- Joined
- Sep 9, 2008
- Messages
- 32,634
- Reaction score
- 23,169
Again, we know there have been players that Belichick has wanted to retain, but couldn't justify paying more than his value system would allow. He's openly admitted such. Last year with Hicks was a prime example of that, and we had the cap money available (still do) all season long. They could've kept him here if they could've agreed to a better deal. Unfortunately, another team stepped in and offered more money. Belichick didn't see the value there.so you mean *want as in with conditions
if the pats don't offer him the market price .... which in this case is appearing to be about 12-12.5M per year, then they don't want him
to say they want him but only if he's cheaper is just a nice way of saying 'lowball'
I want a BMW but at a Kia price
Why would anyone argue or disagree that we all haven't watched this happen during just about every single free agency period? Your suggestion that Belichick has passed on bringing in certain big name players in free agency or allowed others to take a better offer because "he doesn't want them" is ludicrous.
In your argument, I recently passed on the car that I could afford with money to spare because "I didn't want it." That's not true. I wanted it but just couldn't work out good value in our negotiations, so I had to walk away. This is something that we see with all teams every single year. They lose their own solid players and they pass on others...even though they have available cap room. It doesn't mean they wouldn't have liked to keep (or sign) those players.
I'm sure Belichick "wanted" Calvin Johnson or Larry Fitzgerald as a downfield threat, but he wasn't going to hand them blank checks, even though we had the cap space and potential to bring them here. C'mon, man. Your argument is not only weak, it's bizarre.