A Juicy Gasper Nugget sure to keep Talk Radio buzzing for years

[p8ryts]

The man just doesn't know anything about football.
First he cuts Bernie Koasar, then Drew Bledsoe, Lawyer Milloy, did'nt resign
Branch. Law, Samuels, traded Seymour and Moss and unbelievably let's Welker go.

I'm sick of these lousy teams and losing seasons. I remember once they only won 9 games. Twice they didn't even win the division. They've only been to five Sb's under this coach and even lost two of them.

I just don't think I can continue to be a fan of such a poorly managed team. I might become a Jets fan.

IN BILL I HAVE TRUSTED AND WILL CONTINUE TO DO SO!!!!

 

[fnordcircle]

Anyone who thinks that Bill Belichick let's Kraft have any control over personnel decisions has spent the last decade not paying attention.

 

[Deus Irae]

Kraft repeatedly said it took two to make a deal, suggesting Welker wanted too much, and then said a week ago that he wanted Welker to be a Patriot for life when they weren't even willing to give him an offer that would make more sense for a nobody. Kraft is a liar.

Look, I think this was one of the stupidest moves this team has made under Belichick, if not the stupidest. I don't think it's a coincidence that the big-named players who get moved when they can still play (Samuel/Law/Seymour/Branch/Welker) are the guys who don't toe the party line on every single thing. They're going to rely on Brady to bail them out of yet another really piss poor situation where Belichick let his ego get in the way of good decisions and rationalized a terrible move. I'm down with all those arguments.

That's on Belichick, though, not Kraft.

 

[Deus Irae]

The man just doesn't know anything about football.
First he cuts Bernie Koasar, then Drew Bledsoe, Lawyer Milloy, did'nt resign
Branch. Law, Samuels, traded Seymour and Moss and unbelievably let's Welker go.

I'm sick of these lousy teams and losing seasons. I remember once they only won 9 games. Twice they didn't even win the division. They've only been to five Sb's under this coach and even lost two of them.

I just don't think I can continue to be a fan of such a poorly managed team. I might become a Jets fan.

IN BILL I HAVE TRUSTED AND WILL CONTINUE TO DO SO!!!!

Citing history all the way back like that isn't necessarily the smartest thing in the world. Take look at Belichick's record without Brady and you find a very pedestrian data set that can be used against the idea that Belichick is a particularly good coach and be pretty darned convincing.

For example, Belichick has only made the playoffs in one year out of 7 without Brady as his QB, and he got waxed in the divisional round in that playoff year. There are arguments you can make to defend that to some degree, but when you go back all the way to Bernie Kosar, you open up a whole new can of worms.

 

[DocHoliday]

Citing history all the way back like that isn't necessarily the smartest thing in the world. Take look at Belichick's record without Brady and you find a very pedestrian data set that can be used against the idea that Belichick is a particularly good coach and be pretty darned convincing.

For example, Belichick has only made the playoffs in one year out of 7 without Brady as his QB, and he got waxed in the divisional round in that playoff year. There are arguments you can make to defend that to some degree, but when you go back all the way to Bernie Kosar, you open up a whole new can of worms.

How many coaches make the top 10 without a star QB?

They're nearly inseparable positions.

 

[Deus Irae]

How many coaches make the top 10 without a star QB?

They're nearly inseparable positions.

Your argument is incompatible with the argument I was responding to. If Belichick is there because of his QB, then it's not "IBBIT", but "ITBIT". Either it's because Belichick is a great coach and p8ryts argument might be sound, or it's because Belichick's got a great QB, as you note, and p8ryts argument is lousy.

I look back at history and think you generally need both, which means "IBBIT" is not applicable.

 

[Huckleberry1]

Look, I think this was one of the stupidest moves this team has made under Belichick, if not the stupidest. I don't think it's a coincidence that the big-named players who get moved when they can still play (Samuel/Law/Seymour/Branch/Welker) are the guys who don't toe the party line on every single thing. They're going to rely on Brady to bail them out of yet another really piss poor situation where Belichick let his ego get in the way of good decisions and rationalized a terrible move. I'm down with all those arguments.

That's on Belichick, though, not Kraft.

I don't disagree that Belichick made the decision, my point is that Kraft has known exactly what the patriots have been offering and that it wasn't a matter of Welker needing to compromise, and that it would never keep him here "for life." Belichick is the one who screwed the pooch, Kraft just should have kept quiet instead of trying to mislead patriot fans about Welker's position and their desire to keep him.


Letting Welker go to Denver was a huge mistake, and may well be the decision that keeps Brady and Co. from winning any more Lombardis. I have no idea how they are going to stop that offense, and there aren't any defenders they are going to be willing to pay who can stop them. This goes down in the biggest dumbass moves of all time Hall of fame.

 

[shmessy]

Kraft repeatedly said it took two to make a deal, suggesting Welker wanted too much, and then said a week ago that he wanted Welker to be a Patriot for life when they weren't even willing to give him an offer that would make more sense for a nobody. Kraft is a liar.

LOL at the neophyte who thinks Bob Kraft makes the personnel decisions for the New England Patriots football team!!!!!!

