- Joined
- Sep 2, 2006
- Messages
- 8,753
- Reaction score
- 8,102
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.If Bodden preforms well, the Pats dont let him go imo, I think they learned there lesson with Assante
I agree man, no one knows why BB traded him, and we'll probably never know. Everyone's gonna have their various opinions on whether or not Hobbs lived up to their expectations, etc. Certainly not worth arguing or getting all riled up about.
We've lived through some WTF? moments before, so I'm gonna trust our coach on this one, although I'm not sure about some aspects of it totally. I just find this love for Leigh Bodden somewhat ironic, that's all. I hope he does work out, I really do. But I am not 100% on him quite yet, but that's just my personal opinion--and everyone has their own.
The lesson they seem to have learned with Asante is to always have 2 CBs left in the pipeline.
Deltha didnt fit well in the Patriots system, but Bodden had success in a similar system with the Browns when Crennel was head coach! I could see Bodden making a bigger difference than Hobbs and Oneal!
As Reiss mentioned before the Patriots kinda dropped the ball on asante, he thinks they should of extended him a year or 2 before his contract came to an end, I agree.
There's a thread on this, and people have claimed that the Patriots did, in fact, try to sign Samuel, but he was asking for too much money.
i hope leigh bodden has a great season but everyone wants him to go back to has glory days of 2007 when he was 5th in the NFL with 6 INT for the browns but i think INT are overrated
INT #1 came vs the bengals carson palmer throw for 401 yerds and 6 TD chad johnson had 11 rec for 209 yerds and 2 TD Houshmandzadeh had 8 rec and 2TD
INT #2 came vs the ravens McNair throw for 307 yerds and Mason had 10 rec
INT #3 came vs the fins Cleo Lemon throw for 256 yerd and 2 TD Chambers had 6 rec
INT #4 came vs the rams Bulger throw for 310 Holt had 110 yerds and a TD
INT #5 and 6 came 8 weeks later vs the bangals Palmer had only 115 yerd and chad had only 4 rec but thay only passed 20 time and ran the ball 33 times
im not saying they got all dose yerds on leigh bodden alone
but if your realy a top 5 NFL corner like your stats say you are then i think your team would do a lil better vs the pass i hope he becomes the next Nnamdi Asomugha but i just think hes one big yer with the browns is overrated
I didn't say that, I also said he had good coverage, I watch the Browns consistently when the Patriots aren't playing.so Deltha O'Neal had 9 INT in 2001 and 10 INT in 2005 do you think he played better then hobbs
Free agents have known costs. Players about to become free agents are to a large extent unknown in terms of demands on the system. Hobbs would be no Samuel in that department but would end up costing what a free agent would. So that supports the "replacement" theory, as well as the "sure that's your opinion" theory.
Why the timing? Well, the high CB choice was not a given, and BB played chicken to get him later in the 2nd round rather than with pick 23 (or 26 or 34 for that matter. We won't count Brace as playing "chicken" because Butler/Brace picks were interchangeable at that point.) Our guy Butler may not have even been there when we wanted him, and clearly we were "drunk with back-trading power" or something, if we're to believe Peter King. My point is the opposite: going in, there was a significantly likely "not at 23" scenario, or possibly a straight-up "not at 23" decision pre-draft. That leaves the pick somewhere at the top of the second round, going into the draft, and it's quite possible that you aren't picking CB when the first pick comes around.
This train of thought militates for an "if Butler then not Hobbs" scenario, pointed at in the OP's scenario. What was that Pick 40 wait, anyway, when the Pats waited until Pick 41 to grab Brace and Butler together? (or 41/42 or whatever they were... going from memory here.) Had Hobbs already been traded? Again, memory fails. As I recall the Hobbs trade came just after the Butler pick but I might be wrong. That would mean the chronology put us at 1 likely contributor short at CB going into the draft, a spot we meant to fill with Butler, thereby obviating the need for Hobbs and making him expendable. At the time we believe we can fill in the "rising class of 09" slot with our guy (i.e., we think we've nailed down the starting nickel, if that's not a contradiction in terms, which in the Bodden/Springs era we consider the Hobbs slot.) At that point it is possible to get by at the starter level without Hobbs and his future monetary hit.
But we have to wait and see of course. It's May and we want to watch football. We could have had a quite serious discussion a few years back about Chad Jackson coming into training camp, winning the third receiver spot, and being Brady's prime target by the end of the season. I'm sure we did have that conversation in fact.
We sputter, we argue, in the end it is what it is. They grow up, they get expensive, and more often than not, they leave home. We're used to it
PFnV
I don't think this issue is all that complicated. The reasoning goes like this:
1. Hobbs was in the last year of his deal and was not going to re-sign. Judging by his comments, his idea of what his value was was completely different from that of the Patriots. So they knew they only had him for this year, and at a number that was (I think) tied with Bodden for the highest cap hit of any of the corners.
2. The Pats were already paying starter money to both Springs and Bodden for 2009. There was no guarantee Hobbs was going to keep a starting job. In fact he was likely their third corner. And if he was demoted to nickel corner in his walk year, he was not going to be happy.
3. The Pats after drafting Butler had three young corners they hoped would eventually beat out Hobbs, plus a new safety (Chung) who could alleviate the need to rely upon Springs for depth at safety.
4. So: even if Hobbs had stayed and played out of his mind and kept himself in the starting lineup, he'd be blocking three young guys the Pats wanted to see the field and pushing a high-priced veteran to the second-unit.
5. But what was more likely was that Hobbs would be a grumpy, overpaid third or fourth or even fifth or sixth corner for most of the year, and then walk for nothing but a low comp choice at the end of it. Instead of accepting that situation, the Pats dumped him for a young lineman and a young long snapper and assumed the cap savings now, while they are still in the hunt for a guy like Jason Taylor.
Hobbs was a good kick returner and a good third corner masquerading as a #1 corner. There was nobody else among their top 15-20 earners who was even close to as expendable. I think this is a classic situation proving the axiom that once you know you're not going to re-sign a guy, you're better off trading him or getting rid of him somehow. The future doesn't involve him, so you might as start trying to get on without him. You're going to have to deal with that adjustment eventually anyway. Why not now, and why not get something in return?
Is there a group of people, or even one person, who DOESN'T think Bodden is better than Hobbs?
Is there a group of people, or even one person, who DOESN'T think Bodden is better than Hobbs?