Which are going to seem even worse in situations like Ridley when they’re competing against no state income tax states and Mass has a 5% and another 4% due to the millionaires tax. So not just beat $23m but probably have to be north of $26 to make a real difference.“People want to play for winners”
Yet we saw Tennessee, Washington and Carolina spend massive dollars and bring in plenty of new players. Brian Burns had no issue re-signing with the Giants after the trade. Arizona has Kyler Murray, granted, but still a bad roster overall and landed a couple key players.
Players will go where the money is usually. Sure, sometimes a guy wants to play with his buddy, or a guy at the end is chasing a ring. But money talks.
The difference between the Pats and the other awful teams from last year is those other teams are willing to pay top dollar for less than top talent and the Pats don’t seem to be.
Let’s not kid ourselves into thinking the Raiders, who landed arguably the biggest prize (Wilkins) of free agency are too much different than the Pats. Bad roster with a young “players coach”.
Unless Wolf ends up to be a historically great drafter, they’re going to need to shell out some “bad” contracts because that’s the nature of free agency.
While I agree money usually is all that matters, I disagree with the last part. Oh maybe once every 5 years, but generally successful teams Don't spend much of their time shopping the top of the FA market. They draft well, trade well, extend their best guys early when possible and shop for role players. The teams that shop top of the market frequently are usually poorly run teams.Unless Wolf ends up to be a historically great drafter, they’re going to need to shell out some “bad” contracts because that’s the nature of free agency.
The teams that shop top of the market are the ones who already suck, have cap space because they don't have good players worth extending and end up having to pay a premium to acquire talent. It's generally a consequence of sucking (mostly through drafting poorly), not the cause of it. But then you have all that cash and spending money doesn't make it so you'll have less draft resources, so what are you going to do, not spend it?While I agree money usually is all that matters, I disagree with the last part. Oh maybe once every 5 years, but generally successful teams Don't spend much of their time shopping the top of the FA market. They draft well, trade well, extend their best guys early when possible and shop for role players. The teams that shop top of the market frequently are usually poorly run teams.
I think Onwenu had a market outside of NE but I'm not sure about the others. Henry is a 30YO TE, Bourne a 29YO 3rd WR coming off a torn ACL. Uche barely played down the stretch last season and Jennings had a break out season but is a run stuffing LB/Edge hybrid. I like the Jennings signing but I'm not even sure he had a robust market. I'm certainly not convinced any of them took less $$ to stay in NE with the exception of Uche if you believe the PR though even with him I'd be surprised if he really had the type of deals he claims he did.I think it's actually telling that so many guys re-signed. They all could have found offers elsewhere. They chose to be back in New England. We aren't talking about scrubs. Bourne, Henry, Onwenu, Uche, Jennings - these guys are all solid NFL caliber players. It's not like the Pats gave them absurd contracts. They have to believe in Mayo and what the team is doing.
It's both. Every NFL roster has guys worth extending, and badly run teams are bad at identifying and pricing talent. Relying on big money FA is bound to fail as a strategy because most FAs are either in or rapidly approaching their declines, so you pay far more for worsening production.The teams that shop top of the market are the ones who already suck, have cap space because they don't have good players worth extending and end up having to pay a premium to acquire talent. It's generally a consequence of sucking (mostly through drafting poorly), not the cause of it. But then you have all that cash and spending money doesn't make it so you'll have less draft resources, so what are you going to do, not spend it?
Everything is kind of bound to fail as a strategy if you don't have the piece at quarterback, though. You can also build a short term contender by hitting on free agents, especially by finding lower priced gems. The sustainable success through drafting also comes solely by virtue of one of the picks you hit on being a QB.It's both. Every NFL roster has guys worth extending, and badly run teams are bad at identifying and pricing talent. Relying on big money FA is bound to fail as a strategy because most FAs are either in or rapidly approaching their declines, so you pay far more for worsening production.
They all could have left if they wanted to play for a different coach, or wanted a better chance to win. Do you disagree?I think Onwenu had a market outside of NE but I'm not sure about the others. Henry is a 30YO TE, Bourne a 29YO 3rd WR coming off a torn ACL. Uche barely played down the stretch last season and Jennings had a break out season but is a run stuffing LB/Edge hybrid. I like the Jennings signing but I'm not even sure he had a robust market. I'm certainly not convinced any of them took less $$ to stay in NE with the exception of Uche if you believe the PR though even with him I'd be surprised if he really had the type of deals he claims he did.
