I guess you forgot that the Pats rarely hit a homerun in the draft even though they have 136 picks every year. They did well in the late 90's and early 2000's. Since then it's been pretty much a crap shoot so far as I can tell. Keep trading those picks away till next year while Brady creeps towards the twilight of his career Belichick.
The Pats don't need to hit a home run in the draft, it's not like they missed the playoffs and are rebuilding. Yea, that tradedown shit worked well earlier in the decade, but I agree with you, they need to utlize ALL their picks while Brady is still around.
They only reason they don't need to hit a home run because they hit a grand slam in the 6th round in 2000. The fact that the Pats have 2 first rounders and 2 second rounders in this draft doesn't scare anyone or make anyone but Pats homers believe they'll be better in 2012. BB will probably just trade back again, and whiff on the picks he does take. Brady will carry the team to wherever they go in 2012 and the draft picks probably won't have much of an effect.
I would love to see Belichick win a Super Bowl without Brady, or better yet. Take over a down franchise and turn them into a contender. To bad we will never see it, because Belichicks not capable of doing it.
I wouldn't be surprised if they use some of their picks this year to move up or package them to Houston for Mario Williams. I'll be pissed if BB starts trading down again.
They should probably trade both first round picks for Mario Williams. It would be a great move. he's a free agent ...
How many Super Bowls would Noll won without Bradshaw, Walsh without Montana or the Cowboys without Aikman? Your arguement is pure speculation.
I know he is a FA. Work out a sign and trade or Franchise Tag and trade. Houston gets out of the contract while picking up draft picks as well. That's what the Pats did with Matt Cassel.
If they franchise him they aren't going to trade him. That's a huge risk. They will re-sign him or let him test the market.
Texans are in the same boat with Arian Foster. They also are really squeezed by the cap. Why let him test the market and get absolutely nothing in return?
Why would BB not trade a first and second round pick down every year? He is essentially getting better picks in return each year because he is trading them to teams who are worse than him. Pats came in 2nd this year, we get the 31st pick. Since we traded to the Saints last year, we "move up" 4 picks to 27th, and can trade the 31 for a second rounder next year, preferably to a team like the Redskins, which in return will give us better position next year. What isn't to like about this strategy? Obviously you can go all in, but you risk flexibility for future years.
I'm sure you watched our secondary, pass rush and vertical WR threat this year. It's time to stop trading down and fill some needs with impact players.
If you are going to knock coaches for winning with good players, then you must not want any coaches in the Hall of Fame.
Because the cap hit on Williams would be 23 million. If they do that and then a deal falls through they are stuck with it and him. Plus if you franchise someone aren't you then obligated to pay him tha money no matter what? It would be on the Texans for that 23 million.
putting the franchise tag on mario williams is hard because it would push his salary to something like 23 million. no team is going to give up picks for that price.
All three of those teams u named had great D. So how many SB would they had won if they had 31 rank D like the Pats? The same as the Pats did NONE.
The late George Young not only wasn't a fan of BB's, he reportedly gave him NEGATIVE reviews to teams inquiring about hiring him as a HC. Maybe it was also a way to get back at Parcells, I don't know.
Im not trying to diss belichick. All im trying to say is coaching overrated. I bet all 32 coaches today could have won a ring if they had Peyton Manning for decade. Does that make that coach great because he won a ring? hell no
