Reality check: Belichick post-2004

[Crazyeechrispats1]

I am A Belichick supporter all the way the only time I ever said anything negative about him was when he came in and started cutting my favorite players left and right, Slade, Coates, etc.
But he knew what he was doing when I assumed that he was just a power hungry dictator looking for his own kind of players.
Well back then I was wrong and in my opinion anyone is wrong if they question BB's authenticity, his knowledge of schemes, his desire to win.
His dedication to the players and this organization.
The only thing that keeps this man going, makes him forget about the media the morons calling for his head.
His one outlet is a real life version of chess where he deciphers his opponents move before he completes or even thinks it.
This is who Belichick and his good buddy Ernie Adams are and what they are about.
Now as long as you have the talent to back it up which we most certainly do.
Bill keeps us in every game to the final whistle and if he loses.
It won't happen again for a long time!
This is why he seeks veterans for his complicated defensive schemes.
The linebackers are the most critical piece to his strategy, guess but you better guess right.
He will take a guy who runs a 4.9 40 who studies film rigorously who has the instincts to be in the right place at the right time.
Ten out of ten times as opposed to a player that runs a 4.5 relies on his physical attributes and doesn't seek to improve his game.
Is happy just getting to the rusher.
The trick in all this is finding the physical freak who has the intellect of a Vrabel the determination of a Seau, the heart of a Bruschi and the skills of a Adalius Thomas this wherein lies the tricky part to finding BB's young linebacker.
Is there a guy in this draft that fits that mold?
If not don't expect BB and co to draft that linebacker many have been pining over at 7.
More than likely BB trades for a veteran such as a Terrel Suggs or a lance Briggs.
He wants a guy who is dedicated to football but is also dedicated to knowledge of the game and it's schemes.
No no Florida state athletes who barely know where there suppose to be on any given play has a clue when BB insists you also know where the other 10 guys are and what there assignment is on any given play.
I will trust BB as the teams coach 100 percent I don't care what woman he's sleeping with or if he is going all out to gain a competitive advantage.
I want the guy recording things from other players analyzing anything he can interviewing friends of the players from the opposing team, digging thru their trash if it gives us even one little advantage over the other team.
I watched all thru the nineties how this franchise was always one step behind one clue away not in the know when it came down to close games, and right personnel decisions.
Now we finally have that stability and people want him run out of town because of one giant melt down?
For shame to some of you who question BB's coaching or Toms heart.
Please go be a fan of another team cause until a video tape or beta max or dvd or blu ray or hd dvd or divx or any other form of media shows BB doing anything illegal he will be the Coach to lead this franchise for the next half decade.

 

[Pats726]

Is that the whole point?? That Pees/McDanials are not better than Crennel/Pees??? How many years of experience one pair versus the other?
So...does the OP wish to get rid of them? But you know what Crennel and Weiss never led the team to a season with 18 games won...or am I missing something??

 

[BJ_McWild]

