PDA

View Full Version : Chiefs Piloi + High Character Players = Randy Moss To The Pats


jAZ
01-30-2009, 10:36 PM
I wanted Randy Moss when he was market a couple of years ago. This place mostly hated Moss and thought he was a head case. I always thought he seemed like a generally good guy.

I have read one article after another talking about how Pioli is intent on building a team-first, high-character roster.

Then it occurs to me that Pioli traded for Moss.

He must have felt the same way about him, at the time. I'm not sure any of us knew at the time who Pioli was, or what his priorities were.

So my question is this...

Does Pioli's decision to trade for Moss cause you concern for his judgement?

Delano
01-30-2009, 10:37 PM
How many off-the-field negative incidents has Randy Moss been involved in since signing with New England?

bishop_74
01-30-2009, 10:39 PM
Sometimes ya gotta roll the dice! Turned of well too.

The Bad Guy
01-30-2009, 10:41 PM
It doesn't have one bearing on me what-so-ever.

You have to be confident in your coaching staff, and the enviroment they have developed.

If you have a strong foundation, regardless of who it is, won't tear the team down.

cdcox
01-30-2009, 10:45 PM
You have to evaluate your team and the "bad seed". Every (head) case has to be evaluated on its own merits. The Pats brought in one player of questionable attitude.

So the score is: Pats/Pioli +1

jAZ
01-30-2009, 10:47 PM
It doesn't have one bearing on me what-so-ever.

You have to be confident in your coaching staff, and the enviroment they have developed.

If you have a strong foundation, regardless of who it is, won't tear the team down.

I'm not so sure a clearly bi-polar TO would have held up, even in the Pats system.

philfree
01-30-2009, 10:47 PM
What have Randy's character flaws been through his career? I think he was immature when he first came into a league with his I'll give effort when I want attitude he displayed when he got shit for taking plays off.


PhilFree:arrow:

Hal McRae
01-30-2009, 10:48 PM
How many off-the-field negative incidents has Randy Moss been involved in since signing with New England?


Agreed, Delano. Also, theory is the Patriots had so many "character players" in the locker room, that they could plug in a Randy Moss, who had some problems in the past, and not have him harm team chemistry.

The opposite of this would be Dallas, which collects low-character types at a alarming rates and regularly implodes.

DaFace
01-30-2009, 10:55 PM
Are you insinuating that he made a bad move by trading for Moss? I'm confused.

Tribal Warfare
01-30-2009, 11:01 PM
Moss has HOF talent when he is motivated, and when he is he is one of the most dangerous playmakers to dawn a football uniform.

The Bad Guy
01-30-2009, 11:04 PM
I'm not so sure a clearly bi-polar TO would have held up, even in the Pats system.

Then they would have cut his ass the following year, but I can guarantee that team would keep rolling along like it never happened.

DaWolf
01-30-2009, 11:04 PM
Just remember, Bellichik wanted Moss as well, so it may not have all been Pioli.

I think you have to take everything in the context of the situation you are in. In New England, they had a team that was winning and had some strong leaders in the locker room that would keep Moss in check. Plus it was bringing Moss back to the east coast, and I believe they got him at a relatively risk free rate for that first year. And the key was that the biggest thing missing from that team was wide receiving talent. So in essense it was very shrewd. Even more shrewd was going out and getting Wes Welker from the Dolphins to play opposite Moss...

jAZ
01-30-2009, 11:08 PM
Are you insinuating that he made a bad move by trading for Moss? I'm confused.

Like I said, I liked Moss and didn't think he was the headcase that TO was. I thought Moss was worth the "risk" and felt we should have traded for him.

I was in the vast minority at the time.

Ultimately the Pats signed him and it worked out well for them.

Today we praise Pioli as a sort of genius. That same genius was the guy making the choice to sign Moss while we were trashing him.

I thought it was a good idea then. I still think it was a good idea today.

I guess it's a question for those who hated the idea for trading for Moss.

Do you stand corrected? Or do you consider it knock on Pioli (where he just got lucky)?

BigRock
01-30-2009, 11:09 PM
The key is that they didn't build their team around a guy like Moss. They'd already won 3 Super Bowls and then added him as a final piece on their mission to rape the entire world.

