We're leading in the division

[mgteich]

I agree.

Most here that think that we WILL win the division and our home playoff game and then we are toast.

I have no idea why we would be a lock to lose to the colts. Have we gotten so much worse since the last time we played them? Have they gotten better?

I refuse to think being 7-5 and headed to the playoffs means the season is over. I especially refuse to think that when 4 of those 5 losses were very closer to being wins that we cant fix the issues that caused that.

 

[Ring 6]

There is a thing called inferenced information. Say you see all bank's stock going up next Monday morning, you did not have access to news, you can still infer some kind of data/news favorable to financials just came out.

Let's say another football organization with similar amount of information as us, but end up making a much better decision. I could inference our decision maker has not made optimal decisions. It it happens repeatly, then my confidence of the inference increases. Just like when you see financial stocks go up for a month, you basically know there are a string of very good news without ACTUALLY HAVING KNOWLEDGE OF THE REAL news. You don't need to know EVERYTHING to arrive at that conclusion.

Case in point, we badly need LBs in the draft. Cincy/Houston/Greenbay drafted Maualuga/Cushing/Mathews. We passed on all of them TWICE. They are playing near pro bowl level. We shelf'd Crable, traded Vrable, released Redd, and drafted a non name McKenzie. Our LB play has been very weak. That whole experience told you that the decision-making has been very poor.

So because Bill knows more insights of football, does not mean you can not compare his decision making skills against other teams. Actually you have plenty to compare and contrast.

Inference, my friend, is the key to solving your information asymetry problem.

All well and good if you are in a position to accurately judge the data. We do not know how any of those players fit our system or graded out with our scouts, interiewed, or would do in our defense which has them playing a very different position. LB is not LB. OLB in Cinci or GB or Houston is not ILB or OLB in NE. What good would it do us to draft a guy who cannot play in our system but can in someone else?
Dwight Freeney couldn't play for us. Does that mean we were wrong to not draft him?

 

[Ring 6]

I find it pretty funny that you're acting like it's unreasonable that Seymour could have 8 sacks here in New England in a 2-gap scheme, when that's exactly how many sacks he had here last year

Im saying you cant compare apples to oranges

 

[Deus Irae]

We just have a different outlook.
I try to figure out why we will win the next game. With BB here, that's easy for me.
I try to look at the whole picture. Over the years I have come to realize that BB is right more than anyone else. He is also wrong often, but less than anyone else.

When Pete Carroll amd Bobby Grier were here, I expected that I would be disappointed.
With BB here I expect that I will be pleasantly surprised.

Of course the irony here is that I began to question Belichick more and more forcefully over the course of this offseason as I was able to see more and more of the whole picture, yet you're claiming that you are looking at precisely that.

Retired starters at safety and linebacker (*3, although one came back)
Traded starter at LB
Traded starter at CB, and one of the best return men in the game
Failed to sign chosen LB replacement, 2 LB draft picks lost for the season

Then....

Traded starter/frequent Pro Bowler/potential HOF player on the DL, which BB has said is where he builds his defense from.

It doesn't take a football genius to see the inherent problem in trading away your best defensive player in a situation like that. Hell, even if you only looked at Seymour as your 3rd best defensive player, trading him was STILL a bad move under the circumstances. The only possible defense is the draft pick (which is a crap defense), and that's at the expense of this season.

I suppose the differnece between you and I is this:

1) I believe that from my vantage point I have about 15% of the date necessary to make (or judge) the appropriate decision

You're partially right here. I think that there are things where I have plenty of data available to form my opinion on. Of course, so do you, and you've done so in the past. The difference is that I don't have a problem when my opinion runs counter to BB. That's where you go off the rails.

2) Given #1, if I trust the guy making the decision (which I do today) I believe in the decision, or at least believe the decision will be right more often than normal, you seem to not

You know full well that I think Belichick has historically been right more than wrong with this team. This is just you attempting to create more men of straw.

