Super Bowl 2006

[ScoobyDoo]

Either way you slice chief, the New England Patriots are a dynasty. A DYNASTY! :) :D :cool:
Nope.

Bruce sent that BS to the showers on Monday. Delusion is one of your finer traits though so carry on.

[pucksntape]

Has it been established that pucksntape is a former banned poster who has returned from the grave to haunt us all? Is it Hank WP posing a right-wing ideologue? Anyone?

Keep on drinking that phil_dupree kool aid. Think for yourself son, it won't hurt. :D

[pucksntape]

Nope.

Bruce sent that BS to the showers on Monday. Delusion is one of your finer traits though so carry on.

Bruce is just as much an authority on NFL issues as the average layperson. It is in my opinion that Brucey offers no value to sports outside of the biases he has for his own teams.

And not brought to you by Public Access from the basement of his mother's house:

Wayne's World! Party On! Excellent! Woo Woo Woo Woooooo!

[DavidB]

I'm not so sure they'll keep him for 12 million, if they do I'll be surprised after they let Milloyand Washington go when they demanded more or refused to structure their contract. They seem practical when it comes to the CAP and filling their needs.


They won't. The only way he will be back is if he restructures his contract. And with the Pats winning the Superbowl without him the urgency to keep him just went way down....

[Stillings]

They won't. The only way he will be back is if he restructures his contract. And with the Pats winning the Superbowl without him the urgency to keep him just went way down....

Yup. The Pats will be in good shape next year. They have a new offensive weapon when Watson is healthy and playing tight end, and they will have some $ to go get guys when they cut Law, Poole, Fauria. A younger LB or two and a solid DB or two and off you go. I wonder if Givens will stick around or look to become a primary receiver elsewhere?

Possible retirees: Troy Brown, Pfifer, Ty Poole.

[oofakafoo]

Think for yourself son, it won't hurt. :D

Anyone else find this ironically amusing?

[Gibber]

Bruce is just as much an authority on NFL issues as the average layperson. It is in my opinion that Brucey offers no value to sports outside of the biases he has for his own teams.

And not brought to you by Public Access from the basement of his mother's house:

Wayne's World! Party On! Excellent! Woo Woo Woo Woooooo!
It's PARTY TIME!, not Party On!, GOSH! ;)

[Jon]

Nope.

Bruce sent that BS to the showers on Monday. Delusion is one of your finer traits though so carry on.


In the mind of Bruce, perhaps. :p

But I can't argue with the second point.

[Bruce Ciskie]

It is in my opinion that Brucey offers no value to sports outside of the biases he has for his own teams.

Oh, the irony.

(What the hell do the Packers have to do with whether or not the Patriots are a dynasty?)

[GreatLakerMohawk]

Oh, the irony.

(What the hell do the Packers have to do with whether or not the Patriots are a dynasty?)

Come on Bruce, you know the answer to this.

The Packers had a real dynasty in the 60's and this wannabe dynasty the Patriots have going is clearly the greatest occurrance in the history of the NFL - so you and your Packer loyalties are a threat and an insult to anyone who's ever cheered for the Boston/New England Patriots. How dare you disrespect and question anything that is said about the current champions.

The Emperor has no clothes on! The Emperor has no clothes on!

[Rover]

I think Law might restructure. I'm not sure what he's going to command in the open market coming off a season ending injury. It would be good for both sides, because I don't think the Pats secondary has a suitable replacement lined up for his position. As I said before Samuel > Poole, but after that, I don't want Gay taking Law's place. They could always sign a veteran free agent however. Bring him back and Law-Samuel-Wilson-Harrison is the best secondary in the business IMO.

Other than that, offensive line and linebackers from the draft would be nice. Maybe they can package some picks to move up for a higher 1st rounder.

[Stillings]

I think Law might restructure. I'm not sure what he's going to command in the open market coming off a season ending injury. It would be good for both sides, because I don't think the Pats secondary has a suitable replacement lined up for his position. As I said before Samuel > Poole, but after that, I don't want Gay taking Law's place. They could always sign a veteran free agent however. Bring him back and Law-Samuel-Wilson-Harrison is the best secondary in the business IMO.

Other than that, offensive line and linebackers from the draft would be nice. Maybe they can package some picks to move up for a higher 1st rounder.

why restructure when he can make more $ in free agency? You can argue that he will not get the premium that he once commanded, but he will certainly get more money, probably much more money, on the open market than what the Pats want to pay him. His off season antics last year don't help his cause, either.

So why would he restructure?? I'd be astonished if he is back next year. Nice idea, but I just don't see the logic.

And since the Pats have made a nice living by finding solid contributors past the second round of the draft, I would again be surprised if they were to trade up. They need depth at a few positions, not any one stud player.

