Clearly you are the one who is mad. And no, my response didn't make me sound like a prick. My response made me sound like someone who had checked your statements and found them to be full of BS. You clearly have an issue with people not just talking your word for it. And god forbid they question your "facts". If they do that, you throw a temper tantrum, as you have done.
I am not mad in the least bit, I find you to be comical in fact. You have not provided a single fact, you have not offered anything other than your own assertion based on nothing. As far as throwing a temper tantrum, I have not in the least bit, I respond with meme’s because I am tired of wasting my time responding to you.
Yes, you have been shown to be wrong because Slater is inexpensive considering what he brings to the team. Yes, I have shown that there are other special teams specialists (IE. Kicker/Punter) who are paid more than Slater. You were the one who made the claim about Slater being the highest Cap hit amongst "core four special teamers who do not contribute to the offensive or defensive units" and then proceeded to just talk about Gunners from other teams.. And you only listed the "top 10" as Pro Football Focus rated them.. Considering there are at least 62 gunners not on the Patriots, your list was severely lacking. And, instead of looking at the other teams around the league and getting that info, you threw your tantrum..
Show me a player that plays special teams coverage and does not perform the duties of a kicker, punter, returner that earns more than Matthew Slater. There is not one, so your assertion that he is inexpensive is just WRONG he is the highest paid player in the NFL that performs his duties, that is not inexpensive.
Several people have told you that using Pro Football Focus as a source for anything is dangerous at best because none of the people there have any sort of football training. They are all self-taught and their "stats" are based on the "eye test". Much of it is not factual, but their opinions. And this isn't the first time you've attempted to use Pro Football Focus as a basis for making an argument.
I do not see anything wrong with PFF, I think it is a creditable source that media members like Mike Reiss, Greg Bedard, and others use consistently, I put more stock in what PFF says than a poster who is so short sighted that they cannot find value in the entire PFF sight.
Yes, you have been shown to be wrong with your claim that the Patriots have let many key vets go and drafted their replacement 1 year prior to the vet's contract expiring. Two examples in a 3 year period isn't really a damning claim.
No once again, I provided a list of players, you provided nothing, you just run your mouth and hope that is good enough to make people believe you, it is not, you have provided nothing and you never do.
You seem to think that the Pats are somehow special in having "70% of their team on rookie deals" at this time of yea. They aren't. Most teams are like that because of the number of rookies and rookie free agents there are. Heck during a 4 year period, if a team only has 7 picks each year and they all make the team, you're talking about 52.8% of the team being on a rookie deal.
We have the 2nd youngest team in the NFL.