Patriots acquire Mohammed Sanu for 2nd Round pick

[Troy Brown]

4 hours ago, BACK2MACKSACK said:

A hefty price for a solid #2 receiver in his 30s. Since the deal was done with the Patriots, the Falcons were going to ask for a steep price even though they play in different conferences especially with the Super Bowl loss.

For any other team, there would be many eyebrows being raised but given how prudent the Pats are with their draft capital, you can't really argue with the trade. Any other team, Sanu probably could be had for a 4th but the Pats had to pay that extra price.

he just turned 30 in august fwiw

[N4L]

17 hours ago, Hunter2_1 said:

Yeah, because they're good. They would be good in ANY division. 

New England's record against eventual division winners (24-14) makes them the only team in the NFL with a winning record in this category. Against teams who eventually made the playoffs in a given season, the Patriots (60-33, .645) are the best in the league, with the Steelers at a not-so-close second with a .480 winning percentage. 

Their success against teams who finished with a winning record (75-45, .625) is also an NFL-best mark, with the Steelers trailing by a considerable margin at a .440 winning percentage. 

yeah because they have 7 bye weeks per year.

patriot fans love to act like being in the worst division in football for literally the last 10 straight years doesnt mean anything. its not the only reason for the pats success, but its a huge part of it (first round bye, home playoff games every year - yeah cakewalk division doesnt matter *rolls eyes*)

[N4L]

11 hours ago, Pats#1 said:

You completely missed the point.

 

Its not that the players and coaches are buckling under the pressure....it’s that being in the same division as one of if not the most successful sports franchise ever, makes your time allowed for success shorter than others and scrutiny much more prevalent.

I think that’s a large reason there’s so much turnover in the division. 

theres so much turnover in the division because they are three horribly ran franchises. Jets Bills Miami have been poorly ran for a long time now. Miami wasnt so bad until recently, but they were never good either.

 

BTW, I LOVE this trade for the pats. I really wish the niners would have gotten Sanu.

[Hunter2_1]

13 hours ago, The LBC said:

Engh.  The guys don't even have to go on to be stars for them to be useful players.  My point is more that maybe, just maybe, the issue was less that these players (Danny Shelton, KVN, even going to the likes of Shea McLellin) weren't the busts they were perceived to be by the teams that drafted them due to a misevaluation of talent, but rather an inability (or lack of proficiency) of the coaching staff they were originally given over to  to use them correctly.

I'd say so, yes. There's too much incompetency from a coaching point of view in certain places

[Hunter2_1]

1 hour ago, N4L said:

yeah because they have 7 bye weeks per year.

patriot fans love to act like being in the worst division in football for literally the last 10 straight years doesnt mean anything. its not the only reason for the pats success, but its a huge part of it (first round bye, home playoff games every year - yeah cakewalk division doesnt matter *rolls eyes*)

and I was so nice to you....

 

It's not true. The stats show that the AFCE hasn't been the worst. I was surprised too, but they're not. AFC E has the most wins against ALL other divisions, but that's because of NE. Take them out, and take out other div's best team; it's middle of the road. Those are facts (hard to believe, admittedly).

Besides, you've got us wrong. We LOVE being in this division - we just argue that even if you swapped one of them out for a good team, it wouldn't be much different. We have a better record against the likes of PIT (2nd best team in NFL over last 15 years), Saints, Chargers, Bears than we do against effin' Miami. So please...swap em.

Edited October 23, 2019 by Hunter2_1

[The Hitch]

21 hours ago, Hunter2_1 said:

Well, they don't make the superbowl every year. You need more than just a 3 year sample size to say that. They are currently the former (the one you agree with) and, judging by their record against other teams (their record vs Saints, Steelers, Bears just to name three are superior to that of their record vs Miami for example) they'd be that 'win superbowls now and again' team. How long have you held the belief that NE is in an easy div? Is it 10 years? 5 times we've been to the superbowl in that span, if so. If we had swapped the Jets with the Steelers, do you think it would be different?

Of course if Pats had Steelers instead of Jets they would have had it tougher.

2 way tougher games a season. Another team to push for that 1st spot in the division.

But its not even about having one tough (Steelers haven't been that great this decade anyway) opponent every few years. 

In other divisions, you have multiple teams that become great, even if they then fail. You at least get challenges some years. 

All of the NFC West has been in a championship game in the last 6 years. 3 of the NFC South has had the number 1 seed in 4 years. All of the AFC West has had 12 win seasons in the last 4 years.

By comparison, no team outside NE has had a 12 win season in the AFC East since the turn of the century. IIRC AFC East is tied for least wildcard teams since 2010. 

How is it not an easy division?

 

 

[The Hitch]

5 hours ago, Hunter2_1 said:

and I was so nice to you....

 

It's not true. The stats show that the AFCE hasn't been the worst. I was surprised too, but they're not. AFC E has the most wins against ALL other divisions, but that's because of NE. Take them out, and take out other div's best team; it's middle of the road. Those are facts (hard to believe, admittedly).

 

Over what time span is that? I mean all it shows is that bad ACF East teams go 5-11 instead of 2-14. Because they certainly weren't going 12-4. No AFC East team has outside the Pats for two decades. two 11 win seasons in that time and one 10 win I think.  

Because at the end of the day what makes the AFC East weak, isn't whether or not they have the number 1 pick in the draft every year. Its about actually having a contender for the title, and god forbid actually having to play a playoff game away from home now and again

 

Quote

Besides, you've got us wrong. We LOVE being in this division - we just argue that even if you swapped one of them out for a good team, it wouldn't be much different. We have a better record against the likes of PIT (2nd best team in NFL over last 15 years), Saints, Chargers, Bears than we do against effin' Miami. So please...swap em.

ok, does that really prove anything? You are using very selective arguments. You beat NO twice in a decade, a very impressive win away and a last second TD at home, and this proves having NO in the division would be a cakewalk? 

Edited October 23, 2019 by The Hitch

[Hunter2_1]

11 minutes ago, The Hitch said:

Over what time span is that? I mean all it shows is that bad ACF East teams go 5-11 instead of 2-14. Because they certainly weren't going 12-4. No AFC East team has outside the Pats for two decades. two 11 win seasons in that time and one 10 win I think. 

Because at the end of the day what makes the AFC East weak, isn't whether or not they have the number 1 pick in the draft every year. Its about actually having a contender for the title, and god forbid actually having to play a playoff game away from home now and again

 

ok, does that really prove anything? You are using very selective arguments. You beat NO twice in a decade, a very impressive win away and a last second TD at home, and this proves having NO in the division would be a cakewalk? 

Since 2000. It shows that the AFCE can hold it's own vs. other divisions. I was surprised too, but those are facts...I'm not in the business of disputing facts. I'll leave that to you, if that's what you do. 

We don't have to play many playoff games away from home because we are invariably one of the best teams in the NFL. You say 'of course it would make a difference if you swapped the Jets with the Steelers' but again, facts show over the past 15 years, we have a higher win % against PIT than we do NYJ. So, please, explain this? Steelers are better, but we don't really lose to them.

 

"Steelers haven't been that great this decade" - Wrong. Check the facts. They're 2nd in total wins since 2010 as well.

 

"You are using very selective arguments" - I'm using facts. I'm not saying, and have not once said, we are in a tough division. I'm saying it's probably not as bad as people think and that we'd still be the same with another good team in there instead. 

Edited October 23, 2019 by Hunter2_1

[Oregon Ducks]

Outside of a few years of the Mark Sanchez-led Jets, the AFC East has been absolute trash.

[DutchFalcon]

To everyone saying the Pats overpaid:

Do you remember Deion Branch? Superbowl XXXIX MVP?

In my eyes that is what Sanu could be. Dude can be clutch as hell while not being the fastest or biggest WR out there. When he's on dude is straight up clutch (just ask Packer's fans)

This is a great pairing and I'm expecting him to light stuff up in NE.

 

Edited October 23, 2019 by DutchFalcon

[Pats#1]

19 hours ago, N4L said:

theres so much turnover in the division because they are three horribly ran franchises. Jets Bills Miami have been poorly ran for a long time now. Miami wasnt so bad until recently, but they were never good either.