3) I am optimistic until proven wrong instead of pessimistic until proven wrong

I am consistent until proven wrong, whether my analysis seems optimistic or pessimistic. There's nothing optimistic about blindly following someone. Frankly, it's about as pessimistic as it gets. It says that you unconsciously don't feel that the person being followed could stand up to scrutiny, and also that you're not smart enough to see where things have gone wrong.

4) I could care less if my post on a message board turn out to be right or wrong, I post to express my feelings about the team, which often turns out to be to overcome my concerns and make me feel better. I predict the Patriots to win every single game in the prediction thread. I do not believe they will win every single game but I enjoy being a fan more when I expect they are going to.

If you could care less, why do you bother posting disagreements with others on the message board? Frankly, you should just be using the new Blog feature which Ian has installed. By doing that, you could just post your feelings and look back at them in the future, without all that messy 'disagreement' stuff that you get in the message board proper. The message board proper is set up for people with varying opinions, after all.

 

[tanked_as_usual]

I agree.

Most here that think that we WILL win the division and our home playoff game and then we are toast.

I have no idea why we would be a lock to lose to the colts. Have we gotten so much worse since the last time we played them? Have they gotten better?

based on what's been going on lately, the pats give the appearance that any decent QB can throw at will against the pats largely because the is no pass rush. if the pats can manage to put pressure on the QB, then they have a chance to go far. if they can't put pressure on the QB, then the pats do not have a chance.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Im saying you cant compare apples to oranges

Then compare apples to apples. Seymour's track record in New England speaks for itself.

 

[bigfandan]

All well and good if you are in a position to accurately judge the data. We do not know how any of those players fit our system or graded out with our scouts, interiewed, or would do in our defense which has them playing a very different position. LB is not LB. OLB in Cinci or GB or Houston is not ILB or OLB in NE. What good would it do us to draft a guy who cannot play in our system but can in someone else?
Dwight Freeney couldn't play for us. Does that mean we were wrong to not draft him?

You are falling in the same logic trap again. We don't need to know EVERYTHING before we could judge ANYTHING. Use inference for a minute, compare the sad state of our DL and LB group with other teams building strong defenses from draft, does that show you anything?

BTW, these guys play 3-4 very well. Maybe our grading system was not good. The net result is a bad product on the field.

 

[BradyFTW!]

You are falling in the same logic trap again. We don't need to know EVERYTHING therefore we could judge ANYTHING. Use inference for a minute, compare the sad state of our DL and LB group with other teams building strong defenses from draft, does that show you anything?

BTW, these guys play 3-4 very well. Maybe our grading system was not good. The net result is a bad product on the field.

Not to mention that, if it's true that "none of those guys could play in our scheme", then that's a scheme failing. I don't care how good your scheme should be in theory, if you can't find anyone who's capable of running it then that's a pretty huge problem.

 

[Ring 6]

You are falling in the same logic trap again. We don't need to know EVERYTHING therefore we could judge ANYTHING. Use inference for a minute, compare the sad state of our DL and LB group with other teams building strong defenses from draft, does that show you anything?

BTW, these guys play 3-4 very well. Maybe our grading system was not good. The net result is a bad product on the field.

Maybe Im crazy but I think that if BB has a pick and those guys are available and he passes, then they go on to do well in a different system (and 2gap is our system, not 34, there is an enormous difference) then I conclide they didnt fit our system. The alternative is to conclude BB is a moron.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Maybe Im crazy but I think that if BB has a pick and those guys are available and he passes, then they go on to do well in a different system (and 2gap is our system, not 34, there is an enormous difference) then I conclide they didnt fit our system. The alternative is to conclude BB is a moron.

See above post. If we can't find anyone who can play in our system, and have to pass up superior talents year in and year out as a result, then that's a system failing. So we're definitely failing somewhere, whether it's in system or evaluation...

 

[Ring 6]

Not to mention that, if it's true that "none of those guys could play in our scheme", then that's a scheme failing. I don't care how good your scheme should be in theory, if you can't find anyone who's capable of running it then that's a pretty huge problem.

Its not a matter of no one can play in our system its a matter of our system values inteligence and size over athleticism and speed.
Your argument would follow that if we draft a big, smart guy who does well, them the Colts who value athleticism and speed didnt draft him and that means their system has a huge problem and they cant find anyone capable of playing it.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Its not a matter of no one can play in our system its a matter of our system values inteligence and size over athleticism and speed.
Your argument would follow that if we draft a big, smart guy who does well, them the Colts who value athleticism and speed didnt draft him and that means their system has a huge problem and they cant find anyone capable of playing it.

Not at all, because the Colts routinely find guys who can play in their system just fine. Meanwhile, OLB has been a critical need that we've neglected for years on end, and everytime we pass up a good prospect who goes on to prosper elsewhere, the same "he doesn't fit our system" argument gets trotted out. Fine, then- if that's the case, then how about we go and find someone who can play in our system?

Since we've failed to do that repeatedly since 2005, either we're failing at evaluating OLBs or we're failing at putting them in a position to succeed. Either way, it's a major problem. You can't win in the NFL without a pass rush, and we don't have one. If our system is so complicated that have to keep passing on guys who could solve this problem, then maybe it's time to modify that system.

 

[Ring 6]

See above post. If we can't find anyone who can play in our system, and have to pass up superior talents year in and year out as a result, then that's a system failing.

You speak as if we fail as a franchise and defense, yet we are in the process of finishing a decade as its most successful team, and a team that ranked in the top 5-10 in defense pretty much year in and year out.
If you suck, its appropriate to yearn for what you lack.
When you are great, yearning for what you lack is ignoring what you are about. In the BB years, we have been great, overall and on defense.

 

[Ring 6]

Not at all, because the Colts routinely find guys who can play in their system just fine. Meanwhile, OLB has been a critical need that we've neglected for years on end, and everytime we pass up a good prospect who goes on to prosper elsewhere, the same "he doesn't fit our system" argument gets trotted out. Fine, then- if that's the case, then how about we go and find someone who can play in our system?

Since we've failed to do that repeatedly since 2005, either we're failing at evaluating OLBs or we're failing at putting them in a position to succeed. Either way, it's a major problem.

And the Colts routinely are not as good as us.
How have we neglected OLB when we have had McGinest, Vrabel, Colvin. Thomas in this decade?
The fact that other teams draft OLBs that wouldnt succed in our system while we have been excellent at the position for most of a decade escapes me as a problem.
Show me the OLB we passed up who fits our criteria, and we can discuss.

 

[bigfandan]

Maybe Im crazy but I think that if BB has a pick and those guys are available and he passes, then they go on to do well in a different system (and 2gap is our system, not 34, there is an enormous difference) then I conclide they didnt fit our system. The alternative is to conclude BB is a moron.

Like BradyFTW pointed out, if your scheme handicap'd your drafting so severly that very few players could fit in, you are handcuffing yourself; you won't have impact players and you got a huge problem. That is kind of the trend with Bill and LBs.

Scheme, grading, does not matter, you can't take advantage of the crop of talents available to you while other teams can, and you have a bad product on the field, what say you?

 

[BradyFTW!]

You speak as if we fail as a franchise and defense, yet we are in the process of finishing a decade as its most successful team, and a team that ranked in the top 5-10 in defense pretty much year in and year out.
If you suck, its appropriate to yearn for what you lack.
When you are great, yearning for what you lack is ignoring what you are about. In the BB years, we have been great, overall and on defense.

In recent years, the defense has failed repeatedly. 2005, 2006, and 2008 were all years where our seasons ended most prominently because of defensive collapses. And this year's defense is the worst of the bunch.

Nobody's claiming that the Pats aren't the team of the decade. We're just pointing out that the pass rush, and OLB in particular, has been a major problem area for years now, and Belichick hasn't effectively addressed it. Until it's addressed, there won't be any more Super Bowls for the Pats. BTW, if you go back to this preseason, I was actually on the same page as you- I thought we were fine on defense. It's not like this is a point that I've been insistently arguing throughout. I just hated the personnel moves that we made between then and now, watched the games, and realized that my initial opinions had been wrong.

