Ty Law on ESPN: Pats made big mistake gutting team of SB veterans

[Deus Irae]

Don't mean to be rude, but at this point, this is all I see :blahblah::blahblah::blahblah::blahblah::blahblah::blahblah::blahblah:

I understand. Facts probably confuse and scare you. I'll just put you back on ignore, so this problem won't occur again.

 

[HEY BRO! WHAT UP?]

I understand. Facts probably confuse and scare you. I'll just put you back on ignore, so this problem won't occur again.

Whatever makes you feel better but you will find out that this messageboard will be very boring without me. Your will take me off ignore again when you realize there isn't much to argue about. And your "facts" were more like excuses to me. Have a nice life.

 

[cstjohn17]

IMO this is year 2 of a 3 year rebuilding plan, hopefully it is done in enough time to get Brady another ring.

 

[AzPatsFan]

IMO this is year 2 of a 3 year rebuilding plan, hopefully it is done in enough time to get Brady another ring.

You could be right with next year reserved for the spice of a new RB and anothter few in the Offense. But I think the Patriots Defense has all the ingredients, and numbers, to be really awesome. It only needs a little time in the oven.

OTOH, the Offense never needed a full reconstruction; it was not as old, and some critical new pieces are already in place. Brady, Mankins, Volmer, Welker, Tate, Gostowski, Edelman, and Gronkowski make a pretty good foundation for the next generation Offense. There are other posibilities too in Ohrnberger, Bussey, Hernandez and Hoyer.

For that matter ther "oldtimers" probably have a few good years yet. Light, Moss, Kaczur and Maroney are still serviceable.

 

[AzPatsFan]

Unloading older players is only a good way to go if you have younger players who can step in or, at least, other talented players who can pick up the slack.

And a 10-6 season ending with the worst home playoff loss in history, during a wild card game, coming off of a season where the team did not make the playoffs, isn't exactly "dynasty-like success" in my eyes.

That's sophistry.

Not making the playoffs at 11-5, was/is an aberation. Getting humbled in the wildcard round is sobering; but you forget and overlook that we beat the Ravens in the regular season. Plus this was the absolute depths of the rebuilding, having cut ties to the last four big Defensive SB players, in Seymour, Vrabel, Tedy, and Rodney.

Does this edition look to have anywhere near the questions of last year? Hardly. This Defense is very young and somewhat proven even now, and also potentially very deep, stocked with lots of high draft picks.

I think there are young developing impact players here too. Meriwether, Mayo, Wilfork, TBC, have shown glimpses and Spikes, Butler, McCourty, and Cunningham/Crabel have the credentials.

Y'all forget that the defensive stars were all 4 and 5 year vets before their impact plays became routine. Tedy didn't even move to ILB and start, until his fourth season; nor did Vrabel.

 

[Patspsycho]

Y'all forget that the defensive stars were all 4 and 5 year vets before their impact plays became routine. Tedy didn't even move to ILB and start, until his fourth season; nor did Vrabel.

This is what we need to keep in mind in regard to this young corp, and exercise patience. We are sacrificing the short term for long term results.

 

[Deus Irae]

That's sophistry.

No, it's not. What's more, you had to know that when you posted it.

Not making the playoffs at 11-5, was/is an aberation. Getting humbled in the wildcard round is sobering; but you forget and overlook that we beat the Ravens in the regular season. Plus this was the absolute depths of the rebuilding, having cut ties to the last four big Defensive SB players, in Seymour, Vrabel, Tedy, and Rodney.

1.) Going 16-0 was an aberration. Winning 3 Super Bowls in 4 seasons was an aberration. So what? These things still happened.

2.) I didn't forget about the regular season game. Frankly, that makes the loss worse if you claim relevance.

3.) The cutting of the ties is the whole point of at least half the discussion, so I don't buy into it as any sort of excuse, sorry.

Does this edition look to have anywhere near the questions of last year? Hardly. This Defense is very young and somewhat proven even now, and also potentially very deep, stocked with lots of high draft picks.

There are more questions this year than there were last year before Belichick decided to start playing "Let's make a deal" in the offseason. The good news is that the players who are possible answers to many of those questions would be younger than in much of the recent past.

I think there are young developing impact players here too. Meriwether, Mayo, Wilfork, TBC, have shown glimpses and Spikes, Butler, McCourty, and Cunningham/Crabel have the credentials.

No rookies have NFL credentials. Crable's only credentials would come from a medical facility. TBC isn't a young developing player, given that he'll be 30 years old before the season starts, and he's certainly not an impact player to this point in his career.

Y'all forget that the defensive stars were all 4 and 5 year vets before their impact plays became routine. Tedy didn't even move to ILB and start, until his fourth season; nor did Vrabel.

You making the claim that these things are forgotten does not make it truth. In reality, making that "4 and 5 year" argument undermines your assertions about many of the young players, for this season and the next couple of years. The logical inconsistency involved there damages, rather than helps, your overall position.

 

[AzPatsFan]

"There are more questions this year than there were last year before Belichick decided to start playing "Let's make a deal" in the offseason. The good news is that the players who are possible answers to many of those questions would be younger than in much of the recent past."

Where are the "lets make a deal" issues? Seymour was traded prior to the last season, when the young then more inexperienced Defense ended up playing 11th in the league rated Defense. The only change since is that AD was cut... That's not a "make a deal issue at all.

The Defense this year returns everybody else, and this now more experienced Defense adds a lot of new players too. I suppose it could grow worse instead of better, but I'd bet on better...