[Rover]

why restructure when he can make more $ in free agency? You can argue that he will not get the premium that he once commanded, but he will certainly get more money, probably much more money, on the open market than what the Pats want to pay him. His off season antics last year don't help his cause, either.

So why would he restructure?? I'd be astonished if he is back next year. Nice idea, but I just don't see the logic.

Depends on what the Pats consider to be an acceptable salary. That's something we don't know at this point. While I readily admit there's the possibility Law hits the jackpot in free agency, I think that's less likely now. Besides the injury, you have to look at the experience teams like the Redskins have had paying big money to older free agents. Its no longer the prefered way to rebuild your team. Of course, there's always the possibility Buffalo will give him whatever he wants (see Milloy, Lawyer). :eek:

The big thing to remember here also is that there's no viable option at this point to take Law's place. With Poole most likely gone, Samuel takes his place but who takes Law's? A rookie? Randall Gay? Can they sign a veteran? It seems to me the best thing to do is give Law an extension and work it out so that his cap # is reduced. Obviously if they offer him 5M a year he's gone, but if they get closer to last year's salary they might be able to work it out.

[Jason A]

Here's my 2005 Pats snapshot (sorry for the long post):

Offense:
WR: Branch, Johnson, and Sam are all signed for little money (combined ~ $1.7m); Brown’s cap figure would be almost $6m; Givens is a restricted FA, Patten is a FA.
TE: Graham, Watson, and Fauria are signed.
QB: Brady, Redman, and Davey are signed.
RB/FB: Dillon, Faulk, and Cobbs are signed; Pass is a FA.
OL: Offensive line could be a problem. Right now we have Koppen at center, Hochstein at guard, and Light at left tackle. That’s it, I think. Andruzzi and Neal are FAs; Gorin, Ashworth, and Klemm are restricted FAs.

Defense:
DL: Seymour, Wilfork, and Warren are signed; backups Traylor, Bailey, Hill, and Klecko are signed. Green is a restricted FA.
LB: McGinest, Vrabel, Johnson, and Bruschi are signed, as are backups Colvin, Phifer (though eh may retire), Banta-Cain, Izzo, and Chatham. The problem here is that this is a pretty old group.
DB/S: Law is signed but has a cap number of $12.5m. Cutting him would save about $10m against the cap. Poole is signed and would count for ~ $2.5m against the cap. Gay and Samuel combined would cost les than $1m against the cap. Harrison, Wilson, and Reid are signed. Gus Scott signed a one-year deal last year, then missed the entire season with an injury; he’s a restricted FA. Davis is a FA (he’s really an LB anyway, though).

K/P: Miller is signed through 2008. Vinatieri is a FA.

***

The thing about Belichick/Pioli is that they like to double-up on positions in the draft. For example, last year they grabbed two safeties. The year before they took two DTs. Two WRs out of five total picks in 2002; two TEs and two OTs in 2001; and two DEs, 2 OTs, and two RB/FBs in 2000. He seems to like to bring in young players with built-in, young competition. So it wouldn’t surprise me to see them focus on OL, LB, and DB in the draft, and take multiple players from each position.

Some other guesses:

(1) They’ll try to restructure with Law, but he won’t go as far as they’d like and they’ll cut him, then take the $10m and use it to do #2.
(2) They’ll resign Vinatieri and Givens to long-term deals.
(3) They like Green a lot but they’re so deep on the DL that they’ll lose him to a higher bidder.
(4) They’ll try to resign Andruzzi and Ashworth but will probably lose one to free agency. They’ll sign Neal or Gorin for little money and they won't pursue Klemm.
(5) They’ll restructure Brown and he’ll stay.

[Stillings]

Depends on what the Pats consider to be an acceptable salary. That's something we don't know at this point. While I readily admit there's the possibility Law hits the jackpot in free agency, I think that's less likely now. Besides the injury, you have to look at the experience teams like the Redskins have had paying big money to older free agents. Its no longer the prefered way to rebuild your team. Of course, there's always the possibility Buffalo will give him whatever he wants (see Milloy, Lawyer). :eek:

The big thing to remember here also is that there's no viable option at this point to take Law's place. With Poole most likely gone, Samuel takes his place but who takes Law's? A rookie? Randall Gay? Can they sign a veteran? It seems to me the best thing to do is give Law an extension and work it out so that his cap # is reduced. Obviously if they offer him 5M a year he's gone, but if they get closer to last year's salary they might be able to work it out.

The bottomline is that Law will go to the highest bidder and the Patriots will not be the highest bidder, based on past data; their needs; Law's antics, etc, etc, etc. Get used to him in another uniform.