 

[Deus Irae]

Maybe Im crazy but I think that if BB has a pick and those guys are available and he passes, then they go on to do well in a different system (and 2gap is our system, not 34, there is an enormous difference) then I conclide they didnt fit our system. The alternative is to conclude BB is a moron.

Actually, there are multiple alternatives. For example:

1.) BB felt the need was greater elsewhere. In such a case, he could be right or wrong in his analysis of his team.

2.) BB felt he could pick up someone at that position later in the draft. Again, he could be right or wrong.

3.) BB felt there were adequate players available in free agency, that he'd be able to get. Again, he could be right or wrong.

4.) BB felt there were adequate players available in trade, that he'd be able to get. Again, he could be right or wrong.

5.) BB just blew the pick, despite being a generally qualified person.


One of the problems with being a 'homer' or a 'hater' is that you often get stuck in a binary situation, where everything has to be a "1" or a "0". We're seeing a lot of that stupidity with the AdT bashing. Some things really are all or nothing, black or white. Sports fandom doesn't need to be one of those things.

 

[mgteich]

Belichick is not a moron for passing on Matthews and Laurinitis. He thought that he could get more value picking other players. This draft will turn out to have been a fine draft.

As we all discussed at the time, Belichick chose to use resources elsewhere. He was willing to go with Thomas, Banta-Cain and Woods on the outside (and hopefully Crable) and Mayo, Guyton and his rookie McKenzie on the inside plus another free agent or two. We hoped to sign a top OLB, but it never worked out. Ninkovich was adequate replacement for the production fo McKenzie.

The question is where did Belichick fall down, if at all. Some would say he failed to sign a top free agent OLB as he thought he could. We clearly needed the help once Vrabel was gone before free agency even started. In any case, then and now most of us thought that more resources needed to be spent on the linebacker position. And obviously, signing Burgess to replace Seymour who Belichick was looking to cut was devastating.

So, the bottom line is that Belichick traded Vrabel and Seymour. Let's give him the benefit of the doubt. Let's say that these trades needed to happen for whatever reason. Who were the replacements?

Maybe Im crazy but I think that if BB has a pick and those guys are available and he passes, then they go on to do well in a different system (and 2gap is our system, not 34, there is an enormous difference) then I conclide they didnt fit our system. The alternative is to conclude BB is a moron.

 

[Ring 6]

Not at all, because the Colts routinely find guys who can play in their system just fine. Meanwhile, OLB has been a critical need that we've neglected for years on end, and everytime we pass up a good prospect who goes on to prosper elsewhere, the same "he doesn't fit our system" argument gets trotted out. Fine, then- if that's the case, then how about we go and find someone who can play in our system?

Since we've failed to do that repeatedly since 2005, either we're failing at evaluating OLBs or we're failing at putting them in a position to succeed. Either way, it's a major problem. You can't win in the NFL without a pass rush, and we don't have one. If our system is so complicated that have to keep passing on guys who could solve this problem, then maybe it's time to modify that system.

Wow, maybe you are right. Show me. Post the Colts playoff record this decade and the Patriots. For that ,atter, post the Colt defensive rankings and the Pats. I think you'll stop hoping we become the Colts.

 

[BradyFTW!]

And the Colts routinely are not as good as us.
How have we neglected OLB when we have had McGinest, Vrabel, Colvin. Thomas in this decade?
The fact that other teams draft OLBs that wouldnt succed in our system while we have been excellent at the position for most of a decade escapes me as a problem.
Show me the OLB we passed up who fits our criteria, and we can discuss.

Apparently you missed the part in my post where I said since 2005. The only one of those guys who wasn't here pre-2005 is Thomas, and he's just gotten himself benched for the season.

As for the others, yeah, McGinest, Vrabel and Colvin were all excellent OLBs. Back when they were playing for us, we had a pass rush. This was one of a number of reasons why our defense was dominant and we won SBs. Too bad they all got old and we, for one reason or another, were unable to replace them.