The Pats Should CONSIDER Replacing Matt Patricia - Page 7 - New England Patriots Forums

DarrylStingley · 01-24-2013, 12:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mayoclinic

I thought someone like Ray Horton would have been perfect.

Horton might have been perfect but he called Bill (and Josh) out after the Cards beat the Pats this year. Said that he knew what the Pats were going to do before they did it. He really made an ass out of himself and his comments got a lot of attention.

So based on that, I doubt he and Bill are exchanging XMas cards.

***DaBruinz*** · 01-24-2013, 12:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarrylStingley

Patricia didn't have the title but he was the coordinator last year too.

And you're simply wrong that you can't learn from silence. You can.

Imagine if we were sitting by the pool with 10 of our friends, and 10 gorgeous women walked by and each time our group erupted and made all kinds of positive comments about their looks.

Ten minutes later a very homely woman walked by and the group was totally silent.

In absence of any commentary from the group, you would not have facts about what they thought of the homely woman's looks.

But you could draw an inference from the silence.

Here it's the same.

Pats players were loud in their praise of Charlie, Romeo and Josh. We heard lots of positive "catcalls" about them. Pats players have been -- unless I missed it -- silent with regard to Matt.

Sure, there are no facts. We have no interviews to point to. But we can learn from silence. Just like we could learn what it meant about how the crowd perceived the homely woman.

Sorry, but no Pats Player during the 1st 3 SBs was loud in their praise of Charlie and Romeo unless the players was actually ASKED by the media about said coach.

Again, you've yet to answer whether or not any Defensive player has been asked about Patricia. Oh wait. You did. You said none of them have been asked that. So, if the media isn't asking, why would the players be talking about him?

Brady'sButtBoy · 01-24-2013, 12:40 PM

I'd certainly consider replacing him. Look at it this way - what have we seen to show he's added value to the defense? Not much. The unimpressive D might not be his fault but he's a party in it's lackluster performance and thus is fair game to be canned.

Honestly, what are the odds that someone would come in and do worse of a job? For that reason alone I think a change is worth the risk.

***DaBruinz*** · 01-24-2013, 12:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sciz

Bedard Review :In their biggest game, the Patriots failed to measure up

Yes, I know what Bedard claimed and he's full of garbage. I mistakenly said it was Curran in my last post.

I'm sorry, but I've watched the game 3 times and the Ravens only went to their Nickel/Dime package when the Pats lined up 4 or 5 receivers on the line. And that wasn't until late in the game after the Pats went down 21-13.

Get it shawtaay · 01-24-2013, 12:44 PM

What has Matt Patricia done that is so wrong, other than not be a household name? Its not like the defense is getting out-schemed or outsmarted out there. They just don't have the talent to measure up. The Pats front four couldn't get anywhere - Flacco could have checked his email back there - and if he blitzed it would leave Rice open. What do you want the guy to do? Go out and tackle someone himself?

DarrylStingley · 01-24-2013, 12:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaBruinz

Of course you do. Because, when actually challenged by facts, you'd rather stick to your SWAGS, INFERENCES, and ASSUMPTIONS.

We're in a situation in which we will not have direct evidence. The lack of same doesn't make you right.

Circumstantial evidence is sometimes all we have. We have it here, and I'm OK with assuming things based on observation and drawing inferences.

You are not and for some reason you think you have the exclusive truth on this. You don't, you are not correct in my view and that's fine.

But we're not going to agree and I don't see any value in going tit for tat given how wide our disagreement is.

***DaBruinz*** · 01-24-2013, 01:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarrylStingley

We're in a situation in which we will not have direct evidence. The lack of same doesn't make you right.

Circumstantial evidence is sometimes all we have. We have it here, and I'm OK with assuming things based on observation and drawing inferences.

You are not and for some reason you think you have the exclusive truth on this. You don't, you are not correct in my view and that's fine.

But we're not going to agree and I don't see any value in going tit for tat given how wide our disagreement is.

Well, there isn't even circumstantial evidence. All we have are your SWAGS, Inferences, and Assumptions.

No. I don't think I have the exclusive truth on this. On the contrary. All I have stated is that you are making assumptions based on no facts, not even circumstantial ones.

For you top say that I am not correct when I am using facts to support my claims is just laughable. You haven't used any facts to this point. None. In fact, you even admit that the media hasn't asked defensive players about Patricia and you INFER/ASSUME that Patricia is bad because the players haven't been effusive about him.. Yet, you can't comprehend the problem with that assumption.

So, please stop because you've already shown you have absolutely no willingness to deal in facts. You would rather just deal with your assumptions/ inference and lack of any evidence than with reality.

DarrylStingley · 01-24-2013, 01:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaBruinz

Well, there isn't even circumstantial evidence. All we have are your SWAGS, Inferences, and Assumptions.

No. I don't think I have the exclusive truth on this. On the contrary. All I have stated is that you are making assumptions based on no facts, not even circumstantial ones.

For you top say that I am not correct when I am using facts to support my claims is just laughable. You haven't used any facts to this point. None. In fact, you even admit that the media hasn't asked defensive players about Patricia and you INFER/ASSUME that Patricia is bad because the players haven't been effusive about him.. Yet, you can't comprehend the problem with that assumption.

So, please stop because you've already shown you have absolutely no willingness to deal in facts. You would rather just deal with your assumptions/ inference and lack of any evidence than with reality.

I am not going back and forth with you because I think your way of conversing is counter productive and not likely to lead to a good discussion.

And to be crystal clear, I never "admitted" that no one in the media has asked defensive players about Patricia. Good luck finding my post where I "admitted" that.

What I said is that I have not seen any quotes about how great Patricia is. I have not seen any defensive players say anything positive about him at all.

Now it's possible I've just missed it. I certainly don't read everything and I don't listen to Boston sports radio except for podcasts from WEEI and 98.5. So maybe some players have indeed praised Matt.

LetsGoPats36 · 01-24-2013, 01:47 PM

I'm sure it's been said already, but it needs to be repeated;

Mangini can ****ing suck it.

***Sciz*** · 01-24-2013, 02:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaBruinz

Yes, I know what Bedard claimed and he's full of garbage. I mistakenly said it was Curran in my last post.

I'm sorry, but I've watched the game 3 times and the Ravens only went to their Nickel/Dime package when the Pats lined up 4 or 5 receivers on the line. And that wasn't until late in the game after the Pats went down 21-13.

First five snaps of the game (but I'll keep doing more if I need to)
20 - Reed
31 - Pollard
29 - Williams
24 - Graham
23 - Brown
22 - Smith
32 - Ihedigbo

First snap: (Williams is off the screen the left; after this one I realized how impractical the back view is)

Second snap:

Third snap:

Fourth snap:

Fifth snap: