Maybe Bill Walsh is right: after 10 years there needs to be a change

[JJDChE]

Idiocy. Plain and simple. Idiocy.

 

[Ivan]

How have we done in the post-season lately?

Not as good as the Seahawks. The Patriots should go after their coach, then we would all be so pumped and jacked. I wish I had thought of such a great point before you points it out, they should trade Brady and a first for Sanchez as well cause he's a much better playoff QB.

I really hope they do something soon because I'm not sure how much more I can take of the dark ages of Patriots football.

Maybe things will get better when Jon Kraft takes over and we aren't saddled with losers like Belichik and Brady.

 

[TheComeback]

Re: Maybe Bill Walsh is right....

Are you brain damaged? The 2008 Patriots had the most talented roster in the league and played against the easiest schedule ever known to man (they faced both the NFC and AFC West in the same season). Even then, they lost pretty much every game they had against a quality opponent (Colts, Steelers, Chargers, Dolphins, Jets), thus failing to make the playoffs.

If we had Brady, the Patriots were a serious threat to go undefeated again that season. On the other hand, put Matt Cassel on this 2011 team and we might not win 5 games.

The most talented roster in the league? What were you smoking?

Our defense was starting Lewis Sanders at various points in the year. Rodney Harrison missed almost the entire season, and so did Bruschi. We had a guy at QB who hadn't played a game since high school. Our best running back was Sammy Morris.

The only truly talented positions we had that year were WR and DL, with Wilfork/Warren/Seymour in their last good year. The LBs were a joke--Vrabel was washed up, Thomas stunk, and we actually brought back Rosevelt Colvin at one point to start.

Not only that, but were competitive in almost all the games you mentioned us "failing" to win. I seem to remember a split with the Jets, since we beat them in Cassel's first start, losing by a FG to the Colts, and destroying the Dolphins in the second game that year. We also destroyed the Cardinals, who went to the Super Bowl with a worse record than ours.

The '08 Patriots were the first team to miss the playoffs at 11-5 in over twenty years.

Talk about revisionist history. Seriously, this is really pathetic.

 

[reflexblue]

I wrote the following down the night of the draft and tucked it away for posterity, when i saw this thread i remembered it. I think its apprapot


On the night of the draft after we drafted an LT in stead of a DE this came to me out of the blue, Don Shula. I remember that Shula had a long an glorious career after he won his SB's So i went back and checked his states, i also checked the states of Landry, Walsh, C Noll, and Jimmy Johnson. What if found out is that they All won their respective SB's no farther than 9 years apart. And Shula was the only one that went back and had a chance to win another past the 9 year mark.

Shula 2 years between SB wins, 11 years between SB games '72 '73 won ( '82 '84)...lost

Gibbs 9 years between SB wins, '82 '87 '91

Walsh 7 years between first and last SB won.

BBelichick. 7 years '01 '03 '04...07 (lost)

Noll 6 years

Landry 6 years

Johnson 2

Parcells 4



I chose to compare BB to Shula because of the high winning percentage after his SB run. Also after winning his SB with defense Shula became offensive minded, he never did build a great D, he built great offenses and made it back in 84 only to get dusted by the 49's I see BB doing the same thing starting in 07.

So i hope i'm wrong but going by past HX BB will never win another SB. I hadn't heard the Walsh comment until now, maybe hes on to something.

 

[RobertWeathers]

I wrote the following down the night of the draft and tucked it away for posterity, when i saw this thread i remembered it. I think its apprapot


On the night of the draft after we drafted an LT in stead of a DE this came to me out of the blue, Don Shula. I remember that Shula had a long an glorious career after he won his SB's So i went back and checked his states, i also checked the states of Landry, Walsh, C Noll, and Jimmy Johnson. What if found out is that they All won their respective SB's no farther than 9 years apart. And Shula was the only one that went back and had a chance to win another past the 9 year mark.

Shula 2 years between SB wins, 11 years between SB games '72 '73 won ( '82 '84)...lost

Gibbs 9 years between SB wins, '82 '87 '91

Walsh 7 years between first and last SB won.

BBelichick. 7 years '01 '03 '04...07 (lost)

Noll 6 years

Landry 6 years

Johnson 2

Parcells 4



I chose to compare BB to Shula because of the high winning percentage after his SB run. Also after winning his SB with defense Shula became offensive minded, he never did build a great D, he built great offenses and made it back in 84 only to get dusted by the 49's I see BB doing the same thing starting in 07.

So i hope i'm wrong but going by past HX BB will never win another SB. I hadn't heard the Walsh comment until now, maybe hes on to something.

Not completely accurate. The 82 'Fins had a great defense and made it to the Sb. The problem is that their offense was medicore.

I'd argue that the 06 pats were similar to the 82 'Fins as they had a very good defense but like the 82 Fins vs the Skins in that SB, did not step up when they needed to.

 

[Snake Eyes]

Not as good as the Seahawks. The Patriots should go after their coach, then we would all be so pumped and jacked. I wish I had thought of such a great point before you points it out, they should trade Brady and a first for Sanchez as well cause he's a much better playoff QB.

I really hope they do something soon because I'm not sure how much more I can take of the dark ages of Patriots football.

Maybe things will get better when Jon Kraft takes over and we aren't saddled with losers like Belichik and Brady.

Have you ever heard of the term “strawman argument”? Because that what you and all the others who have posted this kind of argument are making, that since we want a change you impose that we want the worse change possible, therefore the desire for change is stupid.

Did the Jets get better when they brought in Rexy? You’re damn right they did. Have the 49ers been better since they got Harbough? Absolutely.

Changes do not automatically mean a change for the worse.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Have you ever heard of the term “strawman argument”? Because that what you and all the others who have posted this kind of argument are making, that since we want a change you impose that we want the worse change possible, therefore the desire for change is stupid.

Did the Jets get better when they brought in Rexy? You’re damn right they did. Have the 49ers been better since they got Harbough? Absolutely.

Changes do not automatically mean a change for the worse.

Eric Mangini → Rex Ryan
Mike Singletary → Jim Harbaugh

Bill Belichick → ???

This is the reason for the skepticism.

 

[Wolfpack]

Who would I want to coach...dont know.

Ding ding ding! And that's why making a change just for the sake of making a change is stupid. It's easy to say you want a change, but pretty hard to say specifically what you want to change to (as all the "we need to get rid of Terry Francona!" people are now discovering(.

 

[Snake Eyes]

Eric Mangini → Rex Ryan
Mike Singletary → Jim Harbaugh

Bill Belichick → ???

This is the reason for the skepticism.

That’s a totally different argument than the one they’re making, if they were thinking along your lines the response would be something like “ok, you want BB gone, fine, who are you going to replace him with?” That said, I actually don’t want BB the coach gone just yet, I want BB the GM gone, when looking at his personnel moves over his tenure I generally think they’ve been harmful and are holding the team back, this also doesn’t mean he doesn’t deserve credit for moves like going with Brady over Bledsoe, but if he truly doesn’t believe that a player can be injury prone and also doesn’t believe in paying a coordinator well than I don’t need to know anything more about that GM, they have no business in that position.

I think we need to actually reevaluate our opinion on BB, he’s been damn near canonized at this point, with the established opinion that he’s THE best coach ever to walk the earth but let’s take a look at his record.

Cleveland
1991: 6-10, no playoffs
1992: 7-9, no playoffs
1993: 7-9, no playoffs
1994: 11-5, 1-1 in playoffs
1995: 5-11, no playoffs

New Enlgand W/O Brady
2000: 5-11, no playoffs
2008: 11-5, no playoffs

NE w/ Brady
2001: 11-5, SB win, 3-0 in playoffs
2002: 9-7, no playoffs
2003: 14-2, SB win, 3-0 in playoffs
2004: 14-2, SB win, 3-0 in playoffs
2005: 10-6, 1-1 in playoffs
2006: 12-4, 2-1 in playoffs
2007: 16-0, 2-1 in playoffs, SB appearance
2009: 10-6, 0-1 in playoffs
2010: 14-2, 0-1 in playoffs

I’m getting the idea that BB can be very successful IF he has the right supporting cast around him, with TFB, Weis and RAC we won SBs, even with TFB we haven’t won since. He had a very solid corp of players that he inherited when we won those SBs, and when he was in NY he had a linebacking corp of LT, Carl Banks, and Harry Carson, not exactly bad material to work with, I’d say having 2 HoF players and a pro-bowler make one’s job a lot easier as a defensive coach.

This does not mean I think BB is a bum as a coach, but that he’s had a lot of help along the way, and some of the credit that automatically goes to him is actually due to others.

 

[BSR]

That said, I actually don’t want BB the coach gone just yet, I want BB the GM gone, when looking at his personnel moves over his tenure I generally think they’ve been harmful and are holding the team back, this also doesn’t mean he doesn’t deserve credit for moves like going with Brady over Bledsoe, but if he truly doesn’t believe that a player can be injury prone and also doesn’t believe in paying a coordinator well than I don’t need to know anything more about that GM, they have no business in that position.

What makes you think this is even an option? Why would BB ever allow anyone to take away his final decision making ability and not just outright quite. The reality is that your scenario isn't really an option. The options are continue with what we have or fire BB and replace him with someone else. You don't get to pick and chose what parts of someone you hire. You take the good with the bad and in the case of BB its pretty darn good.

 

[Snake Eyes]

What makes you think this is even an option? Why would BB ever allow anyone to take away his final decision making ability and not just outright quite. The reality is that your scenario isn't really an option. The options are continue with what we have or fire BB and replace him with someone else. You don't get to pick and chose what parts of someone you hire. You take the good with the bad and in the case of BB its pretty darn good.

It might be an option, it might not be, BB always had to deal with Parcells above him so when he came here the idea of having GM control probably seemed like a blessing but for all we know it might be a weight off his shoulders at this point, neither you nor I know for sure. What I do know is that with BB at the helm we've seen the defense consistently melt down at critical times and decline in general to the point where we've been inept in the post-season for some time. I'm curious, where would things need to go before you'd consider replacing BB?

 

[ctpatsfan77]

It might be an option, it might not be, BB always had to deal with Parcells above him so when he came here the idea of having GM control probably seemed like a blessing but for all we know it might be a weight off his shoulders at this point, neither you nor I know for sure. What I do know is that with BB at the helm we've seen the defense consistently melt down at critical times and decline in general to the point where we've been inept in the post-season for some time. I'm curious, where would things need to go before you'd consider replacing BB?

You're talking about two different things here, I think.

BB as GM I would have little problem with making a change now.

BB as coach . . . not so much.

 

[The Brandon Five]

I think I was better off a couple of days ago when the power was still out and I couldn't read the board...

 

[BSR]

It might be an option, it might not be, BB always had to deal with Parcells above him so when he came here the idea of having GM control probably seemed like a blessing but for all we know it might be a weight off his shoulders at this point, neither you nor I know for sure. What I do know is that with BB at the helm we've seen the defense consistently melt down at critical times and decline in general to the point where we've been inept in the post-season for some time. I'm curious, where would things need to go before you'd consider replacing BB?

Much worse than 5-2, which is apparently your break point.

 

[Ring 6]

Have you ever heard of the term “strawman argument”? Because that what you and all the others who have posted this kind of argument are making, that since we want a change you impose that we want the worse change possible, therefore the desire for change is stupid.

Did the Jets get better when they brought in Rexy? You’re damn right they did. Have the 49ers been better since they got Harbough? Absolutely.

Changes do not automatically mean a change for the worse.

Changing from Bill Belichick to anyone would be a change for the worse

 

[Ring 6]

You're talking about two different things here, I think.

BB as GM I would have little problem with making a change now.

BB as coach . . . not so much.

You dp realize that BB the GM has made all of the decisions since 2000 that made this team a dynasty, not just the ones from last week, right?

 

[Ring 6]

That’s a totally different argument than the one they’re making, if they were thinking along your lines the response would be something like “ok, you want BB gone, fine, who are you going to replace him with?” That said, I actually don’t want BB the coach gone just yet, I want BB the GM gone, when looking at his personnel moves over his tenure I generally think they’ve been harmful and are holding the team back, this also doesn’t mean he doesn’t deserve credit for moves like going with Brady over Bledsoe, but if he truly doesn’t believe that a player can be injury prone and also doesn’t believe in paying a coordinator well than I don’t need to know anything more about that GM, they have no business in that position.

I think we need to actually reevaluate our opinion on BB, he’s been damn near canonized at this point, with the established opinion that he’s THE best coach ever to walk the earth but let’s take a look at his record.

Cleveland
1991: 6-10, no playoffs
1992: 7-9, no playoffs
1993: 7-9, no playoffs
1994: 11-5, 1-1 in playoffs
1995: 5-11, no playoffs

New Enlgand W/O Brady
2000: 5-11, no playoffs
2008: 11-5, no playoffs

NE w/ Brady
2001: 11-5, SB win, 3-0 in playoffs
2002: 9-7, no playoffs
2003: 14-2, SB win, 3-0 in playoffs
2004: 14-2, SB win, 3-0 in playoffs
2005: 10-6, 1-1 in playoffs
2006: 12-4, 2-1 in playoffs
2007: 16-0, 2-1 in playoffs, SB appearance
2009: 10-6, 0-1 in playoffs
2010: 14-2, 0-1 in playoffs

I’m getting the idea that BB can be very successful IF he has the right supporting cast around him, with TFB, Weis and RAC we won SBs, even with TFB we haven’t won since. He had a very solid corp of players that he inherited when we won those SBs, and when he was in NY he had a linebacking corp of LT, Carl Banks, and Harry Carson, not exactly bad material to work with, I’d say having 2 HoF players and a pro-bowler make one’s job a lot easier as a defensive coach.

This does not mean I think BB is a bum as a coach, but that he’s had a lot of help along the way, and some of the credit that automatically goes to him is actually due to others.

Please provide the list of all the coaches who won by themselves without any good players.

 

[Snake Eyes]

Changing from Bill Belichick to anyone would be a change for the worse

Based on what exactly, you're assertion that it's so? Let me ask you then, at what point would you consider that a change is necessary: another 1 and done in the playoffs, not making the playoffs, 2 consecutive years of not making the playoffs, what's your tipping point?

 

[Snake Eyes]

Please provide the list of all the coaches who won by themselves without any good players.

1) you can only blame the players and excuse the coach for so long, 2) BB has good players for a while and not won, and 3) the buck stops with him on this declining defense.

 

[Ring 6]

Based on what exactly, you're assertion that it's so? Let me ask you then, at what point would you consider that a change is necessary: another 1 and done in the playoffs, not making the playoffs, 2 consecutive years of not making the playoffs, what's your tipping point?

Who has done better? If you cant find anyone who has done a better job it is moronic to think you will hire someone who will.