 

BTW, I LOVE this trade for the pats. I really wish the niners would have gotten Sanu.

 

Then some of the other divisions must be god awful...

 

On 10/22/2019 at 12:44 PM, Hunter2_1 said:

Would you ever consider that you're being harsh on Miami, NYJ and BUF? That they're not actually as bad as people think over the span of time since BB and TB were in the league?

 

How has the rest of the AFC East performed vs other divisions since 2000? This is what happens when you take the best team in the division away

 

Division W - L - T      Win Pct        Best Team

NFC East  421 - 442 - 1  .487   Eagles (172-115-1)

NFC South  421 - 441 - 2  .487  Saints (157-131-0)

AFC West  401 - 463 - 0  .464  Broncos (169-119-0)

AFC East  395 - 469 - 0  .457  Patriots (214-74-0)

AFC North  389 - 472 - 3  .450  Steelers (188-99-1)

NFC North  389 - 474 - 1  .450  Packers (178-109-1)

AFC South  368 - 464 - 0  .442  Colts (180-108-0)

NFC West  382 - 479 - 3  .442  Seahawks (161-126-1)

 

They're unfairly maligned. 

 

[Pats#1]

19 hours ago, N4L said:

yeah because they have 7 bye weeks per year.

patriot fans love to act like being in the worst division in football for literally the last 10 straight years doesnt mean anything. its not the only reason for the pats success, but its a huge part of it (first round bye, home playoff games every year - yeah cakewalk division doesnt matter *rolls eyes*)

For the thousandth time....this would make sense if the Patriots win % wasn't exactly the same inside and outside the division

[N4L]

1 hour ago, Pats#1 said:

For the thousandth time....this would make sense if the Patriots win % wasn't exactly the same inside and outside the division

You're missing the point. Having easy games help you more than just the week you play them 

You don't think playing Pittsburg and Baltimore back to back is harder than playing buffalo circa 2009 then playing one of those teams? That's all I'm saying. 

[The Hitch]

17 hours ago, Hunter2_1 said:

Since 2000. It shows that the AFCE can hold it's own vs. other divisions. I was surprised too, but those are facts...I'm not in the business of disputing facts. I'll leave that to you, if that's what you do. 

We don't have to play many playoff games away from home because we are invariably one of the best teams in the NFL. You say 'of course it would make a difference if you swapped the Jets with the Steelers' but again, facts show over the past 15 years, we have a higher win % against PIT than we do NYJ. So, please, explain this? Steelers are better, but we don't really lose to them.

 

"Steelers haven't been that great this decade" - Wrong. Check the facts. They're 2nd in total wins since 2010 as well.

 

"You are using very selective arguments" - I'm using facts. I'm not saying, and have not once said, we are in a tough division. I'm saying it's probably not as bad as people think and that we'd still be the same with another good team in there instead. 

Ok, so you are talking about win %. 
I am talking about superbowls and playoffs.

Its very telling that according to you, the second best team of the decade is a team with 0 superbowls, 0 number 1 seeds, 1 superbowl appearance and 2 Championship game appearances. How? They rack up lots of wins even in their down seasons when they are not realistic challenges. 

Its also telling that according to you the "worst division" is the NFC West. Which has been in the SB in half of the last 8 seasons.  and 7 total superbowl appearnaces over your timespan. 

If what you are saying is that the Pats regular season win % would be similar with 1 better team in the division, sure you can have that. 

But if they were in the NFC West (according to you the worst division), then some years you get an even easier ride to 14-2. Still get the HFA, maybe a 1 seed instead of a 2. 

But other years you have 3 10 wins teams (2013, 2019 potentially), or have to face the best defense in the league for 4 consecutive seasons (Seahawks), or face the best offense in the league. And so those other years you might even have the same win % in the regular season but now have to go away for 3 playoff games cos another team in your division finished higher. 

You would take that? Even if it meant your 20 year regular season win % was the same?

[Hunter2_1]

@The Hitch Have you changed your opinion from a couple days ago when you said something like (can't find the quote); 'Would the pats still be a team everyone is scared of, and make a few superbowls, absolutely!' ? Because that's where I am. We might be agreeing here.