They resigned a lot of league average talent, something virtually every team does.
I don't think the Patriots would be relying on big money FA's to rebuild their team. However, they do need an influx of talent given how bad they were the last couple of seasons. There's a way to do both building through the draft and plugging a hole or two with a higher priced FA to improve the team in the short-term.It's both. Every NFL roster has guys worth extending, and badly run teams are bad at identifying and pricing talent. Relying on big money FA is bound to fail as a strategy because most FAs are either in or rapidly approaching their declines, so you pay far more for worsening production.
It is unfortunate to have high taxes, lousy weather, and be generally seen as not a very happening place (Miami, LA, NYC we are not).Which are going to seem even worse in situations like Ridley when they’re competing against no state income tax states and Mass has a 5% and another 4% due to the millionaires tax. So not just beat $23m but probably have to be north of $26 to make a real difference.
But you're only 45 minutes from either Boston or Providence with no traffic!It is unfortunate to have high taxes, lousy weather, and be generally seen as not a very happening place (Miami, LA, NYC we are not).
Perhaps for less money or term. I don't think there was a big market for Henry or Bourne given age and injury. Onwenu came back for top $$ but certainly could have gone elsewhere. The others perhaps?They all could have left if they wanted to play for a different coach, or wanted a better chance to win. Do you disagree?
I mean yes they have spent money and you should get credit to some degree for bringing guys back as they have not done a good job of that in a while. However, how much better is the team? The WR room is still bottom 5 in the league. They still need a left tackle. The CB room needs another outside corner. QB they will take care of in the draft we know that. Their pass rush is relying on bounce back years from Judon(injury) and Uche(lack of production). RB they got a passing back, but Stevenson is entering a contract year.Miguel has a great tweet today. Won’t link it but for those worried about the Patriots’ cash spending or who think there is a Kraft is cheap narrative, you should take a look.
Cash spending for 2024 is 94m. Possible incentives is $28m. This is for a cap reduction of about $47 million. 2 to 1.
This is just for FAs. It does not take into account all other salaries. Nor does it take into account that cash spending on the third pick in the draft will be nearly $25 million.
So don’t fret. They will start this next 3 year cash spending measuring period by spending like 110 percent of the cap if not more.
Henry and Bourne never made it to market, but from league wide reporters Bourne deal is seen as team friendly. ACL makes it hard to judge. We know Uche took less so he had a market.Perhaps for less money or term. I don't think there was a big market for Henry or Bourne given age and injury. Onwenu came back for top $$ but certainly could have gone elsewhere. The others perhaps?
Nah. A team with a plan and a young rookie QB could be fun to watch for reasons other than W/L.Thank god for the Celtics. Here's hoping for duckboats to brighten what looks like it will be a very gray season in both Fenway and Gillette.
We said that three years agoNah. A team with a plan and a young rookie QB could be fun to watch for reasons other than W/L.
None of that was my point. If people want to argue that there is nothing exciting about building block spending when we lack offensive playmakers, I won’t argue about it.I mean yes they have spent money and you should get credit to some degree for bringing guys back as they have not done a good job of that in a while. However, how much better is the team? The WR room is still bottom 5 in the league. They still need a left tackle. The CB room needs another outside corner. QB they will take care of in the draft we know that. Their pass rush is relying on bounce back years from Judon(injury) and Uche(lack of production). RB they got a passing back, but Stevenson is entering a contract year.
All in all, seems like a lot of money to spend to not really see much of an improvement(so far). If they go out and trade for Higgins or Aiyuk or sign Mike Williams, that changes things. But at the moment, they are looking like they are really taking building through the draft to heart.
You didn't think that playoff team with a rookie QB was fun to watch?We said that three years ago
They were the 1 seed coming out of the bye.You didn't think that playoff team with a rookie QB was fun to watch?
I enjoyed that season.
But SoSH told me MA taxes are not an issue and we are super competitive with other states for retaining top talent, sports world included. I’m confused.It is unfortunate to have high taxes, lousy weather, and be generally seen as not a very happening place (Miami, LA, NYC we are not).
Nah, he's just angling for a position in RFK's cabinet.When you have an opportunity to protect Aaron Roger's third-eye's blind-side it's hard to pass.
