Bart Scott: The Latest Tom Jackson or Onto to Something?

TheoShmeo

Skrub's sympathy case
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
12,890
Boston, NY
So before anyone overreacts, I get that the topic I am about to introduce pales next to concerns about the talent level on the defensive side of the ball. I get that the team they just lost to is pretty damned good. I get that the Pats are going to lose some games. And to me, this is just an interesting little side point that is getting some national attention, as opposed to something that is more tangibly tied to the Pats success, like Gronk's health and whether the Pats will actually pressure opposing QBs going forward.

For those who missed it, Bart Scott essentially said on Showtime's NFL Show that Belichick doesn't value his players. His trading of Jones and Collins tells you that. He thinks it's all about him and the other coaches. And that unless you are one of the favored few, you are always subject to being dumped. And that some players will not go the extra mile given how much they are devalued.

So the question can be asked: Is Scott onto to something or is he just another Tom Jackson, on the verge of becoming another punch line. See also Dilfer, Trent.

The "Scott is just the next Tom Jackson" rationale is pretty easy.

- Scott is arguably a Pats and BB Hater.

- We've been down this path numerous times, and BB hasn't lost his team or the willingness of players to go the extra mile yet.

- Players in NE are willing to buy in, even when they don't understand the rationale, because the Pats win.

- It's easy to kick the Pats after a loss. It was one loss. This happened with Tom Jackson and the Buffalo trouncing in 2003.

- BB might have been sending or reiterating a message to the team against complacency and not doing your job, and that message might be absorbed in the long run.

- Scott may have just been looking for some attention and knew this would generate some heat.

On the other hand:

- Is it possible that we've reached a tipping point? Maybe the players have seen two contract year guys go over a relatively short span, and two superior athletes, and they are scratching their heads and are even disaffected by the moves, in sum.

- Maybe some of them tie this in to Mankins, and say "enough is enough."

- Maybe players in this generation are different than they were in prior periods. Millenials and all that.

- Maybe Collins was exceptionally popular and there is a personal hangover that matters.

****

If this belongs in the larger Collins thread, so be it. Please move it there if so. My assumption is that more threads are better but do what you will.

I am on the side of Bart Scott is Tom Jackson. And I am just as, if not more, concerned that the bigger problem is the impact Collins' departure has on the field. Not that I view that problem as huge. But on a relative basis, that concerns me more.

Still, I wanted to see if people here think this is a complete non-event, which I sort of expect, or if some posters here have some level of concern that BB might have gone a little too far this time from the "team/morale management" perspective.
 

j44thor

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
10,961
The average NFL career is what, about 3-5yrs? I doubt very, very much that Logan Ryan forgot how to play CB because he was too hurt and frustrated over Jamie Collins being traded. Even if you hate your coach (which doesn't apply here) you still want to look good on film so you get another chance..

If they had guaranteed contracts in the NFL this may have a tiny bit more credence (as opposed to 0%).

Bart Scott isn't "arguably" a Patriots hater, he is on the Mount Rushmore of Patriots haters along with Dungy and Tom Jackson.

Move along, nothing to see here.
 

Silverdude2167

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 9, 2006
4,683
Amstredam
The team is 7-2 and just lost to one of the few other good teams in the league while having a chance to tie/win the game at the end.

BB has not changed how he conducts business since 2001, he dumped Laywer at the start of 2003. He is 193 and 70 in that time frame.

This is sour grapes from someone who got beat over and over again by BB's teams of unvalued players.

Also I think we should keep in mind that the amount of turnover in the NFL is insane so this "feeling" if it exists may only exist from players who have left the Pats.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
90,016
Oregon
Along with the usual "who gives a flying fuck at a rolling doughnut about what Bart Scott thinks," doesn't this depend on whether Collins plays up to a level that would give the Patriots seller's remorse?
 

bernardsamuel

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2006
195
Denver, only physically
New threads are good, new threads with interesting topics are very good - thanks, Theo!
Here's my set of beliefs, fully realizing that I am opining while not playing with a full deck of info:
1. Bart Scott is indeed a hater first and may or may not make his way into being a commentator worthy of harking to. It's going to take a lot of work for him to get there.
2. Chandler Jones was not going to get a prized long-term contract offer from the Patriots from the moment that he became an addiction-risk.
3. Jamie Collins was going to get a take-it-or-leave-it less than maximal offer, because he had been doing too much free-lancing (see discussion on how two Denver touchdowns in the AFC conference final were viewed as attributable to free-lancing).
4. The remainder of the team would likely therefore view the two linebacker transactions as being within the realm of "business as usual at Patriot Place," rather than the setting of some insecurity-creating new precedent.
5. Gronk can keep the millennials in line, given how he himself as evolved from loose cannon to team captain, while sacrificing none of his personality even as he has been becoming a bit more restrained in exercising some facets of his personality.

Maybe not totally on-topic rather than just a tangent from my having mentioned Gronk: Gronk's BonJovi-impression commercial and Brady's new Goodell-baiting ad, besides being magnificently funny, do help make the case that it may be worth sacrificing some football contract dollars in return for staying with our football team and having enhanced opportunities for fame and fortune via endorsements and advertisements due to the cache of the Patriots. ...just another possible reason to be more "forgiving" with the tentativeness of continued employment with the Patriots.
 

InstaFace

The Ultimate One
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
21,754
Pittsburgh, PA
Who is Bart Scott?
The above answers are the right ones, but I'll add more color anyway.

Of course Belichick "values" his players. He has dozens of his former players speak reverently of him. He's a sentimental sap, nearly, when speaking of some of his favorites. Other than Brandon Spikes "4 years a slave" stuff, you basically never hear bad things. The ratio of comments like "for the first time since I joined the league, I feel like I'm part of a team that does things right and has a plan" to Spikes or Scott remarks is enormous.

What Belichick doesn't do is value his players over and above valuing winning games. A player is worth to him the net value of his contributions on the field minus his cap hit (i.e., the opportunity cost to having him), and the name of the game to him is, maximize that net value. e.g., Malcolm Butler has probably given him $10M/year+ of excess value above his rookie contract. Once that value flips to negative, Belichick minimizes and then jettisons that player. As he fucking should. Otherwise, you get Tom Benson-style management where you end up having a $30M cap hit for Drew Brees because of "marketing value" or some other dumbshit rationalization.

edit: Bart Scott thinks the league is about the players. Bill Belichick thinks the league is about the team winning games. One of them is still employed.
 

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
22,345
Philadelphia
Belichick must be a pretty good coach to have amassed a GOAT resume despite his players not wanting to go the extra mile. Think how many Super Bowls he could have won if his guys actually played hard.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
30,237
For those who missed it, Bart Scott essentially said on Showtime's NFL Show that Belichick doesn't value his players. His trading of Jones and Collins tells you that. He thinks it's all about him and the other coaches. And that unless you are one of the favored few, you are always subject to being dumped. And that some players will not go the extra mile given how much they are devalued.
Wow.

What I'm essentially saying is that Bart Scott's analysis doesn't stand up to any scrutiny whatsoever. And the bolded is the convenient, meaningless, circular crutch that empty minded dumbassess that provide "analysis" can use by forever re-defining "favored few." Replace that bit of empty word salad with "productive AND financially conducive to allowing the team to build a 63-man roster AND compete for the conference championship and Super Bowl EVERY FUCKING YEAR" and suddenly BB sounds like what every coach & GM aspire to, but very few do. Can Bart Scott name one single player EVER that BB didn't dump when he thought it was time to dump him because he was "one of the favored few."

If Bart Scott was running a team, he'd have 63 Jeff Fishers (the spectacularly mediocre coach with the outsized reputation, not the good player) on the roster and a steady stream of 6 to 9 win seasons.

He values players. He has said more times than I can count how its a players league and always has been. He just values players differently than Hall of Fame coach and General Manager Bart Scott does.

If only Logan Mankins had been one of the "favored few," maybe BB would have been much nicer than he was after the trade, when he unleashed this hostile, juvenile, bitter, unhinged, petty tirade:

“Logan Mankins is everything we would ever want in a football player. It is hard to imagine a better player at his position, a tougher competitor or a person to represent our program. He is one of the all-time great Patriots and the best guard I ever coached. Logan brought a quiet but unmistakable presence and leadership that will be impossible to duplicate. Unfortunately, this is the time of year when difficult decisions have to be made -- and this is one of the most difficult we will ever make -- but like every other decision it was made for what we feel is in the best interests of the team.”
 

kenneycb

Hates Goose Island Beer; Loves Backdoor Play
SoSH Member
Dec 2, 2006
16,090
Tuukka's refugee camp
I think my favorite part of the last 10 years is when the Patriots lose and the board has a collective aneurysm for a week.
 

Hatcher Steals Home

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
216
Belichick values the right (as defined by him) players and there is clear evidence supporting that point. The Patriots extended Ninkovich in the offseason and altered his bonus structure such that he would (well, could) make the same amount of money in 12 games as he would have in 16 games (PFT with details). Belichick granted Ebner leave to play Olympic rugby. The Patriots appear to promote/value/support the scout team more than most other NFL teams, as evidenced by the significance of the black jerseys (practice player of the week) (quick example article here).

I cannot recall off the top of my head, but last year the Patriots also either awarded an unearned incentive to one of the players or simply gave an unannounced bonus. In relatively quick googling, I am coming up empty.

It is unlikely we will ever hear what triggered the Collins to Cleveland trade beyond the Lombardi spin and the pending free agency (and pay day), but that's all discussed in the Collins trade thread.
 

kenneycb

Hates Goose Island Beer; Loves Backdoor Play
SoSH Member
Dec 2, 2006
16,090
Tuukka's refugee camp

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
I think it was Ninkovich (not the extension related to the PED suspension, an offseason bonus in '15). May have been one other one as well.
 

TheoShmeo

Skrub's sympathy case
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
12,890
Boston, NY
I think my favorite part of the last 10 years is when the Patriots lose and the board has a collective aneurysm for a week.
I knew there would be some replies like that.

And no, I have not lost my cookies, had an aneurysm or, more to the point, bought was Scott was selling. My post contained several caveats to make it clear that this is just a discussion point, not something that I buy into.

Agree or disagree with Scott, he said this on a national stage, it's getting some play out there in the sports world, and why not talk about it, if only just to shoot it down?

I mean, roundly shooting it down is cool, and as noted in the OP, I expected that. But the messenger here on SoSH gets it.

If nothing else, I think it's amusing that a shit like Bart Scott has joined the Tom Jackson and Trent Dilfer brigade. Here's to the ending being as it was in 2003 and 2014, and clips of his comments being part of the various championship videos. That's always fun.
 
Last edited:

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
34,368
People close to him describe a reliable friend, a voracious learner, an ardent student of the game, a man whose grim public demeanor hides sharp intelligence and understated humor. He engenders loyalty with both surprising kindness and utmost competence. “As a player, what more do you want?” former Patriots safety Lawyer Milloy said. “You don’t want that fluffy [stuff]. He just wanted us to be focused on ball.”
 

Rick Burlesons Yam Bag

Internet Cowboy, Turbo Accelerator, tOSU Denier
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Here's the big difference between Tom Jackson and Bart Scott. One was an incredible football player who is a ferociously intelligent human who said something that Patriot fans have held against him for over 13 years, the other is a maroon who tosses grenades left and right trying to attract attention. Bart Scott is the second guy.

Earlier this season:

http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/sports/eagles/Bart-Scott-Carson-Wentz-is-fools-gold.html

One of his main points was that both teams' defenses played 3-4 defenses........even though they didn't.......leading to......

http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/sports/eagles/CBS-analyst-Bart-Scott-Carson-Carson-Wentz-Fools-gold-I-was-wrong.html
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
24,651
where I was last at
I caught Bart Scott's "hot take" including how the Ravens appreciated great vets like Old Antler Spray

Boomer Esiason basically called him an idiot, and said he'd play for BB any day of the week, as playing for a great coach maximizes chances for team success.
 

ifmanis5

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 29, 2007
63,740
Rotten Apple
Here's the big difference between Tom Jackson and Bart Scott. One was an incredible football player who is a ferociously intelligent human who said something that Patriot fans have held against him for over 13 years, the other is a maroon who tosses grenades left and right trying to attract attention. Bart Scott is the second guy.

Earlier this season:

http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/sports/eagles/Bart-Scott-Carson-Wentz-is-fools-gold.html

One of his main points was that both teams' defenses played 3-4 defenses........even though they didn't.......leading to......

http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/sports/eagles/CBS-analyst-Bart-Scott-Carson-Carson-Wentz-Fools-gold-I-was-wrong.html
Did you mean Tom "They hate their coach" Jackson?
The same Teej who would pick the Pats on air hoping it would motivate the Jets to beat them? TJ was a terrific player and a good person but his anti-Pats hot takes and tirades (especially when Peyton went to Denver) were not imagined. It was as real as Jim Nantz's unnatural love for The Sheriff.
 

54thMA

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2012
10,154
Westwood MA
. Jamie Collins was going to get a take-it-or-leave-it less than maximal offer, because he had been doing too much free-lancing (see discussion on how two Denver touchdowns in the AFC conference final were viewed as attributable to free-lancing).
If memory serves me (and I've spend thousands on therapy to try to wipe the memory of that game out of my mind), on the first TD, he blew the coverage, on the second one, he got completely turned around and torched by the corpse of Owen Daniels.

Both were embarrassing, the second one was brutal.

And Jones was invisible in that game too by the way.
 

Rick Burlesons Yam Bag

Internet Cowboy, Turbo Accelerator, tOSU Denier
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Did you mean Tom "They hate their coach" Jackson?
The same Teej who would pick the Pats on air hoping it would motivate the Jets to beat them? TJ was a terrific player and a good person but his anti-Pats hot takes and tirades (especially when Peyton went to Denver) were not imagined. It was as real as Jim Nantz's unnatural love for The Sheriff.
He picked the Pats hoping it would motivate the Jets to beat them? I mean......seriously? He said that the Patriots hate their coach at a time when it was hardly unfeasible. How many guys have come back to play at the Patriots, or have taken discounts to play there, etc? I mean....there is a difference between "They hate playing on his teams" and "They hate the guy." He is a good dude and he has stepped up a number of times talking about some of the real bullshit in the league.
 

ifmanis5

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 29, 2007
63,740
Rotten Apple
He picked the Pats hoping it would motivate the Jets to beat them? I mean......seriously? He said that the Patriots hate their coach at a time when it was hardly unfeasible. How many guys have come back to play at the Patriots, or have taken discounts to play there, etc? I mean....there is a difference between "They hate playing on his teams" and "They hate the guy." He is a good dude and he has stepped up a number of times talking about some of the real bullshit in the league.
He did that and he said that. Google around you can find it. In fact, Bart Scott, former Jets LB and titular thread bearer, even called out TJ's pick after the Jets beat the Pats in 2011.
I'll save you the trouble of searching: http://archive.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/articles/2011/01/21/jackson_takes_hit_on_his_credibility/
TJ is a good dude and was nice to me as well. I hate calling him out but he hates the Pats. Absolutely hates them, the org and BB. He barely hid that for a long time. I don't miss him on air. Bart is just trolling and should be ignored for the clown he is. TJ actually had credibility at one point.
 

Rick Burlesons Yam Bag

Internet Cowboy, Turbo Accelerator, tOSU Denier
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Trying to turn this into something that he did as an anti-Pats measure is pretty laughable, as dumb as his comments were (although please note....he was also being attacked by none other than Mr. Scott), this pretty much tells you everything you need to know:

“As a defensive player, I certainly knew that they had a chance to win and I thought that they certainly might win the game. But I knew when they saw 30-10 that I think they would be reminded of what most people were feeling. And I knew they needed to be a little angrier going on the field.”

"I thought that they certainly MIGHT" win the game pretty much means "I thought the Patriots were going to win the game." The whole "I was motivating the Jets" was pure "How do I get Bart Scott to not act like an idiot?"
 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
This whole thread is pretty laughable on about every dimension imaginable. Your standard drop in to poke Pats fans is harmless fun. But you called out a ifmanis because you didn't know Jackson said it. He said it. Is what it is. Its cool.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
90,016
Oregon
This whole thread is pretty laughable on about every dimension imaginable. Your standard drop in to poke Pats fans is harmless fun. But you called out a ifmanis because you didn't know Jackson said it. He said it. Is what it is. Its cool.
It's
 

TheoShmeo

Skrub's sympathy case
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
12,890
Boston, NY
Yammer, you really think Tom Jackson is "ferociously intelligent"? I mean, I get your point about their being a wide gulf between him and Bart Scott, an angry turd, but I don't remember every hearing Jackson make a point and thinking that he or it was particularly insightful.

This is not Patriots Bias talking. Hell, I can't think of a Boston Villain I hated more than A-Rod in recent history and I have to admit that he was pretty, pretty good as an analyst during the World Series. I'm actually looking forward to hearing more of him. I've never looked forward to getting Tom Jackson's take on, well, anything.
 

Saints Rest

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
A number of posters have noted how the Pats have treated well their players (Wilfork, Mankins, Nink, Vollmer, Ebner, et al.). But the other way to look at it is to try to construct a list of players who were cut or traded (and if you wanted to stretch it, you could include players who weren't re-signed as FAs) who proved the Patriots wrong in their choice to say goodbye.
Milloy was a solid player for a number of years but never again made the Pro Bowl after leaving NE.
Pretty much the same for Seymour.
Mankins and Wilfork had similar post-Patriot careers for a couple years as esteemed and contributing elder statesmen on young teams.
Bledsoe had one decent year.
Deion Branch was a solid wideout for Seattle but no great shakes.
Who else?
Who are the players that BB dumped out of spite/his own ego who proved him wrong?
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
Yammer, you really think Tom Jackson is "ferociously intelligent"? I mean, I get your point about their being a wide gulf between him and Bart Scott, an angry turd, but I don't remember every hearing Jackson make a point and thinking that he or it was particularly insightful.

This is not Patriots Bias talking. Hell, I can't think of a Boston Villain I hated more than A-Rod in recent history and I have to admit that he was pretty, pretty good as an analyst during the World Series. I'm actually looking forward to hearing more of him. I've never looked forward to getting Tom Jackson's take on, well, anything.
Tom Jackson is old school, Bart is new.

Agree with Yammer's post in the main. TJ's blood was and remains and always will be orange. Given the rivalry, and given TJ's probable conviction at the time that BB was several grades above everyone else, he seized on Milloy and probably was taken aback by "arrogance." He hoped BB had lit himself on fire, so he said it.

Bart is coming from a different place. For one thing, his rage is fueled by the Baltimore angle (you have to be immersed in it to understand it: I have a front row in the surgical theater). But more fundamentally, he is part of a generation of NFL players who wish to be treated like NBA players. Players rule one League; coaches and others the other -- indeed the players' faces are masked by helmets. BB Is a poster boy for the NFL, even though a renegade -- team matters, individuals matter less. So he's a breathing reminder that you're not in the NBA, and that fuels Bart's resentment.
 

pappymojo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2010
6,667
Bart Scott signed with the Ravens as an undrafted free agent. You would think that he would understand the difference between how a team treats an underperforming, high draft pick who is coming to the end of his rookie contract and how a team treats it's players.

A team can not retain all of its players through all of their contracts.

My take is that if you are a high draft pick player and you want to get paid by the Patriots after your rookie contract runs out, you better be working and producing at a high level. Otherwise, they will be just as happy to fill in your production on the cheap and spend the money elsewhere on the roster.
 

Rick Burlesons Yam Bag

Internet Cowboy, Turbo Accelerator, tOSU Denier
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Yammer, you really think Tom Jackson is "ferociously intelligent"? I mean, I get your point about their being a wide gulf between him and Bart Scott, an angry turd, but I don't remember every hearing Jackson make a point and thinking that he or it was particularly insightful.

This is not Patriots Bias talking. Hell, I can't think of a Boston Villain I hated more than A-Rod in recent history and I have to admit that he was pretty, pretty good as an analyst during the World Series. I'm actually looking forward to hearing more of him. I've never looked forward to getting Tom Jackson's take on, well, anything.
Yeah, he really is. I will grant that he isn't going to MIT in the offseason, there is probably a "for a football player" caveat, but he is a guy who does his thinking on social issues and problems faced by players, as well as the league and does a good job of:

a) Having the balls to speak out on these issues, and
b) Speaking eloquently and gaining followership on these issues (to some extent.....I still don't know how seriously anyone takes DV, which he has been unforgiving on since the 90s when it was very much swept under the rug).

Being somewhat blunt, if it is surprising to you that Tom Jackson is considered one of the best football commentators out there, my hunch is that you are struggling with your own biases. He is very well regarded and deservedly so.
 
Last edited:

kenneycb

Hates Goose Island Beer; Loves Backdoor Play
SoSH Member
Dec 2, 2006
16,090
Tuukka's refugee camp
Bart Scott was extremely intelligent on the Broke 30 for 30. He's emotional and fiery and may not like the Pats given he played on two of their biggest rivals of the last decade. News at 11.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
37,055
Hingham, MA
I just watched the segment. Do you know the first name Scott mentioned as part of the core 4 or 5 favored players? The very first name. Not Brady. Not McCourty. Not Gronk. Not Hightower. Patrick Chung. Same guy BB let walk in free agency after his rookie contract expired. Nice "analysis".
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
37,055
Hingham, MA
Scott is dripping with hatred and bias in the segment. He talked about how loyal the Steelers were to Polamalu when he was declining. Well last I checked the Steelers haven't won a title since 2009. That's going great for them. They are 4-5 this year. When was the last time the Pats had a losing record more than 3 games into the season? He mentioned the Ravens to with Ray Lewis. But he conveniently omitted Haloti Ngata from the discussion. The championship winning nose tackle they traded away. At the end of the segment Scott said Belichick isn't loyal to anyone but himself. You could feel the hatred oozing out of Scott. And he is wrong. BB is loyal to nothing but winning games for the Patriots. Does anything else matter?
 

pappymojo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2010
6,667
I don't know about the spite/ego part, but I think Vinatieri is a candidate.
This type of discussion just seems fundamentally wrong to me. The Patriots have let players go via free agency and trades, and some of those players have gone on to continue to play at a high level (I would include Vinatieri and Seymour in this group) but that doesn't mean that Belichick was proven wrong.

Roster construction is a very fluid thing. It is not simply about how good the lost player is. It is not simply about how much of a salary the lost player is going to make. It is not simply about whether or not that lost player is going to be worth their increased salary. Other factors play into these decisions.

How do you think the lost will progress/decline over the course of their new contract? How coachable is the lost player? How much of a fit is the player's skill set with the team's philosophy? What is the team's philosophy? Will the team be transitioning to a new alingment/scheme/philosphy in the near future? How important of a position does the lost player play for the team's philosophy and scheme?

What players are available to replace the lost player (both on the team currently, available as a free agent the following year and available through the upcoming draft)? How much will the replacement player earn? How good is the replacement player?

How is the rest of the team currently constructed? Are there other players on the team that have looming salary increases and are those other players a safer bet to to provide value to the team at their increased salary? Are there other holes or deficiencies on the roster currently or in the near future that need to be addressed as a priority over the hole created by the absence of the lost player?

What sort of compensation will the team receive for the lost player?

Let's take Richard Seymour for example. He was a great, great player. By trading him the Patriots got a first round draft pick that Tom E. Curran thinks is still paying off for the Patriots, and they freed up money to pay other players on their roster.

http://www.csnne.com/new-england-patriots/patriots-still-reaping-rewards-seymour-deal

The direct compensation from the Raiders – Oakland’s first-round pick in the 2011 NFL Draft (which turned out to be the 17th overall) – was spent on Nate Solder.

Solder’s entering his fifth NFL season and hasn’t missed a game.

But the ripple effect from that deal is really where the Patriots cleaned up. During the 2011 draft, the Patriots dealt their own first-round pick – the 28th overall selection – to the Saints in exchange for the Saints first-rounder in 2012 and a second-rounder, the 56th overall pick.

Had the Patriots not made the Seymour deal, they wouldn’t have had just that 28th pick and probably wouldn’t have been inclined to deal out of the first round. But they did and with the 56th pick they took Shane Vereen.

The Saints first-rounder in 2012 wound up being the 27th overall pick so entering the 2012 draft, the Pats had the 27th and 31st overall picks.

Not for long. First, the Patriots swung a deal with Cincinnati to move up to 21 by sending the Bengals the 27th overall pick and a third-rounder (93 overall). The Patriots took Chandler Jones with the 21st pick.

The Patriots then packaged their own pick with a fourth-rounder to move up six spots and select Donta Hightower. The ripple from Seymour on that trade and selection isn’t very large. But you still have to project that entering that draft with two first-rounders allowed them an aggressive first-round mindset if the board went their way.

And it did.
 
Last edited:

Phil Plantier

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 7, 2002
3,419
All Vinatieri's replacement has done is become the franchise's all-time leading scorer. That arrogant BB!
I guess I was unclear on the point I was trying to make. Vinatieri is never considered on these lists because his replacement has been really good, but is that the right standard? If Roberts turns out to be better than he looked last week, does that make the Collins trade look better, regardless of how Collins does?
 

Rick Burlesons Yam Bag

Internet Cowboy, Turbo Accelerator, tOSU Denier
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
A number of posters have noted how the Pats have treated well their players (Wilfork, Mankins, Nink, Vollmer, Ebner, et al.). But the other way to look at it is to try to construct a list of players who were cut or traded (and if you wanted to stretch it, you could include players who weren't re-signed as FAs) who proved the Patriots wrong in their choice to say goodbye.
Milloy was a solid player for a number of years but never again made the Pro Bowl after leaving NE.
Pretty much the same for Seymour.
Mankins and Wilfork had similar post-Patriot careers for a couple years as esteemed and contributing elder statesmen on young teams.
Bledsoe had one decent year.
Deion Branch was a solid wideout for Seattle but no great shakes.
Who else?
Who are the players that BB dumped out of spite/his own ego who proved him wrong?
This is a near impossible bar to clear and I am not sure that you can make any definitive statement.

With that said.....one of the things that is fascinating about the Patriots success has been how narrow the margin has been in every playoff run - both the years they have won and the years they have lost. There has been a bounce of the ball, or a call, or an injury, or a play selection that has either led to them lifting a Lombardi in the process (From tuck rule to a pass playcall at the goal line), or getting knocked out (A guy who would never catch another ball in the NFL making the play of his life, Gronkowski getting injured, Wilfork slipping and allowing a first down on a pivotal 3rd down). Other than the year that Baltimore really beat them soundly and Brady got booed, most every playoff run has been tight (NB: I could google this to get actual scores, but I am way too lazy for that).

Arguably the most "coin tossy" of their SB victories was the last one. You had the ref screwups in Baltimore on the Hoowamnui stuff ( you need to get confirmation from the defensive captain that he understands. This was not done. I personally think that the Ravens were given enough time to make their substitutions on at least one of the plays, but I wouldn't say that on Ravensluverz.com) and then the Butler play.

In the hypothetical where they don't win that Super Bowl, they have now gone ten+ seasons without lifting a Lombardi despite having two potential GOATs landing in their laps outside of the first round. Would you feel as confident saying that letting go of that talent early was the right move in that situation? I honestly don't know.
 

Rick Burlesons Yam Bag

Internet Cowboy, Turbo Accelerator, tOSU Denier
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
I just watched the segment. Do you know the first name Scott mentioned as part of the core 4 or 5 favored players? The very first name. Not Brady. Not McCourty. Not Gronk. Not Hightower. Patrick Chung. Same guy BB let walk in free agency after his rookie contract expired. Nice "analysis".
Exactly. Seriously, the guy is not smart.
 

Saints Rest

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
This is a near impossible bar to clear and I am not sure that you can make any definitive statement.

With that said.....one of the things that is fascinating about the Patriots success has been how narrow the margin has been in every playoff run - both the years they have won and the years they have lost. There has been a bounce of the ball, or a call, or an injury, or a play selection that has either led to them lifting a Lombardi in the process (From tuck rule to a pass playcall at the goal line), or getting knocked out (A guy who would never catch another ball in the NFL making the play of his life, Gronkowski getting injured, Wilfork slipping and allowing a first down on a pivotal 3rd down). Other than the year that Baltimore really beat them soundly and Brady got booed, most every playoff run has been tight (NB: I could google this to get actual scores, but I am way too lazy for that).

Arguably the most "coin tossy" of their SB victories was the last one. You had the ref screwups in Baltimore on the Hoowamnui stuff ( you need to get confirmation from the defensive captain that he understands. This was not done. I personally think that the Ravens were given enough time to make their substitutions on at least one of the plays, but I wouldn't say that on Ravensluverz.com) and then the Butler play.

In the hypothetical where they don't win that Super Bowl, they have now gone ten+ seasons without lifting a Lombardi despite having two potential GOATs landing in their laps outside of the first round. Would you feel as confident saying that letting go of that talent early was the right move in that situation? I honestly don't know.
But "football is a game of inches" we are always told. One could easily argue that the amazing thing in this run has been not the fact of only one Lombardi since 2004, considering TB & Gronk, but that short of those two, can you name one sure fire HOF player in that run? Randy Moss maybe/probably. Who else?
Perhaps BBs strategy of roster-building which emphasizes the importance of players 40-60 on the depth chart is just as important (if not more so) than the standard strategy of loading up the top of your roster (cf. Indy ca 2001-2008, Denver ca 2012-2016).
 

Van Everyman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2009
26,993
Newton
Isn't the real issue here that BB is a dual coach/GM and Bart Scott spent the majority of his career playing for a "player's coach"? Rex, for all his faults, doesn't have to make the kind of personnel decisions BB does. He's free to be all in for his players, where BB has more responsibilities and, hence, has a different role.

With that said.....one of the things that is fascinating about the Patriots success has been how narrow the margin has been in every playoff run - both the years they have won and the years they have lost. There has been a bounce of the ball, or a call, or an injury, or a play selection that has either led to them lifting a Lombardi in the process (From tuck rule to a pass playcall at the goal line), or getting knocked out (A guy who would never catch another ball in the NFL making the play of his life, Gronkowski getting injured, Wilfork slipping and allowing a first down on a pivotal 3rd down). Other than the year that Baltimore really beat them soundly and Brady got booed, most every playoff run has been tight (NB: I could google this to get actual scores, but I am way too lazy for that).

Arguably the most "coin tossy" of their SB victories was the last one. You had the ref screwups in Baltimore on the Hoowamnui stuff ( you need to get confirmation from the defensive captain that he understands. This was not done. I personally think that the Ravens were given enough time to make their substitutions on at least one of the plays, but I wouldn't say that on Ravensluverz.com) and then the Butler play.

In the hypothetical where they don't win that Super Bowl, they have now gone ten+ seasons without lifting a Lombardi despite having two potential GOATs landing in their laps outside of the first round. Would you feel as confident saying that letting go of that talent early was the right move in that situation? I honestly don't know.
This is a really interesting point that has occurred to me as well. Even the most dominant team in their run--the 2004-2005 team--was one hobbled TO run to the end zone away from losing to an Andy Reid team (yes, that was probably my way of sticking to you, Yams).

Also, what was the Wilfork slip? I don't remember that but it's possible I blocked it out amongst all the bad juju plays.