You obviously haven't watched much of Butler OR Gilmore because you don't know wtf you're talking about.
Butler is one of the most physical cbs in the nfl- much more so than Gilmore( who is also fairly physical).
Butler jams wrs better at the los than Gilmore, plays pressman as good or better and is a better tackler. That pretty much encompasses every aspect of being physical.
Maybe you are right. Sometimes I am wrong. I guess what I was talking about had more to do with playing bigger, more physical receivers, which is more Gilmore than Butler. Butler is better against quicker, more elusive players. Hence, the Talib/Harris comparisons. Maybe I overstepped in that comment, but that is why we have civilized discussion. If you had ended your post there, fine.
You further show your ignorance by holding up Gilmore's contract as " proof" of his superiority,lol.
And now it begins. Where exactly did I say that? Again, as a rebuttal that Butler is "the better man for the job," I believe the Patriots financial commitment to Gilmore suggests otherwise. I don't believe, based on everything I've seen, that the Patriots would have offered Butler that much even if he were a UFA, although several times in this thread I have posed the idea that the Patriots may have signed Gilmore because they knew they could land a #1 corner, and Butler was certainly not a gaurantee for a long-term deal. I have not said that Gilmore is better than Butler. I have certainly stated the obvious, which is that, based on the idea the Patriots set the market on a player, they must think he is a damn good player. And I think it's reasonable to predict that, based on the financial knowns, the Patriots would prefer Gilmore over Butler, if they could have either one at the same price. I'm not sure that is saying Gilmore is "superior" to Butler is really accurate here...which leads into the next point of UFA/RFA.
Obviously you don't know the difference between RFA and ufa or you wouldn't have made such an asinine comment. Butler has no leverage. Gilmore does. Next year, Butler will have the same leverage as Gilmore.
Another huge assumption, which followed from another big reach. Look at my posting history and then tell me I don't understand UFA vs RFA. I have distinguished several times that their bargaining positions are very different. I still don't think the Patriots would have given Butler as good a deal as Gilmore, or else they would have made a more aggressive push to extend him. It is theoretical, so you are welcome to disagree with me, but to suggest that I am ignorant of their bargaining positions and therefore think their offers are apples to apples, you clearly are just projecting onto me. I want to also reiterate that Butler may get an equivalent or greater contract as Gilmore. I am only talking about the Patriots view of these two players, and my best guess is that they would go higher for Gilmore, even if they were both UFAs. And yes, in that case, it certainly is reasonable to use contracts/offers to pinpoint who the Patriots think is better for their job, and arguments about potential, realization, risk, etc. are factored into that job offer.
And nobody in their right mind would argue that Gilmore has been as good as Butler over the last 2 years.
And why do you include this in your response to me when I stated nothing of the sort? Do you just pick all of the worst comments from this thread and attribute them all to me? The only comment I made that was in the same stratosphere as this: Gilmore has had five defensive coordinators. I never once said that Gilmore has been better than, or even equivalent to, Butler.
You can argue Sherman had been better than Butler, you can't argue Gilmore has.
Once again a huge takedown over something I never said.
You got some some kind of bug up your ass about Butler, I don't know why.
Why would I hate the guy who created the greatest moment in my life as a Patriots fan? Much of what I say stems from looking to understand the Patriots thinking, not applying my own assumptions to a situation like this, which was contrary to almost all of our assumptions about the Patriots long-term CB plans.
I'm pretty sure I recently pointed out it was the Patriots, via Lombardi as a proxy, who dragged this out into public, not Butler, and that was in response to others who were calling him immature or other misplaced adjectives. I've been pretty consistent about my take on this whole situation:
A. The Patriots will not pay two guys a king's ransom at #1 and #2 cornerback. I believe the Gilmore deal is likely the writing on the wall for Butler, likely this offseason, or possibly next offseason. It has less to do with Butler and more to do with cap philosophy. The Patriots are already among the league leaders in secondary cost, and may have the best 1-2 FS combo in the league with McCourty and Harmon. Their safety play and coaching is excellent. I don't think it makes sense to pay two guys $25 annually when you will have much of the same success paying one of them $13M and putting a decent player on the other side/slot. Just too many other areas of need on a roster. Seahawks have had the #1 pass defense of this era with Sherman and Thomas as studs in coverage. It hasn't made much difference fon their #2 corner, who looks pretty good no matter what. I compare it to the Ravens linebacker corps of the Reed/Lewis era. Sure, Adalius Thomas and Bart Scott were good players, but when they let those guys go there was little drop off since they already had enough elite players in their front 7 and other linebackers.
B. I think Butler should sign his tender for his own good. I don't recall an RFA with a first round tender actually being signed for a first round pick in about 10 years. No one is going to make him an offer, other than the Saints. Why would the Saints be willing to? It's obvious. They suspect, whether illegally or not, that they will be able to trade for Butler for something less than a first round pick. Nothing will change from now until 4/21 because no other team can talk to the Patriots about Butler, and the Patriots are aware they are being watched closely by the NFLPA. There is a chance, though, that in the meantime the Saints spend their Butler money on someone other than Butler, or that their priorities change.
C. Butler played a really bad Super Bowl, and I can't imagine that helped him get a lucrative extension a year early. Go re-watch the film. I don't hate Butler at all, but it is clear he played the worst game of his career when matched up 1-on-1 against Gabriel and Sanu. There were several articles about his play, and even on the Hightower strip sack, he was completely toasted up the middle. Add in a horrendous PI penalty and an ankle breaking wipeout, and it was a disaster. He played great throughout much of the season, and last year. Atlanta, though, posed some huge challenges. After the Gilmore deal, I was looking for any explanations, and I thought it was a viable idea that his SB51 performance was a factor.
D. The Patriots would prefer Gilmore to Butler if the price were the same. It goes like this...none of us know. I use the simplest way to theorize about is: if the Patriots had felt Butler were a truly elite player in their system, I think they would have dug their heels in to extend him and and probably would not have signed Gilmore (see A.). If the Patriots had felt Gilmore were merely equal to, or less than, Butler they would not have shaken up their team's salary structure and FA philosophy to land him, as they'd prefer the player who has already proven he can fit into their team. Again, I also believe there may be alternative explanation that they saw them both as elite corners and figured they needed to lock up one of them, and it just happened that Gilmore was ready to accept their deal, while Butler's value due to his RFA designation was perceived as too far apart by both sides. However, I am incredibly skeptical that the Patriots would prefer Butler to Gilmore, given the choice of either one.