Hey, Ivan, the middle of the field is called the 50 yard line!

 

[Huckleberry1]

Kraft didn't lie. He, as a fan, wanted Welker. The GM/coach didn't. He's smart enough to know BB etc. know a lot more than he does, so he deferred to their wisdom. That's why he hired them, to make personnel decisions.

He's the opposite of Jones.

Kraft knew Welker's position was more than reasonable and knew the Patriots was sh.t, he's a liar, plain and simple. You folks can call nighttime the daytime all you want but it doesn't make it so. He's the owner, not a fan, and i won't ever believe another word that comes out of this organization again.

 

[Zeus]

Did Dan Shaughnessy write this piece of crap on Gasper's computer?

The contention that the Patriots misread Welker's willingness to walk is idiotic. It's clear that Belichick/McDaniel/Caserio/Adams had made the decision to move on, especially in light of the refusal to match the Bronco's offer. The real question should be about whether the judgment to retool the offense and move ahead without Welker is a good one. This will be hotly debated at least until the real footballs start flying, and justifiably so.

This is the most laughable statement in the piece:

In his last shot to cash in, Welker, who turns 32 in May, didn’t get the big payday he deserved.​

Welker was a free agent - he got exactly what his market value commanded.

There's plenty of legitmate criticisms to be leveled at the Patriots (not to mention Welker and his advisers). Too bad Gasper missed out.

 

[Deus Irae]

I don't disagree that Belichick made the decision, my point is that Kraft has known exactly what the patriots have been offering and that it wasn't a matter of Welker needing to compromise, and that it would never keep him here "for life." Belichick is the one who screwed the pooch, Kraft just should have kept quiet instead of trying to mislead patriot fans about Welker's position and their desire to keep him.

But they would have kept him, for $5 million a year plus incentives. That's a garbage offer for the guy, but it's not a lie, which is the term you used. I agree that Kraft should have kept his mouth shut, but his firing off of platitudes isn't the same as him lying.

Letting Welker go to Denver was a huge mistake, and may well be the decision that keeps Brady and Co. from winning any more Lombardis. I have no idea how they are going to stop that offense, and there aren't any defenders they are going to be willing to pay who can stop them. This goes down in the biggest dumbass moves of all time Hall of fame.

I agree that it was a mistake. I agree that the Broncos right now have an offense that will be potentially dominant if Manning is healthy and not in too much of a decline. I agree that, especially if they add S. Jackson, the Broncos should now be considered the clear favorites in the AFC (at least until more of the offseason shakes out), and I agree that BB needs to get someone into that front office who's willing to tell him that this kind of idiotic, ego-driven move is unacceptable no matter how he tries to rationalize it.

I just don't agree that Kraft lied. Again, I think you're being unfair there.

 

[Nunchucks]

Look, I think this was one of the stupidest moves this team has made under Belichick, if not the stupidest. I don't think it's a coincidence that the big-named players who get moved when they can still play (Samuel/Law/Seymour/Branch/Welker) are the guys who don't toe the party line on every single thing. They're going to rely on Brady to bail them out of yet another really piss poor situation where Belichick let his ego get in the way of good decisions and rationalized a terrible move. I'm down with all those arguments.

That's on Belichick, though, not Kraft.

As stupid as making up words like "stupidist"

 

[BSR]

Citing history all the way back like that isn't necessarily the smartest thing in the world. Take look at Belichick's record without Brady and you find a very pedestrian data set that can be used against the idea that Belichick is a particularly good coach and be pretty darned convincing.

For example, Belichick has only made the playoffs in one year out of 7 without Brady as his QB, and he got waxed in the divisional round in that playoff year. There are arguments you can make to defend that to some degree, but when you go back all the way to Bernie Kosar, you open up a whole new can of worms.

Deus, you are being a little angry and petty here. The notion that Brady carried the Patriots to championships in 2004, 2003 and especially 2001 is dubious at best. It isn't like 2001 Brady was anywhere close to 2007-2012 Brady. Your attempts at trying to paint Belichick as some lucky coach who had Brady to cover for him is just spite. Brady is a damn good coach/GM and Brady is a damn good QB. You don't have the success this team has had over the years without both statements being true.

 

[Nunchucks]

Deus, you are being a little angry and petty here. The notion that Brady carried the Patriots to championships in 2004, 2003 and especially 2001 is dubious at best. It isn't like 2001 Brady was anywhere close to 2007-2012 Brady. Your attempts at trying to paint Belichick as some lucky coach who had Brady to cover for him is just spite. Brady is a damn good coach/GM and Brady is a damn good QB. You don't have the success this team has had over the years without both statements being true.

Hey now, lawn chair GMs are obviously much more qualified than people who get paid millions of dollars and spend 17 hours a day doing the job.

 

[State]

I agree that letting Welker go was a huge mistake.

But what might make it worse is that now we go drafting for needs and not the best talent available, in looking for a slot. One has to think Robert Woods out of USC is almost a gimmie.

And what rubs salt into the wound is the pick, first in the second, two years ago of Ras-I Dowling, when we had been without Randy Moss for a bit and desperately needed a deep threat.

The Ravens a little later in that round nabbed Torrey Smith.

