I just don't understand why it has to be that either Bill or Kraft were cheap.
Why do you need to quote meaningless polls that don't paint the complete picture?
Why do you need to be as wrong as the original poster, and then use him as an excuse?
The Patriots were run correctly for 20 years by ownership and Bill.
It was a textbook example of excellent sports management between two people who obviously didn't like each other.
the discussion started by the O/P (me) wasn't about running the team properly or not
clearly they did.
clearly, to me, the entire time Bill was here, Bill ran EVERYTHING, including the salaries.
just as clear to me, pre Bill, the Krafts controlled the purse strings, and their budget was strained as owners who at the time financed their purchase, and stretched themselves thin.
for 90% of Bill's run, he was the gold standard. I never agreed with every move, but in Bill we trust.
my complaint, is that the "he's cheap" moniker is misplaced on RK.
RK was cheap, before 2000
Once Bill arrived, Bill ran things. and the team was smart, not cheap. moreso, it worked perfectly
Post Bill, RK hasn't been cheap in the least
the team received poor grades in a player poll. RK is fixing that.
can't wait for the new grades.