- Joined
- Sep 7, 2009
- Messages
- 2,489
- Reaction score
- 2,938
Otis "my man" Smith also ahead of Asante with 7. He was a baller, made some big plays for us 2001
![salt-shaker[1].jpg](https://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/data/attachments/49/49328-3b5fb9e351036ff9cb7fbce9b0b410a3.jpg "salt-shaker[1].jpg")
SITE MENU
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.
Otis "my man" Smith also ahead of Asante with 7. He was a baller, made some big plays for us 2001
********. It isn't.
I don't think he would have. As good of a ballhawk he was he was not a complete/elite CB.
Yes, it is. We going to continue with three or less word answers or do you want to have a real discussion?
You deserved a 3 word response because what you posted is garbage. Fine. You want one. Here it is.
Stop. Tom leaving was a business/organizational decision based on a need to rebuild, money, age and Tom wanting different things. You have zero proof if was personal. Bill did not hate Tom. We know that.
None of these are personal. You are making up something that isn't there.
Jack Jones reminds me of him. A nice piece to have one a team. Can make game changing plays, but more other than not gives up too many. Throw in an attitude problem, and those cats just ain’t worth it to me.
It wasn't as bad a drop as Wes'.
]
You just did the same thing with just a few more words. Completely ignored the details I provided for the personal nature of those situtations.
Stephen and Brian? He made his sons wash dishes? And how would you know why they were promoted? It's just as valid for me to claim nepotism.
Are you defending the decision or criticizing it? Because you just did both.
BB wanted to prove he could win without Brady. Now he'll settle for catching Shula. We can't prove BB's motivation for everything so often we're left with putting the pieces together and speculating. That's how I feel about it and BB was trying to be discrete by offering Brady contracts that he knew eventually Brady would reject. BB was fortunate he had Brady for 2018 and 2019 with the horseshit they put in front of him. Brady really had had enough prior to 2019 but he agreed to ride it out for one more season, a decision he probably regrets, just like he probably regrets this past season in Tampa Bay.
It was a point of contention between Brady and Belichick despite BB's reasoning. And I'm not defending Guerrero, he seems like a total douche to me, although I know someone who is close friends with him and they say he's a great guy, and I think he helped Brady sustain his career to age 45 which is remarkable. Really only this season did I see any physical drop-off in Brady's performance and it was with his pocket mobility (he lost some of his lateral movement from the pocket).
You're not being fair. Again, I mentioned some well known aspects of those situations which reflect a personal component to them. And of course there are lesser degrees of 'personal' than adultery.
And the scoop 6 in the 96 AFC Championship game. I was there and the old stadium was rocking.
I didn't ignore them. I categorically dismissed all of them because you don't comprehend the difference between business decision and what is/isn't acceptable behavior on a football team.
You are saying they didn't earn their increased responsibility. That is insulting to them and something you cannot prove.
I am defending the logic of the decision and saying it sucked. You can make a decision based on logic with the results being poor.
Prove this.
It was absolutely contention and needed to be nipped in the bud. AG was undermining the training/medical staff. That is unacceptable. Tom not liking it is his issue- not Bill's.
I'm trying to delineate the difference between a business decision and a personal vendetta for you.
Well, you can rule out almost anything if you're going to default to Belichick makes the rules and he defines (however nebulously) what's unacceptable behavior for one of his players (wherever the behavior may take place). You're choosing to place everything in the business decision bucket. I'm not. When certain things happen off the field (Ty, Moss, Wes), or even away from the team (Chandler), I think it necessarily brings in a personal component (and Bill's personal feelings on the matter, which apparently you also consider "strictly business").
Looks a lot like nepotism. But no, I can't get inside Bill's head to literally show you his personal thoughts on it.
There is no way that decision can be defined by logic. It made no sense, was obviously a horrible decision, and with predictably horrible results. Again, you seem to be of the mind that because Belichick "thought it was the right thing to do" at the time then it must have been a sound decision. Classic IBWT.
I already said we can't prove BB's motivation for everything so often we're left with putting the pieces together and speculating.
Yes. They are rules. He has behavior rules. He has financial principals. You are saying they are "personal". They are not.
Biz and behavior because they are. Ever play on a team? Manage people? If you did you'd understand what i'm talking about.
Ty was released b/c they didn't want to pay him $10m. Wes was not resigned b/c he wanted more money and was older than Amendola. Moss *****ed about his usage and contract was clearly becoming disruptive and was traded. Jones wanted big money and was traded. That had nothing to do with the drugs. Again, nothing personal- strictly business
It's nepotism they got in the door. It's not if they earn more responsibility based on merit.
Yes it can and did. DCs become HCs and call plays. Thats what Fat Matt did in DET. Bill thought he could do OK here. Obviously a major miscalculation.
That's what we do here.