DaFace
01-30-2009, 11:15 PM
Like I said, I liked Moss and didn't think he was the headcase that TO was. I thought Moss was worth the "risk" and felt we should have traded for him.

I was in the vast minority at the time.

Ultimately the Pats signed him and it worked out well for them.

Today we praise Pioli as a sort of genius. That same genius was the guy making the choice to sign Moss while we were trashing him.

I thought it was a good idea then. I still think it was a good idea today.

I guess it's a question for those who hated the idea for trading for Moss.

Do you stand corrected? Or do you consider it knock on Pioli (where he just got lucky)?

I guess, to me, he had the foresight to know that Moss had potential to return to his prior form. Regardless of what I thought at the time, that's a win in my book.

Buehler445
01-30-2009, 11:28 PM
Like I said, I liked Moss and didn't think he was the headcase that TO was. I thought Moss was worth the "risk" and felt we should have traded for him.

I was in the vast minority at the time.

Ultimately the Pats signed him and it worked out well for them.

Today we praise Pioli as a sort of genius. That same genius was the guy making the choice to sign Moss while we were trashing him.

I thought it was a good idea then. I still think it was a good idea today.

I guess it's a question for those who hated the idea for trading for Moss.

Do you stand corrected? Or do you consider it knock on Pioli (where he just got lucky)?

Eh, If the Chiefs were built like the Pats, I probably would have been OK due to the results they got from previous dumbasses like Corey Dillon and Rodney Harrison.

But on the Chiefs, it would have likely been Raiders part II. I'd be hard pressed to be convinced KC would have gotten anywhere near the production NE did.

BucEyedPea
01-30-2009, 11:50 PM
Does Pioli's decision to trade for Moss cause you concern for his judgement?

The interview Pioli & Co had with Moss was key to Moss coming on board the Patriots. Moss really wanted to win. That meant being a team player too. His issues were discussed and they felt he was sincere. Don't forget Dillon was supposed to be a cancer too. Yet, he worked out. If they win it handles a some of these things.

Reaper16
01-30-2009, 11:58 PM
Yeah, I'd be real damn concerned if my GM brought in one of the most talented WR ever.

OctoberFart
01-31-2009, 12:14 AM
Moss was worth the risk since he was only on a 1 year deal. If he was a SH#Thead you cut him with no loss other than a pick that probably wouldn't of done much anyway. It's also amazing what winning does to a problem player.

beach tribe
01-31-2009, 12:25 AM
It's different when you're trying to build a championship team, and having already built one.

Once you've built you're team, you can draft for need, sign high priced FAs, and trade for head cases, trusting in the fact that these players get with the program, because you already have leaders on your team, and these players will be additions to the machine. The teams are not built around them. They are not the gas that makes them go. They are the turbo chargers, and the nitrous systems that make them go faster.

Ari Chi3fs
01-31-2009, 12:33 AM
How many superbowls have the Pats won since Moss joined the team?

Ari Chi3fs
01-31-2009, 12:33 AM
haha... its so weird getting random signatures popping up every now and again.

DrRyan
01-31-2009, 12:38 AM
The Pats traded a 4th round pick for Moss. What possible down side was there to that trade? If he turned into Raider Randy they would have very likely cut his ass.

Portlantis
01-31-2009, 12:59 AM
Eh, If the Chiefs were built like the Pats, I probably would have been OK due to the results they got from previous dumbasses like Corey Dillon and Rodney Harrison.

But on the Chiefs, it would have likely been Raiders part II. I'd be hard pressed to be convinced KC would have gotten anywhere near the production NE did.

I agree. Randy Moss would have been awful in KC. Yes, at his best Randy Moss is one of the best receivers ever. But Moss only plays up to his potential when he is surrounded by talent. As he showed in Oakland and on some bad Vikings squads, when his team is losing, Randy Moss just doesn't give a fuck.

Do you really think Moss would have been a worldbeater playing in Mike Solari's run, run, pass, punt offense? It's far more likely he would have been nothing more than a second locker room cancer.

Amnorix
01-31-2009, 06:54 AM
It doesn't have one bearing on me what-so-ever.

You have to be confident in your coaching staff, and the enviroment they have developed.

If you have a strong foundation, regardless of who it is, won't tear the team down.

I think that's right. Also, it was a low-risk (4th rounder), high-reward gamble.