I did, too ... but it didn't guarantee future successYou didn't think that playoff team with a rookie QB was fun to watch?
I enjoyed that season.
In a just world, your tag line would be "Hates the millionaire's tax".But SoSH told me MA taxes are not an issue and we are super competitive with other states for retaining top talent, sports world included. I’m confused.
That’s kind of a strawman though isn’t it? Not every free agent who signed elsewhere is a “bad” contract and some of those guys probably would have helped the 2024 Patriots be more competitiveBut they haven't thrown away money at bad contracts!!! How are they supposed to compete like that?
That’s kind of a strawman though isn’t it? Not every free agent who signed elsewhere is a “bad” contract and some of those guys probably would have helped the 2024 Patriots be more competitive
I find it hard to believe that a 3rd down back, backup QB and swing tackle who was benched last year are the only acceptable external options to improve a 4 win team.
Wanting to see the team spend money to improve the roster (not just retain guys to prevent it getting worse) isn’t the same as wanting to see the team waste money.
I get it, they want to build through the draft and are looking at this as a 3-5 year rebuild assuming they draft well and get lucky. But that’s going to cause a lot of frustration for fans who are used to winning or at least want to see a team improve from the worst season they’ve had in decades.
Wolf is going to need to have an improbably great draft record the next 2 years for this team to become even semi-relevant by 2026 unless he’s willing to risk a “bad” contract to add core pieces to the team.
I don’t think this fan base is used to the idea that rebuilds take a very long time and often don’t work. The league is littered with teams who have been rebuilding for decades with not much to show for it. It’s a lot more likely, given how often draft picks fail and the current composition of the roster (no talent on offense, aging key players on defense) that they’re going to be in rebuild mode for 5+ years than it is they will be contending in that time span.
Maybe Maye or whoever is a franchise QB. Probably not given the success rate of any random QB prospect. Maybe they find a LT and WR in this draft, but probably not both.
Barring a lot of luck, it’s going to be a long long road to relevancy and a lot of fans are going to have trouble adjusting to that and get frustrated by the process.
I kind of doubt it, because all of these come back to the same issue.... you need a top QB to consistently compete and there are very few paths to that QB. This is one of the Best QB drafts of the decade, Now could the 3rd pick bust out... absolutely, always a risk. BUT.... the odds you'll be in position to draft a prospect that good at QB anytime soon is pretty low.I’m sure this would be anathema to most, but trading #3 for mostly future picks and tanking next year would probably be the path to a better team, especially if they think Maye is not the one. Get a LT project around 20, take a WR in the second, and then the BPA in the third, try and start to rebuild the roster. Better to win 5 games in 2024 than 8.
I hear you. The big question is whether they think the #3 quarterback this year could be that guy or not. I guess if he’s not, you’re probably crapping out again anyway, the “only” thing you’ve lost is the value that coin could have brought your roster in other places.I kind of doubt it, because all of these come back to the same issue.... you need a top QB to consistently compete and there are very few paths to that QB. This is one of the Best QB drafts of the decade, Now could the 3rd pick bust out... absolutely, always a risk. BUT.... the odds you'll be in position to draft a prospect that good at QB anytime soon is pretty low.
Naw. I just don’t like unforced errors that render the state I love less competitive. That includes taxes (millionaires tax, short term cap gains) but also things like housing (should be building far more) and issues around child care (need way more to bring cost down). Anyway none of that is super relevant to this thread outside of me finding it interesting multiple people are saying the Patriots are less competitive moving forward because of it.In a just world, your tag line would be "Hates the millionaire's tax".
The only states with NFL teams and no income tax are Florida, Nevada, Texas, and Washington, right? How are property tax rates in those states? How do all the other states get free agents?Which are going to seem even worse in situations like Ridley when they’re competing against no state income tax states and Mass has a 5% and another 4% due to the millionaires tax. So not just beat $23m but probably have to be north of $26 to make a real difference.