I am A Belichick supporter all the way the only time I ever said anything negative about him was when he came in and started cutting my favorite players left and right, Slade, Coates, etc.
But he knew what he was doing when I assumed that he was just a power hungry dictator looking for his own kind of players.
Well back then I was wrong and in my opinion anyone is wrong if they question BB's authenticity, his knowledge of schemes, his desire to win.
His dedication to the players and this organization.
The only thing that keeps this man going, makes him forget about the media the morons calling for his head.
His one outlet is a real life version of chess where he deciphers his opponents move before he completes or even thinks it.
This is who Belichick and his good buddy Ernie Adams are and what they are about.
Now as long as you have the talent to back it up which we most certainly do.
Bill keeps us in every game to the final whistle and if he loses.
It won't happen again for a long time!
This is why he seeks veterans for his complicated defensive schemes.
The linebackers are the most critical piece to his strategy, guess but you better guess right.
He will take a guy who runs a 4.9 40 who studies film rigorously who has the instincts to be in the right place at the right time.
Ten out of ten times as opposed to a player that runs a 4.5 relies on his physical attributes and doesn't seek to improve his game.
Is happy just getting to the rusher.
The trick in all this is finding the physical freak who has the intellect of a Vrabel the determination of a Seau, the heart of a Bruschi and the skills of a Adalius Thomas this wherein lies the tricky part to finding BB's young linebacker.
Is there a guy in this draft that fits that mold?
If not don't expect BB and co to draft that linebacker many have been pining over at 7.
More than likely BB trades for a veteran such as a Terrel Suggs or a lance Briggs.
He wants a guy who is dedicated to football but is also dedicated to knowledge of the game and it's schemes.
No no Florida state athletes who barely know where there suppose to be on any given play has a clue when BB insists you also know where the other 10 guys are and what there assignment is on any given play.
I will trust BB as the teams coach 100 percent I don't care what woman he's sleeping with or if he is going all out to gain a competitive advantage.
I want the guy recording things from other players analyzing anything he can interviewing friends of the players from the opposing team, digging thru their trash if it gives us even one little advantage over the other team.
I watched all thru the nineties how this franchise was always one step behind one clue away not in the know when it came down to close games, and right personnel decisions.
Now we finally have that stability and people want him run out of town because of one giant melt down?
For shame to some of you who question BB's coaching or Toms heart.
Please go be a fan of another team cause until a video tape or beta max or dvd or blu ray or hd dvd or divx or any other form of media shows BB doing anything illegal he will be the Coach to lead this franchise for the next half decade.

Wow, eloquently stated.

I think 'everyone's right' on this thread.

The game could have been coached better. But there's no reason we can't be a great team next year, too -- and that's thanks to BB.

 

[richpats]

Is that the whole point?? That Pees/McDanials are not better than Crennel/Pees??? How many years of experience one pair versus the other?
So...does the OP wish to get rid of them? But you know what Crennel and Weiss never led the team to a season with 18 games won...or am I missing something??

I'm not calling for Belichick's or McDaniel's or Pees' head, I'm trying to recognize what some people would like to ignore. Yeah, we have the best coach in the league and have won more playoff games in the last 3 years, but what's to show for it? 3 disappointing losses.

Try reading through the entire thread before you post. That will answer some of your questions.

And you're right, Weis/Crennel never led their teams to an 18-win season, only a 14-win and a couple of 17-win seasons, all of which culminated in a SB championship.

 

[Rob0729]

It's called a "Banjo" adjustment, Champ made it before the play to avoid the "rub". Brady counted on the rub as he had been getting it all game. QB's make those kinds of mistakes. In the Quick game (3 step) you have to react more than think. He was going to that spot with the ball, period. It wasn't a bad read, he didn't have time to go to his next read. 1,2,3 steps, it's out.

Sorry, but Brady was on the run backwards and threw the ball offbalance. In that situation, you need to either take the sack or dump the ball since he was outside the pocket. Trying to make the play in that situation has a high percentage of turning it over. Brady made the wrong call there. It is ok to say that Brady is human and he make mistakes every once and a while.

 

[Rob0729]

1) The Pats have had a dropoff in the OC/DC position since 2004 (have they not?)

That is debatable. The Pats had the best offense in NFL history. Brady, Moss, and Welker had career years with Brady and Moss having record breaking years. I would say that you can argue it an improvement at the offensive coordinator position position.

2) A staff that put together an undefeated team was outcoached in the SB (were they not?)

And the Pats were never outcoached when Crennel and Weis were here? You can't argue that.

3) Belichick hasn't had the same effectiveness as he's had in the SB-winning years (how many SB's has he won the last 3 years?)

The Pats had more wins this year than any of the Weis/Crennel years. Weis never had as little of talent as McDaniels had to deal with last year. Crennel defense sucked in 2002 when he didn't have good safeties. Pees had to deal without Harrison and having not much else at safety for most of the 2005 and 2006 season.

