Buffalo Barbarian Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 All's fair. Ballard won't play in 2012, seeing as how he tore his ACL and had the repair plus microfracture surgery in February. And after this season, he'll be a RFA. so why bother? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 so why bother? It is confusing to many; he did this just to be a jerk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillyBaroo Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 Can we please stop the "Cheatriots" and "Bellicheat" references -- That was a long time ago - The Saints have to be referred to now in this way Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 I hate Belichick as much as anybody here but what did he do wrong here? He snatched up a player that was released by the Giants and now Coughlin is crying about it. Once he's been waived, he's fair game for any team. Considering that Merriman's done absolutely NOTHING for us and he's always injured, we still managed to hold on to him and not waive him. Why? BEcause we obviously see something in him and have faith him in. Giants have themselves to blame for losing Ballard Because he's been healthy going into the seasons - you don't have to waive merriman week 3 of the season to IR him. Different situation. That said..... Guys that are irreplaceable don't go through the same process that Ballard did. I think many still don't understand that to IR a guy today, he has to clear waivers, which is a bit tough for a gm. With expanded rosters it shouldn't have been a real issue though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRAWNDO Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 They were discussing this on PFW Radio Show this AM. It is a low risk high reward for the Pats. He will be on IR this season, but probably will be ready for 2013. The question will be how well will he be after microfracture surgery and the ACL Repair? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted June 18, 2012 Author Share Posted June 18, 2012 Can we please stop the "Cheatriots" and "Bellicheat" references -- That was a long time ago - The Saints have to be referred to now in this way No no and no. The Putz have gotten away with a lot of crap over the years. Just look at the NFL rules effected by Saint Brady. How fast did Godell burn the Putz tapes? VERY. He's still holding on the the "Hit Squad" material. Rumor has it that Greggggg had something similar in Buff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 so why bother? It is confusing to many; he did this just to be a jerk. As below, it's a low-risk move that may pay dividends. Waiting until 10 minutes before the end of the claiming period is a jerk move. However Coughlin has the last laugh, in the form of his 2 SB victories over him, and can beat him without Ballard, +/- Ballard on the Cheatriots. Can we please stop the "Cheatriots" and "Bellicheat" references -- That was a long time ago - The Saints have to be referred to now in this way While distasteful, I wouldn't say the Saints cheated. I don't recall any of their cart-offs being the result of illegal hits. And hard hits/bounties have been around since almost the beginning of football. The Cheatriots OTOH... They were discussing this on PFW Radio Show this AM. It is a low risk high reward for the Pats. He will be on IR this season, but probably will be ready for 2013. The question will be how well will he be after microfracture surgery and the ACL Repair? It's low risk, but the reward is completely unknown because of his ACL/microfracture surgery. If it were a simple ACL, then it would likely be high-reward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 Can we please stop the "Cheatriots" and "Bellicheat" references -- That was a long time ago - The Saints have to be referred to now in this way You are free to refer to them* as you wish - however, the correct TSW nomenclature for the group* of recidivist rule-breakers from Foxboro* is Cheatriettes* (not Cheatriots*) (Also, proper TSW protocol mandates adding an asterisk to any mention of said NE* team*, its* front-office*, coaching staff*, and all player-personnel*) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillyBaroo Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 You are free to refer to them* as you wish - however, the correct TSW nomenclature for the group* of recidivist rule-breakers from Foxboro* is Cheatriettes* (not Cheatriots*) (Also, proper TSW protocol mandates adding an asterisk to any mention of said NE* team*, its* front-office*, coaching staff*, and all player-personnel*) Cheatriettes* it is then if the Senator says so... Is that a nod to the French Huguenot population that settled in lower New England and contended for control with the dominant Puritan influences from the Massachusetts area? Lutherans should also be represented if TSW wants to be all inclusive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthernMan Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 And if you want to go WAY back in time, also Jack Kemp... Link - How The Chargers Lost Jack Kemp When the usual whiners started blasting Belichick, I immediately thought of how the Bills acquired Kemp. I was looking to see if somebody here would bring up Kemp, 'cause if you hadn't, I would have. Thanks. All's fair folks. I hate BB and the Pats as much as the next guy, but if there's a move that will help the team and is within the NFL rules, standards, bylaws or whatever... WTF? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pneumonic Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 (edited) It's not going to cost the Pats much $ to possibly get a steal out of this. $540k in '12 and then the veteran minimum in '13. By then, who knows what the Pats will end up with. Might be an unhealthy dud or it could be a close facsimile to the Ballard that posted 38 catches for 604 yards his 1st season starting. And this from a 6-6, 275# TE who is more skilled at run/pass blocking. Also, keep in mind the new IR rules this year ..... a team can bring back one player who is on IR during the season. Might Ballard be ready to play for the Pats come playoff time this year? What a late season addition that could be! Should this kid return to anywhere near form, a TE trio of Gronk, Hernandez and Ballard would be sickening. Gronk and Ballard would form a devastating blocking duo with receiving skills to cause serious headaches. Toss in the very dangerous and versatile Hernandez, not to mention Welker and Lloyd and ........ nightmarish matchup woes for defenses! If healthy, and not needed, I suppose they could always look to trade Ballard .... something BB is highly effective at doing. Edited June 20, 2012 by Pneumonic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 It's not going to cost the Pats much $ to possibly get a steal out of this. $540k in '12 and then the veteran minimum in '13. By then, who knows what the Pats will end up with. Might be an unhealthy dud or it could be a close facsimile to the Ballard that posted 38 catches for 604 yards his 1st season starting. And this from a 6-6, 275# TE who is more skilled at run/pass blocking. Also, keep in mind the new IR rules this year ..... a team can bring back one player who is on IR during the season. Might Ballard be ready to play for the Pats come playoff time this year? What a late season addition that could be! Should this kid return to anywhere near form, a TE trio of Gronk, Hernandez and Ballard would be sickening. Gronk and Ballard would form a devastating blocking duo with receiving skills to cause serious headaches. Toss in the very dangerous and versatile Hernandez, not to mention Welker and Lloyd and ........ nightmarish matchup woes for defenses! If healthy, and not needed, I suppose they could always look to trade Ballard .... something BB is highly effective at doing. has the rule actually passed yet? last i heard was still debate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luxy312 Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 has the rule actually passed yet? last i heard was still debate The rule has passed. However, it doesn't go into effect until 2013. That to me is what makes this Ballard move all the more puzzling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 Cheatriettes* it is then if the Senator says so... Is that a nod to the French Huguenot population that settled in lower New England and contended for control with the dominant Puritan influences from the Massachusetts area? Lutherans should also be represented if TSW wants to be all inclusive. I have no quarrel with Martin Luther or his followers, nor do I necessarily care about being all-inclusive I do, however, consider all Cheatriettes* fans* to be LOWER New Englanders... GO BILLSSS!!!! "I expect to be undefeated...I expect to win every game." - Chan Gailey 19 and 0 baby!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pneumonic Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 (edited) The rule has passed. However, it doesn't go into effect until 2013. That to me is what makes this Ballard move all the more puzzling. Pending the expected approval by the NFLPA the rule goes into effect for this upcoming season. What isn't known for sure, is if players who were injured prior to the start of the season, are eligible to be the IR player selected. If not, the Pats could still place Ballard on PUP and activate him anytime after week 7 up until week 13. Or, just re-hab him and bring him back for 2013 and 2014. Edited June 20, 2012 by Pneumonic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 It's not going to cost the Pats much $ to possibly get a steal out of this. $540k in '12 and then the veteran minimum in '13. By then, who knows what the Pats will end up with. Might be an unhealthy dud or it could be a close facsimile to the Ballard that posted 38 catches for 604 yards his 1st season starting. And this from a 6-6, 275# TE who is more skilled at run/pass blocking. Also, keep in mind the new IR rules this year ..... a team can bring back one player who is on IR during the season. Might Ballard be ready to play for the Pats come playoff time this year? What a late season addition that could be! Should this kid return to anywhere near form, a TE trio of Gronk, Hernandez and Ballard would be sickening. Gronk and Ballard would form a devastating blocking duo with receiving skills to cause serious headaches. Toss in the very dangerous and versatile Hernandez, not to mention Welker and Lloyd and ........ nightmarish matchup woes for defenses! If healthy, and not needed, I suppose they could always look to trade Ballard .... something BB is highly effective at doing. Time will tell. But given the facts that none of the other 30 teams except for the scorned Pats took a chance on him, and the Giants risked exposing him to the waiver wire rather than releasing the 90th best player on their roster so they could keep him, it doesn't speak too well for his future. As for 2013 (which is the earliest Ballard has a chance to return), will Welker even be around? Doesn't sound like a long-term contract is coming anytime soon. Lloyd could likewise be gone, if he fails to show that 2010 was a fluke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pneumonic Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 Time will tell. But given the facts that none of the other 30 teams except for the scorned Pats took a chance on him, and the Giants risked exposing him to the waiver wire rather than releasing the 90th best player on their roster so they could keep him, it doesn't speak too well for his future. As for 2013 (which is the earliest Ballard has a chance to return), will Welker even be around? Doesn't sound like a long-term contract is coming anytime soon. Lloyd could likewise be gone, if he fails to show that 2010 was a fluke. Not sure you can draw much of a conclusion based on what other teams didn't do re: Ballard. As for the Giants placing Ballard on waivers instead of keeping him on the 90, judging by their response, it appears as though they realize that they made a serious blunder. Ballard could return this season if he's healed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 Not sure you can draw much of a conclusion based on what other teams didn't do re: Ballard. As for the Giants placing Ballard on waivers instead of keeping him on the 90, judging by their response, it appears as though they realize that they made a serious blunder. Ballard could return this season if he's healed. The chances are slim at best that he returns this year. Welker impressively returned after 9 months, but he had just an ACL (and MCL, which is nothing) tear, not microfracture in addition to an ACL. But he knew the Pats' playbook inside and out and had played in the system for years. As for the 30 other teams who passed on a guy who had 38 catches for 604 yards and 4 TD's last year in his first year starting, yeah, I'd say that's a big tell that they're not too confident in his ability to return to the game. It's a low-risk move to claim him and IR him, and look for him to play in 2013 or beyond. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pneumonic Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 The chances are slim at best that he returns this year. Welker impressively returned after 9 months, but he had just an ACL (and MCL, which is nothing) tear, not microfracture in addition to an ACL. But he knew the Pats' playbook inside and out and had played in the system for years. As for the 30 other teams who passed on a guy who had 38 catches for 604 yards and 4 TD's last year in his first year starting, yeah, I'd say that's a big tell that they're not too confident in his ability to return to the game. It's a low-risk move to claim him and IR him, and look for him to play in 2013 or beyond. All players heal at different rates and degrees so who knows when he'll be back. No team, except for perhaps the Giants, would have any clue about Ballard's prognosis for full recovery. That's why, inferring teams non interest in him, as an indication of his future health, is a stretch, at best. The Pats are gambling $540k that he'll recover and be a productive player for them. If he does come back, they stole a very capable TE who has size, skill, youth and promise on his side. If he doesn't come back, no biggie! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 All players heal at different rates and degrees so who knows when he'll be back. No team, except for perhaps the Giants, would have any clue about Ballard's prognosis for full recovery. That's why, inferring teams non interest in him, as an indication of his future health, is a stretch, at best. The Pats are gambling $540k that he'll recover and be a productive player for them. If he does come back, they stole a very capable TE who has size, skill, youth and promise on his side. If he doesn't come back, no biggie! There is ample evidence to know when he'll likely be returning and what the odds of him returning will be, given his injuries. But yes, as I've said before, it's a low-risk move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts