Wisdom of Solomon: There’s no room to second-guess Belichick

[MoLewisrocks]

Welker's injury was a football injury. It happened because he was playing football and making a play. The so-called "fluke" injury is one of the reasons you rest players during 'meaningless' games.

This is why you are becoming part of the problem when you used to project as part of the solution beyond your incessant penchant for dragging threads off topic to beat minutae into the ground...

Who do you rest? Can only dress 45 and have to play at least 25 pending injury. Do you risk rotating some of the 20 odd remaining actives to avoid injuring the 25 or do you throw the 25 to the wolves and simply refuse use any player who generally sees more than 50% of the snaps in meaningful game situations?? Remember this isn't preseason when you have access to 80 odd players your attempting to evaluate. Do you mix and match unfortunate starters and backups and third stringers even though playing those groupings may throw off timing and communications across the board and even end up increasing the exposure to football injury for an entire class of players...the starters or key rotational or backup players who can't sit...

Or do you selectively manage your roster as you always do with an eye towards both short and long term goals predicated on winning football games? Do you rest only players who need it most and play those starters who would normally start who need to play or who comprise units that continue to need reps in game conditions to develop cohesive execution and consistency in some limited fashion?

I hope you're listening to Fred and Steve and even Ordway right now because they are laying out the myriad rationales that all football coaches deal with in these situations in every game from pre to post season regardless of whether or not winning that individual game has any impact on the overall season. Football coaches and players, let alone players and coaches with a winning mindset and track record, don't think like you do Deus, and the sooner you figure that out the sooner the rest of us will be the better for it...

 

[Clonamery]

This is a message board. It's tough to talk about things happening before the fact if we're not in the "war" room to discuss them with BB and company during the planning stages. However, if it makes you feel better, Mgteich posted about it prior to game time, and I'm confident that he's not the only person who discussed resting players prior to the game.

My feelings are meaningless.

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

Wait.... are you trying to claim that Bodden, Faulk and Maroney were out due to injury?

Uhhh I'm not the site clown pretending that I was a clairvoyant Sunday morning.

Were they dinged up? I don't know because my team doesn't confide in me. I'm not like you.

Did Welker/Moss play to maintain continuity/work on something? I don't know.

What does your crystal ball say?

What can be judged is what happened Sunday vs what history has shown to be prudent. Obviously, as site clown that it of zero interest.

 

[Deus Irae]

This is why you are becoming part of the problem when you used to project as part of the solution beyond your incessant penchant for dragging threads off topic to beat minutae into the ground...

Belichick could blow up 150 buildings throughout the U.S. and you'd be telling us all that he's above reproach because he brought 3 Super Bowls to New England. But, that's ok. You keep telling the rest of us that we aren't Patriots friendly enough while you keep that screen name. Try looking into a mirror and being less hypocritical.

Who do you rest? Can only dress 45 and have to play at least 25 pending injury. Do you risk rotating some of the 20 odd remaining actives to avoid injuring the 25 or do you throw the 25 to the wolves and simply refuse use any player who generally sees more than 50% of the snaps in meaningful game situations?? Remember this isn't preseason when you have access to 80 odd players your attempting to evaluate. Do you mix and match unfortunate starters and backups and third stringers even though playing those groupings may throw off timing and communications across the board and even end up increasing the exposure to football injury for an entire class of players...the starters or key rotational or backup players who can't sit...

You rest Welker all game, and Brady after a series or two. You rest Moss whenever (he's outside and doesn't have a 'backup' like Edelman, so once he's out of the game, everything changes), and go with Edelman, Slater, Aiken and Stanbach as your receivers. This is pretty easy stuff here. Belichick certainly didn't have any problem tossing out that sort of lineup for the game's final drive.

Or do you selectively manage your roster as you always do with an eye towards both short and long term goals predicated on winning football games? Do you rest only players who need it most and play those starters who would normally start who need to play or who comprise units that continue to need reps in game conditions to develop cohesive execution and consistency in some limited fashion?

Welker takes the biggest beating of any receiver on the team, and he had an injury earlier in the season which required him to miss games. And, again, Edelman is there as a backup.