4) The coaching staff in the last 3 years has not performed to the level of the 2001-2004 staff in the playoffs (pretty obvious).

And neither have the players. I don't know how fumbles on punt and kick returns have anything to do with coaching though.

5) The coaching staff needs to improve its performance in the playoffs in order for NE to win another SB (duh).

And so do the players. Last time I checked, players need to execute the gameplan. Sorry, I put a lot more blame on the players than you who want to blame the coaching staff even for clear execution problems.

 

[Rob0729]

The New England Patriots don't have godgiven right for the Superbowl but you can't expect to win it with 14 points. I've read somewhere (I think it was here) that we scored less in the last three years since Charlie Weis left than when he was OC. I'm hundred per cent certain we would have won with him. Sometimes I think you are not allowed to criticise the Patriots. Honestly its like a cult here.

Huh? Where did you get that. Here is a breakdown on points:

2007 - 589 points (NFL record)
2006 - 385 points
2005 - 379 points
2004 - 437 points
2003 - 348 points
2002 - 381 points
2001 - 371 points
2000 - 271 points

So even last year with Reche Caldwell as our best WR during the regular season, the Pats scored more points than any year under Weis except 2004 when we had Corey Dillon who had the best per game average out of any RB in the league.

This continues my point that the legend of Charlie Weis has far outshadowed the reality of Charlie Weis. At worst, McDaniels' offense has been as as productive as Weis' and at best, they have been better.

 

[Pats726]

Try reading through the entire thread before you post. That will answer some of your questions.

I did and it was as clear as mud...saying one thing early and running away from that later in the thread..

 

[richpats]

That is debatable. The Pats had the best offense in NFL history. Brady, Moss, and Welker had career years with Brady and Moss having record breaking years. I would say that you can argue it an improvement at the offensive coordinator position position.

Um, maybe our offense was so much better because we added Moss and Welker. And Stallworth. Just a thought.

And the Pats were never outcoached when Crennel and Weis were here? You can't argue that.

Way to wiggle past that one with a question Ok, so you do admit that an 18-0 team was outcoached, correct?

The Pats had more wins this year than any of the Weis/Crennel years.

That's like saying a plane made record time going from LA to New York, only to crash during the landing. The achievement is pointless without finishing the job.

And neither have the players. I don't know how fumbles on punt and kick returns have anything to do with coaching though.



And so do the players. Last time I checked, players need to execute the gameplan. Sorry, I put a lot more blame on the players than you who want to blame the coaching staff even for clear execution problems.

So if we don't win, it's never the coach's fault - it's always the players? Aren't the coaches responsible for preparing the players to execute the gameplan?

 

[richpats]

I did and it was as clear as mud...saying one thing early and running away from that later in the thread..

Point out those inconsistencies and I will be happy to explain them.

 

[richpats]

This continues my point that the legend of Charlie Weis has far outshadowed the reality of Charlie Weis. At worst, McDaniels' offense has been as as productive as Weis' and at best, they have been better.

Charlie Weis never had an offense put up a season-low point total in a Super Bowl. Charlie Weis never let his offense be outscored by 21 points in one half during a playoff game. NFL-record setting offense puts up 14 points in the Super Bowl and nobody is concerned?

 

[Rob0729]

Um, maybe our offense was so much better because we added Moss and Welker. And Stallworth. Just a thought.

Yeah and eventhough the offense in 2006 was better than any year under Weis other than 2004, it had nothing to do with McDaniels. It was all Reche Caldwell and Doug Gabriel carrying McDaniels. I love how McDaniels hater

Way to wiggle past that one with a question Ok, so you do admit that an 18-0 team was outcoached, correct?

We were more than outcoached, we were out played first and foremost. I didn't know that physical strength was coachable. Because I saw our o-line get manhandled. Let's put the blame where blame is due and our o-line played their worst game in years. The coaching staff did deserve a decent piece of the blame, but not all the blame.

That's like saying a plane made record time going from LA to New York, only to crash during the landing. The achievement is pointless without finishing the job.

I don't get the coorlation. So you saying that having the best offense ever isn't an achievement? That the Pats are the only team that went 16-0 isn't relevant? Yes, the Pats lost the Super Bowl by 3 points, but the best we ever did with Crennel and Weis was win by three and two of three were on last second scores and the other was on one where the Eagles were driving for potentially the game winning TD and the Pats players executed to turn the ball over (very similiar to this Super Bowl except the players had opportunities to end the drive and didn't execute).

So if we don't win, it's never the coach's fault - it's always the players? Aren't the coaches responsible for preparing the players to execute the gameplan?

I never said that. I have said the coaching staff deserves a share of the blame. I say the players deserve a bigger share. Unfortunately for you McDaniels haters, you only want to credit him for the outcome of the game when things go bad. Whenever the Pats do well on offense it is always because of the players, but when it fails it is McDaniels. Sorry, but if the players can break records despite McDaniels, there is nothing McDaniels can do to screw up the offense because the players should have overcome his mistakes. You want it both ways.

 

[Rob0729]

Charlie Weis never had an offense put up a season-low point total in a Super Bowl. Charlie Weis never let his offense be outscored by 21 points in one half during a playoff game. NFL-record setting offense puts up 14 points in the Super Bowl and nobody is concerned?

And Weis never had a record breaking offense either. Ok, McDaniels is clearly the better regular season OC and Weis is the better Super Bowl OC. Are you happy?

Nothing like overracting about one game no matter how important it is.

It is interesting that I totally disproved what you called the "voice of reason" in that the offense under Weis scored more points than under McDaniels and just cherry picked the information from that post.

 

[richpats]

And Weis never had a record breaking offense either.

That worked out great for the '98 Vikings, the '01 Rams and the '04 Colts, didn't it?

Ok, McDaniels is clearly the better regular season OC and Weis is the better Super Bowl OC. Are you happy?

Nothing like overracting about one game no matter how important it is.

Yeah, I'm happy you've faced the facts. And I'll never be convinced that McDaniels/Pees are championship-caliber until they win one (redundant, I know).

 

[richpats]

It is interesting that I totally disproved what you called the "voice of reason" in that the offense under Weis scored more points than under McDaniels and just cherry picked the information from that post.

You have disproved squat. But go on, keep acting like the last few playoff losses couldn't have been salvaged, it'll make you feel better.

 

[Rob0729]

That worked out great for the '98 Vikings, the '01 Rams and the '04 Colts, didn't it?

And if McNabb didn't throw a ball right into Harrison's breadbasket, it might not have worked out great for the 2004 Pats too. You do realize

Yeah, I'm happy you've faced the facts. And I'll never be convinced that McDaniels/Pees are championship-caliber until they win one (redundant, I know).

Yes, it is 100% McDaniels fault that he didn't teach the o-line to be stronger than the Giants' defensive line, but hey we can't blame the players when we can always blame McDaniels. The players can only overcome McDaniels incompetence so much, but when he is calling plays for players to run the wrong routes or for Brady to over and underthrow receiver or the online to get outmuscled in the trenches, how do you expect the players to overcome that.

Last time I checked, we didn't win a blow out in any Super Bowl. The final minutes of the Pats/Eagles Super Bowl were very similair to this one. The big difference is that when the Pats in Feb of 2005 were in position to turn over the ball, they did. The Pats last Sunday had to makable INTs on the last drive and dropped the ball in ball in both instances. That is the biggest difference between both Super Bowls. It was execution, not scheming. Why can't you at least put some of the blame on execution because it was clearly execution that was more to blame on the Giants' final drive.

 

[richpats]

And if McNabb didn't throw a ball right into Harrison's breadbasket, it might not have worked out great for the 2004 Pats too. You do realize

Watch that again, it tipped off an Eagles' receiver's hands. And they probably had 35+ yards to go in about 10 seconds just to get in position to TIE.

Yes, it is 100% McDaniels fault that he didn't teach the o-line to be stronger than the Giants' defensive line, but hey we can't blame the players when we can always blame McDaniels. The players can only overcome McDaniels incompetence so much, but when he is calling plays for players to run the wrong routes or for Brady to over and underthrow receiver or the online to get outmuscled in the trenches, how do you expect the players to overcome that.

Last time I checked, we didn't win a blow out in any Super Bowl. The final minutes of the Pats/Eagles Super Bowl were very similair to this one. The big difference is that when the Pats in Feb of 2005 were in position to turn over the ball, they did. The Pats last Sunday had to makable INTs on the last drive and dropped the ball in ball in both instances. That is the biggest difference between both Super Bowls. It was execution, not scheming. Why can't you at least put some of the blame on execution because it was clearly execution that was more to blame on the Giants' final drive.

Lack of execution is attributed to lack of preparation. I mean, it's not like it was ONE play that wasn't executed, it was several, by different players. That too, falls on the coaches. And we had a 10-point lead in SB39. The Eagles had little time to drive down the field. McNabb had to force throws, Eli didn't.

 

[Rob0729]

You have disproved squat. But go on, keep acting like the last few playoff losses couldn't have been salvaged, it'll make you feel better.

No I didn't disprove squat. You are right. Eventhough the poster said that it was his understanding that the Pats scored less under McDaniels than under Weis and I posted the numbers that proved that that wasn't the case, of course I proved nothing.

I agree some of the playoff losses could have been salvaged, but if the players executed. If Asante Samuel caught that ball that was right in his hands, it would have equalled the Rodney Harrison INT of the Eagles/Pats Super Bowl. If Meriweather held onto the ball that went right through his hands, the same thing could be said. Why can't you admit that player's execution has something to do with it.

We did not play a great game vs. the Eagles in the Super Bowl. The Eagles had more yards than us, converted more than 50% of their third downs, we had 7 penalties, we only converted 4 of 12 third downs, we had six three and outs, Brady fumbled away a scoring drive, etc. Even with 3 turnovers at the time, the Eagles were in position for the go ahead or tying score at the end of the game. The difference is the players stepped up and stopped the drive. They didn't on Sunday.

 

[Rob0729]

Watch that again, it tipped off an Eagles' receiver's hands. And they probably had 35+ yards to go in about 10 seconds just to get in position to TIE.

Even if was a tying situation, I don't see it being all that different of the situation especially since it was the Eagles' fault they didn't have enough time since McNabb didn't play with a sense of urgency on the drive before. Besides, if Weis called better plays and didn't have a three and out the drive before, the game would have been over. Why run Faulk three times when you had "Clock Killin" Corey Dillon?

Lack of execution is attributed to lack of preparation. I mean, it's not like it was ONE play that wasn't executed, it was several, by different players. That too, falls on the coaches. And we had a 10-point lead in SB39. The Eagles had little time to drive down the field. McNabb had to force throws, Eli didn't.

So are you advocating firing Belichick. Lack of preparation is the responsibility of the head coach. So it is McDaniels' or Pees' fault that Samuel and Meriweather dropped gift interceptions? It was McDaniels' or Pees' fault that the Patriots had Eli dead to rights on a sack, but he broke free and completed a critical pass to David Tyree?

Again, McNabb had such little time to go down the field because of McNabb and his coaching staff. Anyone who watched the game were questioning why the Eagles would take so long to get plays off in the fourth quarter down by 10. That wasn't because of brilliant coaching by Weis or Crennel.

 

[richpats]

So are you advocating firing Belichick.

Step away from the keyboard Rob, you are only proving that you can't get the point of the thread. You know it's possible to recommend improvement from the coordinators without calling for the head coach's head, right?

And you better believe that all of those "drops" will be addressed during the offseason, because that's what coaches are supposed to do - prevent those mental errors from happening.