upstater1
Hall of Fame Poster
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2005
- Messages
- 26,498
- Reaction score
- 16,717
Yes, that was my point. They sucked. The Patriots were dreadful. I said that.
Tommy disagrees with my sarcastic remark.
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.Yes, that was my point. They sucked. The Patriots were dreadful. I said that.
Yes, that was my point. They sucked. The Patriots were dreadful. I said that.
So your point was that they were just not good enough for you. Or they could have been better if they did not let big ticket free agents walk.
I did that’s why I asked the question.
I was referring to this post.Well, in that post I said I was a fan of Belichick's decisions to let very expensive FAs go, and that it was the right decision.
Well--we went from 2004 to 2014 without winning Super Bowls using this methodology. Then we drafted guys like Trey Flowers, and we won 3 Super Bowls... so, yes, the method works, but not all the time. Sometimes you need Trey Flowers.
In one area, but stronger in others.
As compared to keeping him.How does losing Flowers help us in other areas? It's not like we were paying Flowers 17m and added that amount to our cap space.
Flowers was great here, but to call him the primary reason for the defensive play in the Sb is just wrong. IMOUh, no.
But you guys will twist everything anyway.
I replied to someone who said we won 3 Super Bowls doing it this way. I wrote that it's not not a guaranteed method since we also didn't win one from 2004-2014. I never said they sucked, never said they weren't good enough, and in fact I went out of my way to say that Belichick's method is the right one for this team, etc.
If you want to look back, and do second-guessing, then you could easily say, for instance, that they would have won the 2006 Super Bowl if they had kept Deion Branch, but... that is not what I am saying at all. I am saying that one of the biggest factors in this SB win was the play of the DL, and specifically Try Flowers. He destroyed Rivers, Mahomes and Goff. And that's mainly why they won 13-3. You don't get back that production easily.
I think he was probably worth 14-15m, what Gilmore gets. Not 17m. But I'd still like to see whether his contract was backloaded.
Nobody is twisting anything. You are making statements and are being called on them.Uh, no.
But you guys will twist everything anyway.
Nobody is twisting anything. You are making statements and are being called on them.
If anyone is twisting things you are by moving the goalposts every time someone points out something to you
BS. You're full of it. Nowhere did I say the Patriots suck.
do you recall the days Hugh Millen, Tommy Hodson, and Marc Wilson were our QB's?
I was referring to this post.
Flowers was great here, but to call him the primary reason for the defensive play in the Sb is just wrong. IMO
What method works "all the time?"Yes, I wrote in that post that the method works, but not all the time. In other words, I agree with it. If I said it didn't work, I wouldn't agree with it.
I took it, based upon how you wrote it that the system couldn’t win sbs until it drafted trey flowers. I’m understanding now that isn’t what you meant.Yes, I wrote in that post that the method works, but not all the time. In other words, I agree with it. If I said it didn't work, I wouldn't agree with it.
He was surely the best DL on the team.Primary reason for the DL's play. I mean, come on. Look at who else was there. Simon, Clayborn, Brown. About the only 2 guys who added real value were Guy and Wise. Flowers was such a huge problem for the other team that he created space for the others (who are mostly just JAGs) when he wasn't making plays himself.
Oh brother. That was sarcasm. Sigh.