Have you grown numb to our lack participation in free agency

[AU-panther]

3 hours ago, GoobyPls said:

How do you know we won’t do well with signing premium FA if we never even try??? Kalil was not a premium FA he was a bum in Minnesota and  the only other team that wanted him were the Viking themselves at a cheap discount.

 

 

We have been “shopping frugally” for 20+ years it has gotten us a 190-193 record.

Somebody thought he was a premium FA or they wouldn't have signed him.  Either way it is irrelevant to your title.  Maybe it should read "Have you grown numb to our ability to sign GOOD free agents"

[GoobyPls]

8 minutes ago, AU-panther said:

Somebody thought he was a premium FA or they wouldn't have signed him.  Either way it is irrelevant to your title.  Maybe it should read "Have you grown numb to our ability to sign GOOD free agents"

By somebody you mean Gettleman was dumb and desperate enough to sign him , even though his market wasn’t really that big, especially at that value.

[X-Clown]

7 minutes ago, GoobyPls said:

I think I have debunked this patriots myth a 1000 times.

 

The patriots are ten times more active in free agency than we are. Two years ago they gave Stephon Gilmore 50+ million dollars, they also signed the number 1 TE in free agency that year with Bennett. A couple years before that they signed Revis and Browner in the same off season. They also are constantly making trades like Gordon or Cooks.

If you're debunking myths, you should at least get the details correct and provide appropriate context. Bennett was obtained in a trade with the Bears with one year left on his contract. He was asking for more money than they thought he was worth so he left after a pretty good year. They gave Revis a one year prove it deal and then let him go to let the Jets overpay him. Brandon Browner was maybe the 10th highest paid CBs from that FA class (even though he was a big name), and they cut him the next offseason.  These moves are quite a bit different from the contracts that

Gilmore is the lone signing that had a significant signing bonus and length of a deal. They are able to swing trades because they keep flexibility with spending, accumulating draft picks, and take advantage of when an asset is available or another team is desperate. They are not afraid to let good players walk or to trade them before a big pay day. It is not because they print out a list from NFL.com of the top free agents and pay the player whatever it takes to "fill a hole".

[X-Clown]

5 hours ago, GoobyPls said:

Yeah we have more trophy’s in our SB case than those teams

 

 

oh wait

Ok, so if I had used the example of the Jacksonville Jaguars and Buffalo Bills (who do the same thing and also haven't won a Super Bowl), then I guess that validates my point to you? I guess I can't use the Jets as an example because they won a Super Bowl in 1968?

[GoobyPls]

11 minutes ago, X-Clown said:

If you're debunking myths, you should at least get the details correct and provide appropriate context. Bennett was obtained in a trade with the Bears with one year left on his contract. He was asking for more money than they thought he was worth so he left after a pretty good year. They gave Revis a one year prove it deal and then let him go to let the Jets overpay him. Brandon Browner was maybe the 10th highest paid CBs from that FA class (even though he was a big name), and they cut him the next offseason.  These moves are quite a bit different from the contracts that

Gilmore is the lone signing that had a significant signing bonus and length of a deal. They are able to swing trades because they keep flexibility with spending, accumulating draft picks, and take advantage of when an asset is available or another team is desperate. They are not afraid to let good players walk or to trade them before a big pay day. It is not because they print out a list from NFL.com of the top free agents and pay the player whatever it takes to "fill a hole".

Bennett was pretty much seen as a FA since the bears put him out their as trade mbait, and my point still stands with Revis and Browner.

 

The patriots have always been aggressive in free agency (trades count as FA) and that’s not gonna change cause you put context to it. When was the last the panthers signed someone of Revis’s caliber? Or even Browners caliber? Or how about trading for a pro bowl player like Brandin Cooks? 

 

Let me here the excuses

[GoobyPls]

14 minutes ago, X-Clown said:

Ok, so if I had used the example of the Jacksonville Jaguars and Buffalo Bills (who do the same thing and also haven't won a Super Bowl), then I guess that validates my point to you? I guess I can't use the Jets as an example because they won a Super Bowl in 1968?

Funny how you don’t mention the team that beat us in the SB cause it doesn’t fit your narrative, or what about the eagles who also went heavy in free agency.

[AU-panther]

1 hour ago, GoobyPls said:

By somebody you mean Gettleman was dumb and desperate enough to sign him , even though his market wasn’t really that big, especially at that value.

I never said it was a smart move, just fit the definition of a big money free agent signing.

[AggieLean]

No.

