pats could have held onto asante samuel.

maybe you should keep some of your star players beyond the QB

1. Branch and his agent f*cked it up, not the Pats. They went and spoke to the Jets, they wanted crazy money for a player CLEARLY NOT WORTH IT, f*ck them. As for Branch being the difference between us winning and losing a 4th Lombardi, don't be daft.

2. Samuel? You were happy for us to give $7M a year to a gambler? Plus a $20M signing bonus? To Asante Samuel? You are nuts.

As for keeping star players, they have done, and then have let them go when they've been of no use or not worth it. All teams do the same. The ones that don't are the ones you see picking in the top 10 of the Draft year after year.

And since when was Adalius Thomas a star player anyway?

 

[BritPat]

please don't tell me you really believe the pats 2009 defense was the 5th best in the NFL......in 2009, the pats defense was beaten every way possible

The idea is to keep points off the board, the Pats were pretty good at that sadly for you.

 

[condon84]

The idea is to keep points off the board, the Pats were pretty good at that sadly for you.

Sometimes stats can be misleading. You can't possibley think that the Pats defense was the fifth best in the NFL this year right?