I just hope we can reload at the WR position and Dowling comes back and stays healthy a whole season--he's got elite size and first-round talent. The knock has always been his health, which is why Welker's replacement has a ton of pressure on him to stay healthy.

He hasn't shown the durability of Welker.

 

[Deus Irae]

As stupid as making up words like "stupidist"

Stupidest
Use Stupidest in a sentence
stu·pid
[stoo-pid, styoo?] adjective, stu·pid·er, stu·pid·est, noun
adjective
1.
lacking ordinary quickness and keenness of mind; dull.
2.
characterized by or proceeding from mental dullness; foolish; senseless: a stupid question.
3.
tediously dull, especially due to lack of meaning or sense; inane; pointless: a stupid party.
4.
annoying or irritating; troublesome: Turn off that stupid radio.
5.
in a state of stupor; stupefied: stupid from fatigue.

Stupidest | Define Stupidest at Dictionary.com

not made up....

The dictionary can be your friend.

 

[FCB02062]

The man just doesn't know anything about football.
First he cuts Bernie Koasar, then Drew Bledsoe, Lawyer Milloy, did'nt resign
Branch. Law, Samuels, traded Seymour and Moss and unbelievably let's Welker go.

I'm sick of these lousy teams and losing seasons. I remember once they only won 9 games. Twice they didn't even win the division. They've only been to five Sb's under this coach and even lost two of them.

I just don't think I can continue to be a fan of such a poorly managed team. I might become a Jets fan.

IN BILL I HAVE TRUSTED AND WILL CONTINUE TO DO SO!!!!

All those AFC East Titles since 2004 are really awesome, that 18-1 campaign was pissah, - so too are the playoff wins vs 8-8 Denver, Jack Del Rio's Jaguars, Eric Mangini's 10-6 NYJ, etc....
Talk to the real fans when this team can actually beat a good, complete team, with a formidable defense. The last playoff win the Pats have over a team that fits that category is the 06 Divisional win on the road vs SD. That win was ballsy against the #1 offense and #7 defense ON THE ROAD. Since that game, every time they've played a playoff team their equal or perhaps better than them, they've lied down and folded like Bob Kraft's wallet (don't talk to me about two seasons ago vs Bal in the AFC Champ game; Pats were clearly the better team and the game should not have been as close as it was)....

 

[shmessy]

Citing history all the way back like that isn't necessarily the smartest thing in the world. Take look at Belichick's record without Brady and you find a very pedestrian data set that can be used against the idea that Belichick is a particularly good coach and be pretty darned convincing.

For example, Belichick has only made the playoffs in one year out of 7 without Brady as his QB, and he got waxed in the divisional round in that playoff year.

Hmmm....that's a pretty catchy wording, but when one looks at the actual situation, one gets a better understanding:

Of those 6 years of being a HC that BB did not make the playoffs:

- 2 of those years were as a first year/taking over a falling knife of a new team
- 1 of those years his team was in playoff contention until the owner announced he was moving the franchise
- 1 of those years his team went 11-5 with the BACKUP FREAKING QB playing every minute except the first 6 of the first game of the season.

So now you are talking about 2 other years without Brady: Both in Cleveland as he was building a team from the ground up BEFORE THE SALARY CAP ERA with a financially strapped owner (talk about a bad combination) who was constantly carping about money and who finally left his city.

A little context to your statement.

.

 

[Deus Irae]

Deus, you are being a little angry and petty here. The notion that Brady carried the Patriots to championships in 2004, 2003 and especially 2001 is dubious at best. It isn't like 2001 Brady was anywhere close to 2007-2012 Brady. Your attempts at trying to paint Belichick as some lucky coach who had Brady to cover for him is just spite. Brady is a damn good coach/GM and Brady is a damn good QB. You don't have the success this team has had over the years without both statements being true.

First, I didn't try to paint Belichick as that, but was just responding to someone else giving the "IBBWT" mantra. As I noted in a later post

I look back at history and think you generally need both, which means "IBBIT" is not applicable.

Second, while I'm certainly angry about the move, I'm not being petty at all. In this thread, I'm defending Kraft about the situation, for crying out loud.

And your final sentence is the whole point.

 

[Deus Irae]

Hmmm....that's a pretty catchy wording, but when one looks at the actual situation, one gets a better understanding:

Of those 6 years of being a HC that BB did not make the playoffs:

- 2 of those years were as a first year/taking over a falling knife of a new team
- 1 of those years his team was in playoff contention until the owner announced he was moving the franchise
- 1 of those years his team went 11-5 with the BACKUP FREAKING QB playing every minute except the first 6 of the first game of the season.

So now you are talking about 2 other years without Brady: Both in Cleveland as he was building a team from the ground up BEFORE THE SALARY CAP ERA with a financially strapped owner (talk about a bad combination) who was constantly carping about money and who finally left his city.

A little context to your statement.

That's not just context, that's defense and rationalization, not meaning those terms in a bad way. As I noted

There are arguments you can make to defend that to some degree,

And, given that you take such a keen interest in my postings, you surely know that I've used those very defenses and rationalizations on this board when talking about BB in the past.