[X-Clown]

On ‎3‎/‎12‎/‎2019 at 4:57 PM, GoobyPls said:

Bennett was pretty much seen as a FA since the bears put him out their as trade mbait, and my point still stands with Revis and Browner.

 

The patriots have always been aggressive in free agency (trades count as FA) and that’s not gonna change cause you put context to it. When was the last the panthers signed someone of Revis’s caliber? Or even Browners caliber? Or how about trading for a pro bowl player like Brandin Cooks? 

 

Let me here the excuses

If you can't understand the difference between signing high profile free agents to long term contracts with big guarantees, and signing guys on one year prove it deals and think they are the same strategy then there's really no point in having this discussion. Also, I'm dying at the assertion that trading is the the exact same thing as free agency. I can't HERE this lame argument, so I'm dropping out on that topic.

On ‎3‎/‎12‎/‎2019 at 4:58 PM, GoobyPls said:

Funny how you don’t mention the team that beat us in the SB cause it doesn’t fit your narrative, or what about the eagles who also went heavy in free agency. 

I gave you six or seven teams who spend heavily in free agency every year who are pitiful, you cherry pick two specific examples of teams in two specific years that I will break down in just a minute which probably will go right over your head.

The Broncos went all in because they had Peyton Manning on his last legs and had lots of key contributors on rookie deals or below market contracts that allowed them to make the push to sign the Demarcus Wares of the world. None of that would have mattered of course, if they weren't gifted the Super Bowl as part of Peyton Manning's retirement package.

The Eagles are spending heavily in free agency because they have a star QB on a rookie deal. Seattle did the same thing when Russell Wilson was a rookie, the Rams are doing that now with Jared Goff, and the Chiefs will do that while they can with Patrick Mahomes. They won't be able to do this once their QB gets his second contract.

Why couldn't we have done this when Cam and Luke were both on their rookie deals? Well guess what, we did......except our GM spent the money like a drunk on Amazon at 3 a.m on the core of a 2-14 team.  All of that might have been OK if the drafts  from 2009-2011 weren't complete disasters except for Cam and Hardy.

 

[Mr. Scot]

4 minutes ago, X-Clown said:

Also, I'm dying at the assertion that trading is the the exact same thing as free agency.

He's not the only one who's espoused that dumbass notion recently

[GoobyPls]

On 3/14/2019 at 10:30 AM, X-Clown said:

If you can't understand the difference between signing high profile free agents to long term contracts with big guarantees, and signing guys on one year prove it deals and think they are the same strategy then there's really no point in having this discussion. Also, I'm dying at the assertion that trading is the the exact same thing as free agency. I can't HERE this lame argument, so I'm dropping out on that topic.

I gave you six or seven teams who spend heavily in free agency every year who are pitiful, you cherry pick two specific examples of teams in two specific years that I will break down in just a minute which probably will go right over your head.

The Broncos went all in because they had Peyton Manning on his last legs and had lots of key contributors on rookie deals or below market contracts that allowed them to make the push to sign the Demarcus Wares of the world. None of that would have mattered of course, if they weren't gifted the Super Bowl as part of Peyton Manning's retirement package.

The Eagles are spending heavily in free agency because they have a star QB on a rookie deal. Seattle did the same thing when Russell Wilson was a rookie, the Rams are doing that now with Jared Goff, and the Chiefs will do that while they can with Patrick Mahomes. They won't be able to do this once their QB gets his second contract.

Why couldn't we have done this when Cam and Luke were both on their rookie deals? Well guess what, we did......except our GM spent the money like a drunk on Amazon at 3 a.m on the core of a 2-14 team.  All of that might have been OK if the drafts  from 2009-2011 weren't complete disasters except for Cam and Hardy.

 

Did they or did they not sign Revis? That’s a yes or know answer. You just moving the goal post cause it doesn’t fit your narrative. And trading players is a part of free agency, why do you think it happens in the same timespan. Many teams trade for the a player just for they won’t be a free agent.

 

Now you are making excuses for SB winning teams LOL. I can literally breakdown the last 8 or so SB winners and how they have all been active free agency, at least way more than us. Inactivity in free agency gets you know where and that’s why we continue the cycle of mediocrity. Dumpster diving doesn’t count as big free agency moves.

[Moo Daeng]

Just stop embarrassing yourself. 

[Khyber53]

Our approach to free agency has been the right one. 

Sure, things are looking exciting in Cleveland right now, Oakland, too. Cleveland. Oakland.... Cleveland and Oakland...

Cleveland and Oakland.

Just hoping that will sink in.