I hope you're listening to Fred and Steve and even Ordway right now because they are laying out the myriad rationales that all football coaches deal with in these situations in every game from pre to post season regardless of whether or not winning that individual game has any impact on the overall season. Football coaches and players, let alone players and coaches with a winning mindset and track record, don't think like you do Deus, and the sooner you figure that out the sooner the rest of us will be the better for it...

Actually, the question of resting players vs. playing them is an ongoing question, with "football coaches and players" coming down publicly on both sides of the issue, often switching positions depending upon the circumstances. The sooner you stop trying to tell others how these people think when you don't know any more about it than many of the rest of us, the sooner the rest of us will be better for it.

 

[fumbrunner]

Shoulda coulda woulda, lovely.

Hindsight is Deus' specialty.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

My feelings are meaningless.

This is generally true for me too, but in light of the fact the mg had expounded on a strategy pre game apparently even moreso...:ugh:

 

[Clonamery]

The sooner you stop trying to tell others how these people think when you don't know any more about it than MANY of the rest of us, the sooner the rest of us will be better for it.

("Many" is capitilaized for emphasis.) At least you know what's what.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Belichick could blow up 150 buildings throughout the U.S. and you'd be telling us all that he's above reproach because he brought 3 Super Bowls to New England. But, that's ok. You keep telling the rest of us that we aren't Patriots friendly enough while you keep that screen name. Try looking into a mirror and being less hypocritical.

It's really sad, you're becoming the kind of poster you used to rail against...

You rest Welker all game, and Brady after a series or two. You rest Moss whenever (he's outside and doesn't have a 'backup' like Edelman, so once he's out of the game, everything changes), and go with Edelman, Slater, Aiken and Stanbach as your receivers. This is pretty easy stuff here. Belichick certainly didn't have any problem tossing out that sort of lineup for the game's final drive.



Welker takes the biggest beating of any receiver on the team, and he had an injury earlier in the season which required him to miss games. And, again, Edelman is there as a backup.



Actually, the question of resting players vs. playing them is an ongoing question, with "football coaches and players" coming down publicly on both sides of the issue, often switching positions depending upon the circumstances. The sooner you stop trying to tell others how these people think when you don't know any more about it than many of the rest of us, the sooner the rest of us will be better for it.

You remind me of that quote Jimmy Williams made famous, what little league team did you coach...

 

[fumbrunner]

The fact of the matter is this team does not typically rest players. They didn't in 2003 and they didn't in 2004. The team plays to win and plays their starters. It BB's philosophy and the team stays true to it. Funny how this has never been questioned until a freak injury happens. For those that dont believe in the basic philosophies that this franchise has been built on over the past decade, I'm sure there is plenty of room on the Colts bandwagon. They dont have any problem turning games "meaningless".

 

[Deus Irae]

Hindsight is Deus' specialty.

1.) Anything that happened in the past that is discussed is discussed in hindsight. That's the nature of the beast.

2.) I have pointed out many instances of agreement or disagreement the moment I've learned of the happening. You can call that "hindsight" because I wasn't there when it occurred, but that means that such a "specialty" would apply to everyone on this board, and about 99.999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999992% percent of the world when it comes to any Patriots happening.

3.) A quick glance at the Game thread shows my "hindsight" included posting a mail box with a letter being "mailed", right after someone posted "i hope Brady will not play so much", so clearly I was on the "mail it in" bandwagon before anything happened to Welker. But we'll just ignore that, since your first post in that thread was several pages later and your second post was a dig at me after I'd posted multiple times in the thread.

 

[Deus Irae]

You remind me of that quote Jimmy Williams made famous, what little league team did you coach...

Well I did play college ball and beyond, and I have coached, but that's as irrelevant as all the crap you spew where you tell us about how Belichick feels and thinks. I'm not the one pretending to know every thought inside of Belichick's head. That would be you.

