Article on McDaniels and his role in the Pats offense - Page 2 - New England Patriots Forums

***Rob0729*** · 04-05-2009, 10:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RayClay

It's just not a good article, similar to the recent Seymour article. I didn't need to go beyond your quote to find stuff that doesn't sound like it was written by someone who knew what he was talking about.

I have no opinion about McDaniels and hope he does well as long as it doesn't negatively affect us.

It the Bleacher Report. Most of the stuff are not good articles in terms of the writing and anyone can write one. I really not looking at anything in this report other than the information he supposably got from a Patriots' insider. Just because the writer doesn't know much about football, doesn't mean the information isn't true. It very well may be BS, but if it isn't it is an interesting debate on the effects of McDaniels loss.

***Rob0729*** · 04-05-2009, 11:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RayClay

Plus "game planning" and "situational football" are by definition two completely different things.

Game planning could be coming up with a unique game plan for each opponent.

Being prepared for a given situation that could occur in any game. is "sf"

Being prepared for many situations doesn't even make sense. Of course you try to be prepared for any possible situation, but there isn't a name for that.

Well, gameplanning and situational football can be the same thing. If you gameplan for certain situations, then it is situational football. Although the term is usually associated with play calling rather than gameplanning.

As being prepared for any possible situation, I would call it situational readiness. Belichick has preached that on both sides of the ball since 2000 though.

RayClay · 04-05-2009, 11:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rob0729

It the Bleacher Report. Most of the stuff are not good articles in terms of the writing and anyone can write one. I really not looking at anything in this report other than the information he supposably got from a Patriots' insider. Just because the writer doesn't know much about football, doesn't mean the information isn't true. It very well may be BS, but if it isn't it is an interesting debate on the effects of McDaniels loss.

Well, someone that doesn't know the basics loses me. Why should i trust him, when i disbelieve far more authoritative sources? I'll go out on a limb and guess it's not NEM, though.

Also being afraid to sign your name to an article isn't a good sign.

RayClay · 04-05-2009, 11:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rob0729

Well, gameplanning and situational football can be the same thing. If you gameplan for certain situations, then it is situational football. Although the term is usually associated with play calling rather than gameplanning.

As being prepared for any possible situation, I would call it situational readiness. Belichick has preached that on both sides of the ball since 2000 though.

Situational football is practicing certain down and distance, time factors etc. that could occur in any game, in other words situations. Game planning is planning for a certain type of team.

If you use the English language loosely, anything can be anything else, but those two terms have precise meanings.

Maybe some situations occur most often with certain offensive packages. But mushing everything together blurs the actual meanings.

tobias funke · 04-05-2009, 11:08 AM

If McDaniels is the offensive mind he is made out to be in this article, wouldn't it stand to reason that Belichick will have learned a great deal from Josh in the process of mentoring him?

Even though it's often forgotten, teaching goes both ways.

***Rob0729*** · 04-05-2009, 11:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RayClay

Well, someone that doesn't know the basics loses me. Why should i trust him, when i disbelieve far more authoritative sources? I'll go out on a limb and guess it's not NEM, though.

Also being afraid to sign your name to an article isn't a good sign.

The guy who wrote it is named Usama Shah. He signed his name to the article. The site I originally posted is just a dummy site that pulls Bleacher Report posts and claims them as their own with no writer attached.

Who is Usama Shah? Who knows? He might have a contact inside the Patriots. It also could be a low level nothing who Belichick couldn't pick out of a line up that included Matt Walsh.

All we know about the source (if there really is a source) is that he/she has been there since 1992. The only one in the coaching staff been that long is Dante Scarnecchia, but joined the Pats in 1982. So it would have to be someone in the offices if there is someone and it may not be anyone close to the coaching staff.

***Frezo*** · 04-05-2009, 11:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rob0729

Well, you can say that about anyone in the NFL including Belichick though. Would Belichick been the same coach if he didn't learn under Parcells, Ray Perkins, and Ted Marchabroda. Considering he runs a defense that he learned from Perkins and then from Parcells, I would say no although he might have been as successful running a different system. Most coaches' successes and failures are at leastin part of the the head coaches they learn under. Why else do you see the best head coaches have the most assistants get head coaching jobs. That is why we talk about Bill Walsh's, Bill Parcell's, Jimmy Johnson's, and Bill Belichick's coaching trees. When have we ever talked about Herm Edwards' coaching tree?

That was exactly my point. Everything is still in place for O'Brien to be successful. There is also an indication that members of the immediate Belichick coaching tree have only been successful while under the direct tutelage of Belichick.

Just because Herm wasn't used in a prior discussion, it doesn't mean that he can't be used in a loose analogy.

***Rob0729*** · 04-05-2009, 11:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RayClay

Situational football is practicing certain down and distance, time factors etc. that could occur in any game, in other words situations. Game planning is planning for a certain type of team.

If you use the English language loosely, anything can be anything else, but those two terms have precise meanings.

Maybe some situations occur most often with certain offensive packages. But mushing everything together blurs the actual meanings.

Well, there really isn't an official definition for the term situational football. It is generally accepted as what you said on the individual play level that you run plays based on the situation, but it doesn't mean it isn't applied to weekly gameplans too. At least by people who don't know the term like this author.

***Rob0729*** · 04-05-2009, 11:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tobias funke

If McDaniels is the offensive mind he is made out to be in this article, wouldn't it stand to reason that Belichick will have learned a great deal from Josh in the process of mentoring him?

Even though it's often forgotten, teaching goes both ways.

I'm sure that if the article is true, Belichick has learned a lot from McDaniels. So has Brady. Belichick is constantly trying to learn new ways to make this team more effective. He visits with Urban Meyers every year for that reason. It isn't a coincidence that the Pats started to make their offense more like Meyer's spread offense after the yearly visits to Florida started. I am sure that Belichick's yearly fishing outings with Jimmy Johnson include a lot of exchanging of ideas.

Even if McDaniels is an offensive genius, a lot of what he has learned came directly or indirectly from Belichick anyway.

***Rob0729*** · 04-05-2009, 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frezo

That was exactly my point. Everything is still in place for O'Brien to be successful. There is also an indication that members of the immediate Belichick coaching tree have only been successful while under the direct tutelage of Belichick.

Just because Herm wasn't used in a prior discussion, it doesn't mean that he can't be used in a loose analogy.

A couple of things. I never said that O'Brien couldn't end up being as good or better than either McDaniels or Weis. He may very well be.

Also, I think people overstate the failures of former Belichick assistants after they leave. Mangini was probably not ready to leave and suffered for it. Crennel didn't shop for the groceries and his conflicts with Phil Savage who was shopping for the groceries are well documented. Thomas Dimitroff, although a front office guy and not a coach, has been a huge success so far. Weis is in college and sometimes the skills don't translate. Beside, he is at a school that is at a disadvantage for recruiting. ND still requires an academic standard which precludes some of the best high school prospects. Lastly, just because someone is a great coordinator, doesn't mean he will be a great head coach. That is probably why guys like Monty Kiffin, Tom Moore (granted he is probably a product of Peyton Manning), and Jim Johnson (Eagles) never pursued head coaching jobs.