Ty Warren signs with Broncos

[BadMoFo]

So long Ty, it was fun while it lasted.

AdamSchefter Adam Schefter
Broncos land former Patriots DE Ty Warren with a 2-year, $10 million deal that includes $2.5 million guaranteed.

 

[PatsBoy12]

This has become a bit of a pattern with Denver . . . or so it seems. Good luck, Ty.

 

[BadMoFo]

Hope his stay in Denver is longer than Jarvis Green's.

 

[patsfan13]

I wish Ty well in Denver, except when the Bronco's play the Pats.

 

[PatsBoy12]

I wish Ty well in Denver, except when the Bronco's play the Pats.

Fixed it for you!

 

[jczxohn1]

Hope this doesn't come back to bite the Pats. Does this lift his $5 mil cap hit?

 

[jah]

Fixed it for you!

You missed a typo. "Bronco's"

 

[andrewgarrr]

Patriots released Warren because he has been a 34 end his entire professional career, and his claim suggesting the Patriots are shifting to a base 43 defense. Yet he is pursued and signed by a team running the 43?

 

[Ring 6]

Very interesting. Thats a lot of money for a guy who hasnt played a down in 18 months, and apparently showed up out of shape. And he is going to a 43 team.
I thought Warren said he was going to a contender and would take the minimum to play for a winner?

 

[Ring 6]

Patriots released Warren because he has been a 34 end his entire professional career, and his claim suggesting the Patriots are shifting to a base 43 defense. Yet he is pursued and signed by a team running the 43?

Whether or not there is going to be a scheme change is irrelevant to Warren still being here. He would be as effective playing DT or DE in a 2gap 43 as he would in a 2gap 34. He is gone because of him, not a philosophical change. Whether that is his contract, his attitude, his health or whatever, he wasn't cut because he can do the job if one of our OLBs is in a 2 point stance but not if they are in a 3.

 

[strngplyr]

Very interesting. Thats a lot of money for a guy who hasnt played a down in 18 months, and apparently showed up out of shape. And he is going to a 43 team.
I thought Warren said he was going to a contender and would take the minimum to play for a winner?

He didn't say how much a non contender would have to pay for his services. He sounds like a guy who meaning wins something to. If you're not gonna win he wants something in return.

 

[Ring 6]

He didn't say how much a non contender would have to pay for his services. He sounds like a guy who meaning wins something to. If you're not gonna win he wants something in return.

Huh? That makes no sense. He takes what a terrible team offers and that means he wants to win, but was forced to take a lot of money from a loser?
I'm pretty sure there are a lot of playoff teams that would have given him the vet minimum.
The point is that his comments were hypocritical, not that he traded losing for money.
Not sure where you get that he sounds like winning means a lot, because his actions don't so much indicate that, including his participation in the off-season, apparent reporting out of shape, and willingness to sign with a team that has little chance of winning.

 

[PatsBoy12]

You missed a typo. "Bronco's"

Yeah, but that one didn't change the whole context of the sentence. You're right, though.

 

[Deus Irae]

The Texans gave him a thorough examination and were satisfied with his hip. The Denver deal must have been much better for him financially.

 

[voluntarysaftey]

with that kind of offer, it seems like he would've had some trade value. If the broncs are willing to pay 2/10, they probably would've paid 1/3.x (his salary before getting cut) + late round draft pick

 

[italia44]

You missed a typo. "Bronco's"

jeezus....mary.....the apostrophe police are loose again!:bricks:

 

[BillBelichickFan79]

Whether or not there is going to be a scheme change is irrelevant to Warren still being here. He would be as effective playing DT or DE in a 2gap 43 as he would in a 2gap 34. He is gone because of him, not a philosophical change. Whether that is his contract, his attitude, his health or whatever, he wasn't cut because he can do the job if one of our OLBs is in a 2 point stance but not if they are in a 3.

I agree with this. I call bullcrap on the alleged "scheme change" being the reason Warren was cut loose. Even if Bill does not run a two gapping 4-3 and actually does switch to more of a one gapping 4-3, I find it hard to believe that Warren couldn't somehow contribute. You could probably play him at DE against run-heavy teams in the base 4-3. You could slide him inside with guys like Haynesworth and Wright against pass heavy teams like the Colts where you use a lot of sub packages.

He was released for other reason. Maybe contract/salary. Maybe conditioning/attitude.

 

[cmasspatsfan]

He was released for other reason. Maybe contract/salary. Maybe conditioning/attitude.

maybe all of the above, though Im leaning towards salary, we'll see what Bill does in the next week.

 

[convertedpatsfan]

I agree with this. I call bullcrap on the alleged "scheme change" being the reason Warren was cut loose. Even if Bill does not run a two gapping 4-3 and actually does switch to more of a one gapping 4-3, I find it hard to believe that Warren couldn't somehow contribute. You could probably play him at DE against run-heavy teams in the base 4-3. You could slide him inside with guys like Haynesworth and Wright against pass heavy teams like the Colts where you use a lot of sub packages.

He was released for other reason. Maybe contract/salary. Maybe conditioning/attitude.

I agree, it wasn't about scheme so much as something else. Reiss mentioned how BB talked about Warren's injury history last season, which is unusual for him.

Quick-hit thoughts entering Day 3 - New England Patriots Blog - ESPN Boston

He may be proven correct, although the writing may have first been on the locker-room wall last August when Warren went on season-ending injured reserve with a hip injury and this was Belichick's response: "It's a tough break for Ty, but we have to move on. He's missed quite a bit of time the last couple of years. We've had to deal with that anyway." I remember thinking that Belichick's reference to "missing quite a bit of a time" and having to "deal" with it was somewhat out of character for him -- he usually talks up his players publicly by pointing out what they do, not what they don't, especially with a player who had contributed like Warren had since 2003. At that point, I think it was a sign that Warren's return to left defensive end in 2011 wasn't a guarantee in Belichick's eyes.

I don't think it was money since I didn't see them even ask him to re-negotiate the deal. And his salary wasn't out of line for someone that projects to be a quality starting DL, especially with 3 other DL on PUP. I'm still quite confused about the cut, but wish Ty all the best in Denver.

 

[PATSNUTme]

Good luck to Ty, glad he got some $.