Yeah. Super rare that two guys in BBTL are looking to give the team a pass.Naw. I just don’t like unforced errors that render the state I love less competitive. That includes taxes (millionaires tax, short term cap gains) but also things like housing (should be building far more) and issues around child care (need way more to bring cost down). Anyway none of that is super relevant to this thread outside of me finding it interesting multiple people are saying the Patriots are less competitive moving forward because of it.
yeah, it's a very minor factor for some players, not at all for others. I honestly would bet that the weather is a bigger one for more guys, and the mediocre appeal of the cities. LA teams have zero problem getting top athletes and the taxes are much higher, same with the NY teams.I’m pretty sure the taxes issue is more complicated than just where your home team plays. I think athletes still pay taxes as nonresidents in states where they play away games. Obviously playing half your games in a tax free state is nice but if you have to play the Niners and the Giants away you are paying taxes. So, it’s an advantage, but not as easy as saying “X state’s players pay 5 percent more taxes.”
The parallel is striking considering NE had their "full throttle" moment when Mayo came out just after being hired and said they would be spending cash this off-season. I don't think many expected 90% of that cash being used to retain the existing core. Full throttle 2 Electric BugalooI check every day praying for a new thread around a significant addition and it never comes. It's like the Red Sox offseason all over again
100% of your salary still is taxed at the home state(I.e MA if you play for the Patriots) then there are deductions for taxes paid to other states. For example, So if you play an away game in a tax free state MA taxes you on all of it.I’m pretty sure the taxes issue is more complicated than just where your home team plays. I think athletes still pay taxes as nonresidents in states where they play away games. Obviously playing half your games in a tax free state is nice but if you have to play the Niners and the Giants away you are paying taxes. So, it’s an advantage, but not as easy as saying “X state’s players pay 5 percent more taxes.”
True, but we signed all of our own players worth keeping and still have $50 million in cap space.Just went back to read the 2021 thread on signing Jonnu. So many were very excited and happy with the signing, and we know how that worked out. FA is a dangerous game and it's almost always better to sign your own players and invest in outside undervalued guys. But that's not as exciting as throwing a huge bag at Jonnu, or Golladay, or Teron Armstead, or Chandler Jones, or JC Jackson, or...
As long as we only cite the guys who didn't work out. How about throwing a bag at Matt Judon?Just went back to read the 2021 thread on signing Jonnu. So many were very excited and happy with the signing, and we know how that worked out. FA is a dangerous game and it's almost always better to sign your own players and invest in outside undervalued guys. But that's not as exciting as throwing a huge bag at Jonnu, or Golladay, or Teron Armstead, or Chandler Jones, or JC Jackson, or...
1) They haven't signed all their own players worth keeping; Barmore and Judon still need signing and will cost against the current cap.True, but we signed all of our own players worth keeping and still have $50 million in cap space.
Judon was a great signing, so was Gilmore. I'm not saying you should never throw a bag at FAs. I am saying that Ridley, Jonah Williams, and Tyron Smith aren't those level of players. Spending for the sake of spending is dumb.As long as we only cite the guys who didn't work out. How about throwing a bag at Matt Judon?
This post is tremendous. Completely, 100% agree. It's all about the 2024 and 2025 drafts at this point. If they do find 2 of those 3 positions in the draft (or in a perfect world, all three), then you can look to spend on some high ticket items in free agency next year and hopefully open your window of opportunity for those next 4 years while your QB is still cheap.This team doesn't have a foundation. Its best players, save for Gonzalez (and he's kind of a wild card considering how many games he's played) and Judon (who's on the back nine), are at the least valuable positions in football. You know why we couldn't find a QB, Tackle, or WR in FA? Because every team in the league is looking for one of those positions, if not two (or bad teams, three). Scarcity is why we're talking ourselves into thinking that Calvin Ridley, maybe like the 30th best receiver in the NFL if I'm being generous, is a "top free agent target."
The best teams build through the draft, then fill holes in FA with big signings when they have a foundation. The lack of FA movement this offseason is kind of irrelevant for the Patriots. Everything is going to depend on how they do the next couple of drafts and if they can find long term starters at the most valuable positions in football. If they can't, then it's going to be a tough few years... but that will have nothing to do with them not signing Calvin Ridley this offseason.
I'm happy that this team is being real about the state of the roster and not talking themselves into the "this is a playoff team with an average QB" nonsense. Yes, this team with an average QB and an easy schedule could hypothetically go 10-7 and then get whooped in the first round. As we've seen, that's not sustainable. It's not even fun. Take the slow and low approach, improve the roster, get younger (this team was the 27th oldest in the league last year!), and try to build a team that can get into the playoffs repeatedly over many years.