They just won the SB without Law, I'd say they have a suitable replacement. Is there room for improvement? of course. Is it an area of weakness? seems to be. Do they need to fix it wo win? No.

They can fill the spot through the draft and free agency.

The Pats have an opportunity to get more value by dropping Law, why would they keep paying his salary??? It makes no sense.

[Stillings]

Here's my 2005 Pats snapshot (sorry for the long post):

Offense:
WR: Branch, Johnson, and Sam are all signed for little money (combined ~ $1.7m); Brown’s cap figure would be almost $6m; Givens is a restricted FA, Patten is a FA.
TE: Graham, Watson, and Fauria are signed.
QB: Brady, Redman, and Davey are signed.
RB/FB: Dillon, Faulk, and Cobbs are signed; Pass is a FA.
OL: Offensive line could be a problem. Right now we have Koppen at center, Hochstein at guard, and Light at left tackle. That’s it, I think. Andruzzi and Neal are FAs; Gorin, Ashworth, and Klemm are restricted FAs.

Defense:
DL: Seymour, Wilfork, and Warren are signed; backups Traylor, Bailey, Hill, and Klecko are signed. Green is a restricted FA.
LB: McGinest, Vrabel, Johnson, and Bruschi are signed, as are backups Colvin, Phifer (though eh may retire), Banta-Cain, Izzo, and Chatham. The problem here is that this is a pretty old group.
DB/S: Law is signed but has a cap number of $12.5m. Cutting him would save about $10m against the cap. Poole is signed and would count for ~ $2.5m against the cap. Gay and Samuel combined would cost les than $1m against the cap. Harrison, Wilson, and Reid are signed. Gus Scott signed a one-year deal last year, then missed the entire season with an injury; he’s a restricted FA. Davis is a FA (he’s really an LB anyway, though).

K/P: Miller is signed through 2008. Vinatieri is a FA.

***

The thing about Belichick/Pioli is that they like to double-up on positions in the draft. For example, last year they grabbed two safeties. The year before they took two DTs. Two WRs out of five total picks in 2002; two TEs and two OTs in 2001; and two DEs, 2 OTs, and two RB/FBs in 2000. He seems to like to bring in young players with built-in, young competition. So it wouldn’t surprise me to see them focus on OL, LB, and DB in the draft, and take multiple players from each position.

Some other guesses:

(1) They’ll try to restructure with Law, but he won’t go as far as they’d like and they’ll cut him, then take the $10m and use it to do #2.
(2) They’ll resign Vinatieri and Givens to long-term deals.
(3) They like Green a lot but they’re so deep on the DL that they’ll lose him to a higher bidder.
(4) They’ll try to resign Andruzzi and Ashworth but will probably lose one to free agency. They’ll sign Neal or Gorin for little money and they won't pursue Klemm.
(5) They’ll restructure Brown and he’ll stay.

Don't you think Fauria will retire or be cut? Do the Pats need 3 TEs?

[Jason A]

Don't you think Fauria will retire or be cut? Do the Pats need 3 TEs?Good question. I don't know, but I think the original plan when drafting Watson was that 2004 would be Fauria's last with NE. But his cap number is only $1m, so he's not breaking the bank. And Watson is untested. So maybe they bring him into camp and see what he can do?

Unless he retires, of course, in which case the decision is made for them.

[shrader]

Of course, there's always the possibility Buffalo will give him whatever he wants (see Milloy, Lawyer). :eek:

Say what you want, but that move has worked out for Buffalo. It's not like his $3.9 million cap figure is killing the Bills.

[pucksntape]

Oh, the irony.

(What the hell do the Packers have to do with whether or not the Patriots are a dynasty?)

Bruce, you seem to have this funny infatuation with Favre being this great QB. Sure, I agree he has some good individual stats, but Brady is the one who is 10-0 post season, and lead his team to 3 Superbowl victories.

I suppose in your mind, as one poster said you putthe Pats in the shower (yikes), you do not believe the Pats won 3 bowls. ;)

I hear they are going to rename the trohy the Belichick instead the Lombardi! LOL.

[Stillings]

Good question. I don't know, but I think the original plan when drafting Watson was that 2004 would be Fauria's last with NE. But his cap number is only $1m, so he's not breaking the bank. And Watson is untested. So maybe they bring him into camp and see what he can do?

Unless he retires, of course, in which case the decision is made for them.

Fauria is there for his hands (not his blocking). I think Watson can replace him nicely. Plus early in the year Graham caught a ton of passes. All of this adds up to Fauria's expendability (is that a word???). Remember, it is not all salary cap, these guys are taking up valuable roster spots. The Pats do not carry a whole lot of specialists....