2007-11-21 08:21:02 · 24 answers · asked by tatereatinmic 3 in Sports ➔ Baseball
Don't get me wrong, its an effective strategy, money can do anything? But I lost respect for teams like this who like to buy their wins? It only makes seeing them get whipped a better game. When you see these two teams win, who cares of course their gonna win, they got the best team money can buy, literally. But when the Colts beat the Pats to go to the Superbowl last year, or the Red Sox came back from a 0-3 matchup to go on to beat the Yankees and then win the world series, it doesn't get any better than that. The underdog teams are in America's heart, not the big bucks sellouts these two teams are comprised of. No offense to players of these teams who originally signed with them and believe in their team no matter what they're getting payed.
2007-11-21 08:24:45 · update #1
absolutely|
2007-11-21 08:44:00 · answer #1 · answered by woody 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋
This can really be broken down into a 2 part answer.
If you are talking about a dynasty that will run it's course for many years and win multiple championships the answer is Yes.
But on the other side of the question they are the complete opposite of the Yankees.
Last season they were one of the lowest spending teams falling well short of the alloted cap money they could spend, This allowed them all of the extra room to bring in Adelius Thomas, Randy Moss, Stallworth and Wes Welker.
If you remember the Patriots teams that won the SuperBowl they were called the team with no stars on it. The big difference now is everyone realized they had many very good players that are now household names and adding the stud players in the offseason threw off the balance of the league.
The main reason why the Patriots are in the position they are is because of the way they do business. Nobody is above the team, they do not hand out big money to just anybody and they seemingly never miss in the draft when they select their players. Scott Pioli the director of Player Personel along with
Bill Belichick learned this lesson long ago by being members of Bill Parcells teams which also was very good in the draft.
If you were going to compare a team in the NFL that won by spending you would need to go back to the pre-salary cap days and look at the 49ers or Cowboys. Not to take anything away from those teams, it is just how the business was run back then. In todays game with the salary cap no team truly has an advantage unless they budget themselves wiser or have a great quarterback that attracts other players to play cheaper...
And that is where New England stands alone. They are the only team in the NFL with both.
2007-11-21 17:26:07 · answer #2 · answered by Chiefdogg 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Your question is kind of absurd. "Buying better players just so they can win"? What else would they buy them for? Also, the Yankees haven't won in seven years, and actually have been "buying" players less the past couple of years after being burnt on pitchers like Randy Johnson and Carl Pavano. They are now relying more on their farm system. If you are going to talk about "buying" players, you also have to mention the Red Sox who are second in payroll. They have some huge contracts as well. It's not like they have been getting by on a small budget. Four years ago, only two teams could have made the trade for Curt Schilling and his huge salary, the Red Sox and Yankees, and he went to Boston. Josh Beckett was acquired from Florida,but only if Boston would take Mike Lowell and his big contract, and the trade was made. You could say they bought him as well.
As for the Patriots, there is a salary cap in the NFL, so they don't spend as much as you would think. They got Randy Moss for a FOURTH round draft choice, and Wes Welker for a second-rounder, which is amazing work by their front office. Yes, they signed a few players, but they always cut a few loose each year, so it evens out.
Just curious, but why do you consider the Red Sox an "underdog" team? According to Dan Shaughnessy of the Boston Globe, their payroll was over $140 MILLION last season. Perhaps you also forgot that they paid over $50 MILLION for the rights to Dice-K, and the price tag came to $103 MILLION once he was signed. I'm just curious to know if you look at all the facts and think things through before you spout off nonsense.
2007-11-21 23:57:09 · answer #3 · answered by Jeffrey S 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No...players actually take pay cuts and re-structure their contracts to play in NE because they know there is a good chance they could win a Superbowl in NE...plus there is a salary cap in football...you can't even compare the two sports in respect to payroll.
Edit:
And to this comment: "The Patriots are not the Yankees of football. The Yankees have class, and they don't cheat."...so the players on the Yankees that have taken steroids doesn't count as cheating?
2007-11-21 16:58:40 · answer #4 · answered by JT-24 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I don't get it. Would you feel better if the Steinbrenner family did what a lot of other team owners and simply pocketed the money rather than spending it on players ?The Yankees can afford to buy what they own .It's MLB's fault for letting teams into the game that can't afford to play it.
The Patriots are a whole 'nother story .They are simply much much better than their competition is in all phases of the game from their scouting department and up .Rather than knocking the Patriots you should put your team allegiances aside and realize that you are bearing witness to what may very well be the greatest season that any team hasever had in NFL history
2007-11-21 17:26:11 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
your comparison is way off. the only way that the two can be compared is by how much they are hated by the rest of the fans. the patriots have done what they have done under a salary cap, meaning that they have spent only the amount of money that everyone else has so they have had to spend wisely. the yankees on the other hand have spent very unwisely. if the yankees were an nfl team they would be the washington redskins.
2007-11-21 17:53:03 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
I don't think it's money making them come here. The NFL has a salary cap. That's an ignorant thing to say. Players want to come to this team because they want a ring and seeing as New England has 3 in the past what 6 years, big players will take a pay cut (like Randy Moss) to play on a winning team.
2007-11-21 16:29:53 · answer #7 · answered by Let's go Red Sox! 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
an assinine statement.
the NFL has a salary cap; MLB does not. Unlike the Yankees, the Patriots cannot spend more (2x, 3x, 9x more in some cases) than other NFL teams. They have the same constraints that everyone else does.
So trading for players and picks and signing free agents doesn't mean the same thing as it does in baseball.
2007-11-21 17:08:29 · answer #8 · answered by mikep426 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It's not even close to me. Baseball has no salary cap and the Patriots were built through the draft, trades, and a few free agents. The Eagles let Stallworth walk and I think the Pats made a deal with the Raiders.
2007-11-21 16:43:23 · answer #9 · answered by Awesome Bill 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
No they are not the Yankees of Football, but the NFL has a salary cap. Every team in the NFL can do what the Patriots did (with the exception of tapeing plays), unlike in major league baseball where there is no salary cap and it becomes a game of which owner has more money. The Yankees have money over everybody else, the Patriots have used their money wisely over everyone else.
2007-11-21 16:27:06 · answer #10 · answered by Average Joes 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋
As much as I hate saying this the Pats aren't totally. They signed many lowcost FA' slike Vrabel and Izzo in 2000 and now traded for Moss, Welker, and drafter Brady (6th rd Michigan) Maurony (06 Minnesota) Bruschi, and Seymore. Plus the NFL has a salary cap so they can't spend outragious amounts still they did sign Stallsworth, Morris, Washington, Gaffney, Kyle Brady, Thomas, Seau, and Evans so sort of but not totally yet
2007-11-21 16:43:52 · answer #11 · answered by Jacoby 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