 

[ausbacker]

Unloading older players is only a good way to go if you have younger players who can step in or, at least, other talented players who can pick up the slack.

And a 10-6 season ending with the worst home playoff loss in history, during a wild card game, coming off of a season where the team did not make the playoffs, isn't exactly "dynasty-like success" in my eyes.

You know Deus I read this comment and though fair enough. Then I read how you tried to justify the Patriots of 2009 and then realized you're trying to have it both ways. You're making excuses for the Patriots and you're making excuses against the Patriots.

You're conflicted as to where the Patriots are actually at. I don't see any reason why Brady can't play as long as he wants to provided his performance remains good. If Brett Favre can walk on to a new team and take them to within a game of a Superbowl at 39, why can't Brady be an integral part in this Patriots rebuild? There's no issue with Manning at Indy. Why should there be with Brady at the Pats?

Make up your mind as to who you want to blame. The Patriots will be fine and are in transition. I am under no illusion as to where we stand.

 

[Joker]

just looked up the meaning of sophistry and discovered I am a sophist...dyam...thanks for nothin'

 

[IllegalContact]

"There are more questions this year than there were last year before Belichick decided to start playing "Let's make a deal" in the offseason. The good news is that the players who are possible answers to many of those questions would be younger than in much of the recent past."

Where are the "lets make a deal" issues? Seymour was traded prior to the last season, when the young then more inexperienced Defense ended up playing 11th in the league rated Defense. The only change since is that AD was cut... That's not a "make a deal issue at all.

The Defense this year returns everybody else, and this now more experienced Defense adds a lot of new players too. I suppose it could grow worse instead of better, but I'd bet on better...

I do believe the pats are facing much tougher QB's in 2010.

last year, the pats played half their games against rookies or 1st year starters, or backups. This year, the pats stand to face no rookies and the only feasible 1st year starter would be in Cleveland.

The good news is that the beginning of the season is mostly against weaker passing teams. But starting with the Chargers game, the pats will be facing Rivers, Favre, Rothlisberger will probably be back by the Steelers game, and Manning. It would not be suprising to see the Pats be at 4-1 going to SD, but 5-5 by the time they go to Detroit.

In order to help the defense, the Pats offense is going to have to change a bit to be more ball-control oriented (this will also reduce the hits on Brady) with more 2 TE sets and more selectivity in pursuing Moss deep.

 

[lillestroom]

Am I the only one who thinks that Ty Law is bitter about the fact he never got the huge money in NE that others did?

He knocks NE quite often in the press.

 

[IllegalContact]

Am I the only one who thinks that Ty Law is bitter about the fact he never got the huge money in NE that others did?

He knocks NE quite often in the press.

except that he did get huge money in NE.....7 years for 49M was insanely huge money in 1999

 

[lillestroom]

except that he did get huge money in NE.....7 years for 49M was insanely huge money in 1999

He didnt get that extension he wanted tho (which was the point I should have made a bit more properly). Thats what will always get him.... that he was" farmed off."

 

[lillestroom]

The good news is that the beginning of the season is mostly against weaker passing teams. But starting with the Chargers game, the pats will be facing Rivers, Favre, Rothlisberger will probably be back by the Steelers game, and Manning. It would not be suprising to see the Pats be at 4-1 going to SD, but 5-5 by the time they go to Detroit.
.

FWIW, I dont see Detroit having a poor season this year, and I believe that Matthew Stafford is an excellent QB too.

OTOH, I've never ever rated Rothlisberger, no matter how many times "she consented".- He's an average QB made good by a system he fits into

 

[PatsFanSince74]

I don't think Law's statements are "news," as Brady and Belichick have both pretty much said that leadership was an issue last year, especially towards the end of the season.

 

[Deus Irae]

You know Deus I read this comment and though fair enough. Then I read how you tried to justify the Patriots of 2009 and then realized you're trying to have it both ways. You're making excuses for the Patriots and you're making excuses against the Patriots.

You're conflicted as to where the Patriots are actually at. I don't see any reason why Brady can't play as long as he wants to provided his performance remains good. If Brett Favre can walk on to a new team and take them to within a game of a Superbowl at 39, why can't Brady be an integral part in this Patriots rebuild? There's no issue with Manning at Indy. Why should there be with Brady at the Pats?

Make up your mind as to who you want to blame. The Patriots will be fine and are in transition. I am under no illusion as to where we stand.

No offense but, in context of this being a reply to my post, I have no idea what you're talking about.

 

[IllegalContact]

He didnt get that extension he wanted tho (which was the point I should have made a bit more properly). Thats what will always get him.... that he was" farmed off."

Oh, he got the one he wanted. The pats just didn't want to pay him 12M after winning an SB without him, so they cut him. Which is what the Jets did after one year when they didn't want to pay him 7M after an all-pro year. He has never been good at taking responsibility for his silliness

 

[stinkypete]

Revisionist history.

Ty Law was a legitimate question mark during the 2005 off season. That foot injury he suffered in Pittsburgh was career threatening. The "point of emphasis" pass interference rule was projected to impact Law's game in particular. Law was considered a major risk, that's why Herm only brought him in on a 1 year deal. He wasn't going to get paid by anybody at that point.

If Law is pissed that he wasn't extended after 2003 it's his fault for not understanding that Belichick just wasn't going to do business that way.

 

[lillestroom]

And why oh why do networks give Ty Law time to comment on the Pats?

He loves the Pats the same way Mick Vick loves his dogs.