 

[fumbrunner]

3.) A quick glance at the Game thread shows my "hindsight" involved posting a mail box with a letter being "mailed", right after someone posted "i hope Brady will not play so much", so clearly I was on the "mail it in" bandwagon before anything happened to Welker. But we'll just ignore that, right, since your first post in that thread was several pages later and your second post was a dig at me after I'd posted multiple times in the thread.

Sorry that I don't spend every waking second of the day on the board. I will defer to your 13000 posts.

 

[Deus Irae]

It's really sad, you're becoming the kind of poster you used to rail against..

No, I'm the same poster I've always been, although I've probably developed a shorter fuse as the same stupidity has gotten posted year after year by the same people. Thinking that might be happening, I even started putting those people on ignore. However, 2 things of significance HAVE changed:

1.) The team has spent the past 12 months, give or take, making the sort of moves and mistakes that posters here once laughed at other teams for doing, and many of those posters have just flipped the "But it's Belichick" switch in order to justify the actions.

2.) You've become one of the two types of posters I've always railed against: those who can see nothing wrong, and those who can see nothing right. You've simply become a member of the first group.

The first leads to me criticizing the team more than I had in the past, and the second leads to you nagging anyone who dares question the team about anything.

 

[Deus Irae]

Sorry that I don't spend every waking second of the day on the board. I will defer to your 13000 posts.

Yes, post count insults are awesome, especially when your arguments have been undercut and you've got nothing else to go with. Good stuff!

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

Well I did play college ball and beyond, and I have coached, but that's as irrelevant as all the crap you spew where you tell us about how Belichick feels and thinks. I'm not the one pretending to know every thought inside of Belichick's head. That would be you.

Playing with your balls in college and beyond doesn't qualify as expertise.

 

[aluminum seats]

My thinking has changed on resting guys. For the longest time, I was in the Parcells/Belichick camp of playing (almost) every game to win. Even as late as 2007--I forget the specifics, but essentially every team going into the playoffs that played hard the last game did well, and the teams mailing it in faltered. (Giants beating Tampa illustrated the point.)

But I have become SO SICK of football players getting hurt. It's beginning to cast a pall over the game. I still think the Colts are full of it--history is worth trying for. But yeah, I woulda sat Welker on Sunday. No matter what anybody says, he wasn't going to tear up his knee Sunday if he watched the game from home.

 

[Deus Irae]

Playing with your balls in college and beyond doesn't qualify as expertise.

I'm willing to accept that you know this from experience.

 

[JackBauer]

Watch out, Deus is in a punchy mood this afternoon.

 

[fumbrunner]

Yes, post count insults are awesome, especially when your arguments have been undercut and you've got nothing else to go with. Good stuff!

Hardly, but whatever makes you sleep better at night. I shared your views for the most part on the Seymour fiasco, which is fine. But this Welker thing is ridiculous. This is the way this team plays. Every year. Whether they have something to play for or not. It is an easy argument to come in after the fact and say oh, they should have sat this player or that player. If the injury didnt happen, we wouldn't even be talking about it. Please, point out your comments in past years about how the team should be resting players in these "meaningless" games. I doubt you will find that from your posts or from many others. Why? Because it is the fabric of this team. It's easy to criticize the decision after an injury. But hey, you love the easy ones eh?

 

[Deus Irae]

Hardly, but whatever makes you sleep better at night. I shared your views for the most part on the Seymour fiasco, which is fine. But this Welker thing is ridiculous. This is the way this team plays. Every year. Whether they have something to play for or not. It is an easy argument to come in after the fact and say oh, they should have sat this player or that player. If the injury didnt happen, we wouldn't even be talking about it. Please, point out your comments in past years about how the team should be resting players in these "meaningless" games. I doubt you will find that from your posts or from many others. Why? Because it is the fabric of this team. It's easy to criticize the decision after an injury. But hey, you love the easy ones eh?

Again.... You can't criticize the decision before it's made. It hasn't been made yet. You keep tossing out that red herring. The idea of how to play the game was discussed prior to the game. Resting players was mentioned. Hell, it was part of what people were lampooning the Colts for.

Also, Kevin Faulk was a healthy scratch, according to the list, so the whole "play them all, play to win" crap is just nonsense.