Stephon Gilmore

[Ring 6]

Many posters have been parroting the idea that most/all Bill Belichick coached teams start out the season with many issues on defense, particularly during the earlier months of Sept/Oct. We've seen many comments like that, about how slow they always start out, etc.

I'm simply stating how that wasn't the case last season. Their version of needing to iron out issues was nowhere close to giving up 456 yards a game, or 32 ppg. That didn't happen, as their version of a "really bad game" in the beginning of last year came during week one when they gave up 21 points on the road to an NFCCG participant from the previous year.

Rather than "what posters say" here are facts.
Since BB arrived
Games 1-4 1436
Games 5-8 1327
Games 9-12 1374
Games 13-16 1090

 

[supafly]

The reality is that belichick defenses consistently improve over the course of the season and often peak by the playoffs.

That's the silver lining, although I can't remember too many seasons where they've failed at just about everything, defensively speaking.

There also may be a personnel problem, judging by multiple benchings of players that we expected to succeed. Time will tell.

 

[supafly]

Rather than "what posters say" here are facts.
Since BB arrived
Games 1-4 1436
Games 5-8 1327
Games 9-12 1374
Games 13-16 1090

That's fine, and even expected, but proves absolutely nothing in regards to how this defense looked in the early months of 2016 vs. the early months of 2017, which is what we were discussing.

 

[Ring 6]

Common sense: Gilmore is the new player added to the secondary, so it would make sense that the communication issues would probably lie closer to him vs. proven seasoned vets who are familiar with the system and have excelled within it.

This is the problem. Instead of looking at what happened you have decided it's Gilmore and then created a story to make it true. Facts don't come from a happened and I think b so that means it must be c.

Patriots players: "we've simplified our system to the basics," (paraphrasing) and that "there are way too many communication issues."

You have been a patriot fan way too long to think they are actually discussing things in the in media.

Eye test: Gilmore's having issues on at least a moderate level. We now have 4 games to go on. The defense is sucking at a record setting pace, particularly in the secondary.

This doesn't mean Gilmore screwed up plays that he didn't.

Other posters' takes: Gilmore's obviously having issues.

And we all know that posters pick a target and attack whether justified or not.

Media members: Gilmore's having issues, with some type of numeric breakdown to back that up.

I read Hannables "article". He didn't analyze anything he shor from the hip.
--------

What are people supposed to think?

People are supposed to loomfir themselves and not jump on the bandwagon of misinformed.
People trashed Gilmore for the hill TD until (and many even after, even still today) McCourty explained that Gilmore played it correctly.
The sane thing is happening now. Coverage blown so it must be Gilmore.
Maybe it is but saying it because he makes the must money isn't going to make it true.
I see a lot of potential screw ups by McCourty but I don't know the call so I am not trashing him. Maybe because I don't feel a burning need to trash someone, anyone whether it's right or wrong.
We should be better than this by now after 5 titles.

As I said before since BB arrived we have the most the season wins, most playoff wins, most SB wins and most times our own fans have said we suck.

 

[Ring 6]

That's fine, and even expected, but proves absolutely nothing in regards to how this defense looked in the early months of 2016 vs. the early months of 2017, which is what we were discussing.

Who the f{}% is discussing that? Not me.

 

[Ring 6]

That's the silver lining, although I can't remember too many seasons where they've failed at just about everything, defensively speaking.

There also may be a personnel problem, judging by multiple benchings of players that we expected to succeed. Time will tell.

What multiple benching?
I can't think of a single player who was benched.

 

[supafly]

We also faced sone pretty crappy offenses at the beginning of last year.

Okay, fine, fair enough, but the growing pain theory that I've seen several posters suggest did not apply to last year's defense, at least in terms of points allowed in the months of Sept and Oct. The 2016 version of early season growing pains saw them give up 21 and then 24 (garbage time with large lead) then improve to 0, 16, 13, 16, and 17 over the course of the next five games.

The two games where they allowed the most points (BUF 25, SEA 31) were actually sandwiched around the mid-season bye. As we know, they closed out the season strong, too.

Many posters have been parroting the idea that most/all Bill Belichick coached teams start out the season with many issues on defense, particularly during the earlier months of Sept/Oct. We've seen many comments like that, about how slow they always start out, etc.

I'm simply stating how that wasn't the case last season. Their version of needing to iron out issues was nowhere close to giving up 456 yards a game, or 32 ppg. That didn't happen, as their version of a "really bad game" in the beginning of last year came during week one when they gave up 21 points on the road to an NFCCG participant from the previous year.

Who the f{}% is discussing that? Not me.

Apparently, you have a very short memory. Of course it's "you" who is discussing it. Lol.

 

[supafly]

What multiple benching?
I can't think of a single player who was benched.

Seriously? Now you're just trying to get a rise.

Alan Branch has been benched. Malcolm Butler has been benched. You just pointed out how Patrick Chung had been playing poorly and subsequently benched, as McCourty took over his role, and Harmon took over DMac's role.

You literally just pointed this out less than 20 mins ago when you were trying to make your point regarding something else.

 

[Ring 6]

Apparently, you have a very short memory. Of course it's "you" who is discussing it. Lol.

No that was your straw man. As you see you posted one post of me abswrinh a question you asked me and 2 long ones of you talking about that. Other than politely answering your questions I wasnt discussing or comparing the beginning of last year at all.

 

[Ring 6]

Seriously? Now you're just trying to get a rise.

Alan Branch has been benched. Malcolm Butler has been benched. You just pointed out how Patrick Chung had been playing poorly and subsequently benched, as McCourty took over his role, and Harmon took over DMac's role.

You literally just pointed this out less than 20 mins ago when you were trying to make your point regarding something else.

Playing a lesser role is not being benched.
Branchs snaps are down. We don't know why. It could be a health or conditioning issue. It could be an opponent/game plan issue.
Butler wasn't benched he played like 75% of the snaps in the only game he didn't play almost all of them.
Chung played 54% yesterday.

 

[supafly]

No that was your straw man. As you see you posted one post of me abswrinh a question you asked me and 2 long ones of you talking about that. Other than politely answering your questions I wasnt discussing or comparing the beginning of last year at all.

You were the one who brought up the "weak offenses" argument as it pertained to the 2016 defense's solid start. You said it needed to be taken into consideration.

You most certainly interjected with an opinion. You even had another post where you discussed the week two game vs. Miami, where they allowed them back in the game. Unless someone else highjacked your account, it was you who was discussing it. I'm not using a "straw man" in this debate. I was simply pointing out a very basic fact, which is that there is absolutely no resemblance to the defense that started 2016.

 

[supafly]

I think we've exhausted the subject past all meaningful conversation, so perhaps we should move on.

 

[K. Dog]

I heard somewhere that if Gilmore is cut the Patriots take a $22 million salary cap hit for the next two years. Similarly if he is traded.

Can someone authoritatively describe the salary cap implications both to the Patriots and/or to his new team if Gilmore is cut or traded?

 

[Ring 6]

You were the one who brought up the "weak offenses" argument as it pertained to the 2016 defense's solid start. You said it needed to be taken into consideration.

You most certainly interjected with an opinion. You even had another post where you discussed the week two game vs. Miami, where they allowed them back in the game. Unless someone else highjacked your account, it was you who was discussing it. I'm not using a "straw man" in this debate. I was simply pointing out a very basic fact, which is that there is absolutely no resemblance to the defense that started 2016.

As I said I politely responded to your comments but that was never something I was discussing.

 

[Love The Drake]

I heard somewhere that if Gilmore is cut the Patriots take a $22 million salary cap hit for the next two years. Similarly if he is traded.

Can someone authoritatively describe the salary cap implications both to the Patriots and/or to his new team if Gilmore is cut or traded?

He's not getting cut
If you watcheds Baldys film you can see Rowe made a mistake on the wide open TD.
Alan Branch got blown up on running plays.
Elandon Roberts lost sight of Whittaker on the screen td.
Besides Booger calling 2 questionable penalties
When Sherman does this every play and so did Revis why are we talking about cutting Gilmore again?

 

[Soul_Survivor88]

Stephon Gilmore took such a beating on social media, he made his twitter account private rivate

 

[PatsBoy12]

That's the silver lining, although I can't remember too many seasons where they've failed at just about everything, defensively speaking.

There also may be a personnel problem, judging by multiple benchings of players that we expected to succeed. Time will tell.

Yeah, I think there is a personnel issue.

 

[PatsBoy12]

I think we've exhausted the subject past all meaningful conversation, so perhaps we should move on.

Interestingly, there isn't much more to it than he's proving to be what he's always been to this point in his career: INCONSISTENT AND UNDISCIPLINED. He's a guy who flashes at times, probably because he really does have all the physical makings of a top flight corner in the NFL, but he's dumb and, by some accounts, really just prefers to be left alone to do his own thing (which kind of speaks to the communication part). Period. It's not a scheme thing or necessarily poor coaching or anything else. The guy just needs to focus more.

 

[K. Dog]

I predicted back in July that Gilmore would likely not be helpful to the team, just based on his comments, e.g. Gilmore: "My People finally going to get to see me play on tv." .

Here I wrote:

I think [Gilmore] has the potential to disrupt the chemistry of the entire defense

Gilmore: "My People finally going to get to see me play on tv."
At that time my analysis was not met with universal agreement here, but recent games have been consistent with the analysis: the defense is playing as if its chemistry is disrupted.

Another quote,

taken together, these tweets and interviews suggest that Gilmore's personality is a poor fit.

Gilmore: "My People finally going to get to see me play on tv."

 

[goheels22002]

40 million guaranteed

Exactly. If Stephon Gilmore is going to called for "hands to the face," we might as well get our money's worth: