Mr. WEO Posted March 20, 2013 Posted March 20, 2013 given what we have learned about the ease of calling buddys office, perhaps he really was. in hindsight im disappointed i didnt call up to chat about potential employment opportunities. Exactly! As they say, anyone can coach a team to a losing record.
JohnC Posted March 20, 2013 Posted March 20, 2013 (edited) Is Robert Kraft going to spin the contract numbers to make it look as if he is not the bad guy in the Welker departure? Probably so. But the Pats are simply following a business model that has worked for them for a very long time. They are very cautious about giving out big contracts to veteran players who they believe are on the downside of their careers. They have a history of letting long term players such as Seymore. Milloy, Bledsoe. Dion Branch etc.go, especially when an extended rich contract is desired by the affected player. New England is one of the most successful franchises in the NFL. They have their own way in evaluation players. They also have a very hardnosed approach to neogtiating contracts. Welker was probably very accurate in describing the Pats as being non yielding in negotiations. Their approach is far different from the losing Bills. They would never have given a player such as Kelsay or Fitz the kind of contracts they garnerd under Nix.They have a much better understanding of the relationship between value and talent than the Bills do. Without queston there is a very irritating arrogance to the way the Patriot organization is run. They are in the business to make money and to win games. Whether you like them or not you have to give them their due for their consistent level of success done in a financially responsible way. Edited March 20, 2013 by JohnC
TheLynchTrain Posted March 20, 2013 Author Posted March 20, 2013 do we know they were made up, or like i said earlier, does he possibly have a different set of qualifiers than you do? also, i think i saw that top 25 for 700m stat pretty early in FA (ie pre-steven jackson for instance) so it may have been just a few days outdated last up - is welker in the top 25 pay wise? id guess jackson isnt. but who lets facts get in the way of a rant about lack of fact checking. Thanks for the response. First off, Pro Bowl - I get it. I'm sure management throws away ALL Pro Bowl talk in negotiations, but I would speculate t doesn't matter whether a players an alternate due to injury or playoff rosters, etc. They'll still claim they made the Pro Bowl and the teams and broadcasters will continue to hype it. Like it or not, if you play or we're selected, its generally been said you're a "Pro Bowler." For the top 25/700 thing - have you seen a public list for the top 25 free agents? I asked that in my OP because I've looked and haven't found anything remote to it. Regarding 700 million for the top 25, is he talking about overall contracts and not guaranteed money? If so, he's talking out of both sides of his mouth there. He went on a long-winded rant about how the Pats* offer to Welker had something along the lines of more "real money" (i.e. guaranteed) than the Broncos. If he sets this measurement for "money" discussions, and then goes back to talking about total money (most of which players will never receive), his argument is worthless. On Welker (and Jackson) as I said, they may have a slim chance of making that list, but again who knows? Until I actually see a list I don't know, and that's why I didnt' include them in the count with the four "Pro Bowlers." My beef here is that no reporters even casually (at least publicly) took issue with those numbers thrown out by Kraft. They reported his numbers as fact because, gee, it was such a smart, well-informed quote. If he's talking throwing out numbers that may include qualifiers, why not question him on which qualifiers he's using - guaranteed vs non guaranteed? Pro Bowl starter vs. injury replacement? Like when Buddy said he was fielding 15 calls a day for the Bills HC job--before he settled on Chan Gailey? At least around Buffalo, there was pretty healthy skepticism by our media on this. No one believed Buddy on that, and it was obvious in the reporting after the statement.
NoSaint Posted March 20, 2013 Posted March 20, 2013 Thanks for the response. First off, Pro Bowl - I get it. I'm sure management throws away ALL Pro Bowl talk in negotiations, but I would speculate t doesn't matter whether a players an alternate due to injury or playoff rosters, etc. They'll still claim they made the Pro Bowl and the teams and broadcasters will continue to hype it. Like it or not, if you play or we're selected, its generally been said you're a "Pro Bowler." For the top 25/700 thing - have you seen a public list for the top 25 free agents? I asked that in my OP because I've looked and haven't found anything remote to it. Regarding 700 million for the top 25, is he talking about overall contracts and not guaranteed money? If so, he's talking out of both sides of his mouth there. He went on a long-winded rant about how the Pats* offer to Welker had something along the lines of more "real money" (i.e. guaranteed) than the Broncos. If he sets this measurement for "money" discussions, and then goes back to talking about total money (most of which players will never receive), his argument is worthless. On Welker (and Jackson) as I said, they may have a slim chance of making that list, but again who knows? Until I actually see a list I don't know, and that's why I didnt' include them in the count with the four "Pro Bowlers." My beef here is that no reporters even casually (at least publicly) took issue with those numbers thrown out by Kraft. They reported his numbers as fact because, gee, it was such a smart, well-informed quote. If he's talking throwing out numbers that may include qualifiers, why not question him on which qualifiers he's using - guaranteed vs non guaranteed? Pro Bowl starter vs. injury replacement? At least around Buffalo, there was pretty healthy skepticism by our media on this. No one believed Buddy on that, and it was obvious in the reporting after the statement. If you want to dig, go for it. Doesn't mean it's made up just because you don't know. It could be but I don't get the assume he's lying unless someone explains otherwise approach that I'm takinf from you. You could find the answers extremely quick on the top 25 - some napkin math after glancing at a top free agent list should answer most of that, and from there I imagine the rest falls into place... Or maybe you really do catch him in one. It just seems your angry at the pats and this is an excuse to vent it though. Just my gut reading the tone you seemed to take, which might be wrong.
benderbender Posted March 20, 2013 Posted March 20, 2013 Kraft lost any respect in my book when he used the death of his wife as cheer fodder for their last Super Bowl season. That's low even for the Cheatriots
Maybe Someday Posted March 20, 2013 Posted March 20, 2013 If you cross Kraft or the Pats*, you’ll never be allowed anywhere near that team again. Hell, he’d probably get the reporter that doubted him fired. Kraft likes to spin the numbers/facts to his benefit. Just like he stated that the Pats* offered WW more money than the Broncos did (even though the total is $2 mil less) because they offered more money in the 1st year and there’s no guaranty of the 2nd year.
JESSEFEFFER Posted March 20, 2013 Posted March 20, 2013 I'd say the CBA is working. Instead of paying stupid money to college players they can now spend stupid money on players that have some NFL pedigree. They have game tape and work history to build their resume. It's a better system, IMO.
leper65 Posted March 20, 2013 Posted March 20, 2013 Like when Buddy said he was fielding 15 calls a day for the Bills HC job--before he settled on Chan Gailey? In his defense, I called him at least twice a day...I don't know who the other 13 calls were.
Webster Guy Posted March 20, 2013 Posted March 20, 2013 Kraft lost any respect in my book when he used the death of his wife as cheer fodder for their last Super Bowl season. That's low even for the Cheatriots Yeah that was ridiculous. Brady throwing a touchdown and pointing to his Myra sticker on this shirt and then up to the heavens. If she was as great of a lady as everyone says she was, that kind of stuff would have her rolling over in her grave. I call Kraft "lucky Bob" because he won the QB draft lottery. Anyway I think lucky Bob was referring to ALL PRO, not pro bowlers. There is a big difference. He's confused, as usual. An all-pro is a player who is determined to be the best at their position as voted on by a selected panel of sports writers. One per position. Adrian Peterson and Peyton Manning were 2012 ALL PRO's, Arian Foster and Tom Brady were not. A pro-bowl player is any player who appears in the pro bowl based on votes by the fans, the players, and the coaches. In a lot of cases they get there because of injury or superbowl appearances by other guys and are chosen by the Pro Bowl coaches.
Mr. WEO Posted March 20, 2013 Posted March 20, 2013 For the top 25/700 thing - have you seen a public list for the top 25 free agents? I asked that in my OP because I've looked and haven't found anything remote to it. Regarding 700 million for the top 25, is he talking about overall contracts and not guaranteed money? If so, he's talking out of both sides of his mouth there. He went on a long-winded rant about how the Pats* offer to Welker had something along the lines of more "real money" (i.e. guaranteed) than the Broncos. If he sets this measurement for "money" discussions, and then goes back to talking about total money (most of which players will never receive), his argument is worthless. ." So you don't know if his numbers are inaccurate and you don't know exactly what he's referring to anyway--yet he's talking out both sides of his mouth and making things up? Awesome thread!
BuffaloBill Posted March 20, 2013 Posted March 20, 2013 Perhaps what Kraft is pointing to is that under the new free agency and players contract teams seem to be willing to pay a couple of stars then a large group of newer players at much lower salaries. It is squeezing guys in the middle as well as older (therefore higher paid) players out.
Bill Brasky Posted March 20, 2013 Posted March 20, 2013 You guys are right, he sucks. I'd much rather have Ralph Wilson as my owner
TheLynchTrain Posted March 21, 2013 Author Posted March 21, 2013 So you don't know if his numbers are inaccurate and you don't know exactly what he's referring to anyway--yet he's talking out both sides of his mouth and making things up? Awesome thread! Honestly, do you get some sick pleasure tearing other people down all the time? I've never seen one positive post from you on here. Now that I think of it, I've never seen you even add anything to any conversation either. Is there a point to all your shenanigans?
Cash Posted March 21, 2013 Posted March 21, 2013 You guys are right, he sucks. I'd much rather have Ralph Wilson as my owner Who's saying he sucks? Seems to me that this thread is about hating on Kraft, not saying he's incompetent.
Dan Posted March 21, 2013 Posted March 21, 2013 ... but who lets facts get in the way of a rant about lack of fact checking. This thread is why the press is the way it is. We have a thread about the inaccuracy of someone's facts; yet, not a single fact is given or supported to demonstrate the inaccuracies. You obviously don't need facts to make arguments or generate discussion - which is what the majority of the press is about now. Throw something out there every day, generate "likes" and hits and such, collect ad dollars.
Mr. WEO Posted March 21, 2013 Posted March 21, 2013 Honestly, do you get some sick pleasure tearing other people down all the time? I've never seen one positive post from you on here. Now that I think of it, I've never seen you even add anything to any conversation either. Is there a point to all your shenanigans? Look, I'm pointing out to you that this is a silly thread. That's different from "tearing (you) down". You are the one who felt compelled to start a thread where you admit you didn't even look up, let alone find any contradictory info to what you are dumping on Kraft and the press for. Then you say you're not sure what he was talking about anyway. It's gratuitous and not very convincing, so what was the point of posting it? You don't like Kraft--so why don't you contribute to any of the other Kraft realted threads? This thread "adds nothing" to that theme anyway. This thread is why the press is the way it is. We have a thread about the inaccuracy of someone's facts; yet, not a single fact is given or supported to demonstrate the inaccuracies. You obviously don't need facts to make arguments or generate discussion - which is what the majority of the press is about now. Throw something out there every day, generate "likes" and hits and such, collect ad dollars. What Dan says...
Recommended Posts