NFL - NEWS & NOTES

Deja Vu.

 

I would have to say, technically, no... A Super Bowl win proves they didn't need him. The let down is his for not being able to relish in going to a Super Bowl. The off field issues are obviously either, too difficult to handle being in the lime light or he cares more about drugs/alcohol than football. Either way, he needs to begin his after football life and just concentrate on keeping that right. It will be a lifelong struggle for him and I honestly hope he gets straight before it's too late.

As for football, anyone counting on him for ANYTHING is aiming for a let down. Honestly, not even sure he will get another chance..how many suspensions does it take to just stop letting him back in?

 

Its pretty amazing to me all the help and chances he's been getting... seriously, I don't know why. Seems like there is more patience and tolerance towards him than anyone else I can think of.

 

Well I gotta disagree with that take. If ya want to get technical about the word "need" i suppose... A SB win proves they are an amazing and resilient bunch....New England won without him, but that shouldn't take Josh off the hook...He let the Pats down in a major way.

I mean, if they lose the OT coin flip in KC, they aren't even in the SB most likely...

 

same amount of contribution ? i i can't believe you're an Eagles fan saying that. Wentz was 11-1 or 11-2 before his injury. What did Gordon put up for NE that they missed him so much ? It's not even close to the same production. And Gordon has had run-in other suspensions before. These two players are not the same case.

 

Justin Blackmon agrees.

 

Justin Blackmon never showed it on the field...had he done that for just ONE year, he would be receiving the same treatment.

 

He never gave himself the chance.

• Drafted 5th O/A in 2012.
• Played the entire 2012 rookie season.
• Suspended for the 1st 4 games of 2013.
• Permanently suspended in November of 2013.

 

Blackmon showed enough when he did play that he'd've gotten multiple chances, too, if he'd ever made any real effort to show any interest in those chances. Gordon keeps screwing up but tries to fix himself, Blackmon kept screwing up and it didn't ever seem to bother him in the least that he wasn't allowed to play football anymore. If he was, he would've gone through the reinstatement vetting process that Gordon did.

 

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/falcon...sed-missing-one-fg-last-season-173507328.html

Falcons giving the boot to Matt Bryant ! He missed 1 FG last season.

 

Hello, Matt Bryant. Chicago is mighty nice...

 

Tavecchio didn't miss any and costs them a fraction of what Bryant would

 

While we're on the topic of kickers...curious what every one else thinks of Stephen Gostkowski. On the Pats board earlier in the season my opinion that Gost was not worth what he costs on the cap in comparison to what it costs to replace him (see Bryant vs. Tavecchio as an example) was quite unpopular. Most seemed to think it was worth paying him at the top of the market to avoid a Cody Parkey type situation (sorry Bears fans). My counter was if they were capable of replacing Vinatieri with Gostkowski, they should be able to do it again, and there's always competent kickers available (not to mention Gostkowski's always been less reliable in the post-season than the regular season).

So what say you l4sn'ers - would you pay Gostkowski at the top of the kicker market (i.e. around $5MM per) in FA this offseason?

 

I don't think there are always competent kickers available. After letting go of Gould, the Bears cycled through a number of available kickers, never once finding a guy who was worth trusting. Now, not only did they lose a crucial playoff game because of it, but they're going to be auditioning a number of other crappy kickers, and hoping to get lucky.

Sorry, but the kicking world is fickle. If you've got a dependable guy, and you're a team in a position to win, you pay the damn kicker. That's not something you mess with. It could always be worse, and probably will be.

 

no. find that rookie diamond in the rough or an experienced, but cheaper nfl kicker. not need to drop $5 on a kicker.

 

In an extremely small sample...He kicked 5 FGs and 6 INTs.. In a full season the prior year he missed 5 FGs going 16 for 21 and also missed a PAT going 33 of 34... So, he may improve or he might not.. The good news for them is that whomever it is, they will be kicking in a dome at least 9 times a year.

 

I disagree.. For years Phil Dawson was the team MVP, until he wasn't any longer... In other words, they went years making him one of the highest paid kickers, even franchising him a few times. Then they woke up one day and said exactly what you two are saying now. We have been searching for a kicker ever since.

We've even drafted a couple of "rookie diamonds in the rough"...Not signed an UDFA, actually DRAFTED the ones they perceived to be the top available and didn't want to chance missing on him in rookie free agency...Has not worked out yet.

Those "experienced" kickers available...well most of them are available for a reason, and not because there was a team wanting to save a couple of million by not paying them their worth. You never know when kickers are going to go south. When they do, many times they don't recover. It's really odd. So, if you get one that is reliable, keep his ass until he is no longer reliable...don't get rid of him because you want to save a couple million on the salary cap. They can win you games, but others can most definitely lose you games...remember that!

 

well said and great post dawg-i'm with you now on kickers and i change my stance.

btw-National Signing Day today for college football. ND already had 19 kids committed. I don't know if they got anyone new they didn't already know would sign. highest rankings for their class is 14th.

 

Most kickers don't catch on at their first stop. Matt Bryant got cut by 4 teams before he caught on in Tampa and became a reliable kicker. Dawson got cut twice before he landed in Cleveland. The Pro Bowl kickers this year both got cut in other places first (one of them in the Arena League...twice!). Daniel Carlson kicked his way out of a job in two games in Minnesota and then was excellent for the Raiders after they signed him, and the Vikings replaced him with a freely available former Pro Bowler who lost his prior job to a - wait for it - unproven rookie who actually had a pretty good season. It can certainly be done if a team is diligent and yes perhaps a bit lucky.

Anyway, I get the argument for paying for reliability, but my bigger question was really...is Gostkowski really that guy anymore? If you're a team in need of a kicker this offseason, are you praying he's the guy your team signs (Bears fans excluded lol)? I mean he's still good, but his performance has clearly been in decline, too. I think Pats fans have become so used to not having to think about who their kicker is only having two guys for the last 23 years that they are too willing to overpay for that comfort without acknowledging disaster could still be on the horizon.

 

Injurved vs suspended Gordon would be the same contribution. @IrishDawg42