Reality check: Belichick post-2004

[Rob0729]

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.

You say that preparation is a problem and that is Belichick's responsibilty. You want to throw it all on the coordinators though. I was being sarcastic based on your inability to actually put anything on the players even dropped interceptions.

Based on the fact that the Pats were the best offense ever and the Pats had an above average offense last year with below average talent, I don't see there being a need for an improvement at the OC position.

Considering the Pats won two of the three Super Bowl years because of great defense and pretty average offenses that didn't make mistakes even with a great QB like Brady, I don't know how you can argue that Weis is worlds better than McDaniels. Neither the 2001 nor the 2003 offense were anything to write home about and were middle of the pack. The defense was one of the best of all time in 2003. The defense carried the team in 2001 as Brady dinked and dunk on the offense. We went 9-7 in 2002 because the defense fell apart and the offense wasn't good enough to carry the team.

As for DC, the fact that Belichick was spending most offensive series working with the starting defense this season, I wouldn't be upset if they made an upgrade. Although Pees did a great job in 2006 with huge holes on the defense.

I'm sorry, but a few losses in the playoffs where you can point to execution problems to being major factors. I just don't think the talent on this team was nearly as good in 2005 or 2006 as the Super Bowl years of 2003 and 2004. The fact the Pats got to the AFC Championship game last year was pretty amazing considering what we had on offense for talent. The offensive talent was better this year than any year under Weis, but the defense was pretty average.

I think McDaniels is as good as most OCs in the league right now. I don't know about Pees since Belichick played a big role on the defense. Maybe that is the biggest problem is that that Belichick has focused too much attention on the defense (more so than any year under Crennel), but we were a minute away from going 19-0 and winning the Super Bowl against a team that beat the best teams in the NFC on the road to get to the Super Bowl. I still don't see a huge problem.

I also think that you and other would still be trashing McDaniels even if the Pats won 35-0. People do not give this guy any credit at all, but all the blame. I can't name one OC in the league right now that I would say would have definitely done a better job than McDaniels this year.

 

[JoeSixPat]

I guarantee you weren't doing that Sunday night, were you?

EDIT: After seeing the 6-degrees of separation, I'm convinced some people are VERY much in denial.

What exactly are people in denial about? No one's in denial about the fact that we lost one game - and that one game was the biggest game of the season.

But I would agree that people are in denial about the fact that we won 18 straight games in one season - including the first and only 16-0 regular season ever.

Seeing as you can't do any better than that, I'm hard pressed to see how that suggests we have a coach who is in a decline. Can you think of any teams, coaches or fans that would rather lose games than win?

I think people were in denial LAST season when they said that we had no need to upgrade at WR citing how close we came to the Super Bowl.

And if people don't think there's a need to get better this season as well I'd say they are in denial as well. Our defense needs talented youth and our OL sure didn't play well against the Giants. That might or might not be an aberration.

I can second guess a lot of playcalling too but I'd stop short of saying our coaches are in decline.

So what exactly do YOU think people are in denial about?

 

[richpats]

I also think that you and other would still be trashing McDaniels even if the Pats won 35-0.

If that was the case then the coordinators would have done a terrific job. But they didn't - ACCEPT IT. You can't argue against someone raising concerns about a bad performance with the "well if they didn't perform badly" routine.

 

[richpats]

But I would agree that people are in denial about the fact that we won 18 straight games in one season - including the first and only 16-0 regular season ever.

I'd rather they come through in game #19, end of story.

 

[Rob0729]

If that was the case then the coordinators would have done a terrific job. But they didn't - ACCEPT IT. You can't argue against someone raising concerns about a bad performance with the "well if they didn't perform badly" routine.

Yes, if McDaniels just blocked Uminyeria, Tuck, and Strahan better; the Pats win. If McDaniels didn't design plays that had Wes Welker purposely run the wrong route or have Brady over or underthrow an open Moss down the field, the Pats win. If Pees didn't teach Samuel and Meriweather to not try to catch interceptions that hit their hands, the Pats win.

I have said that the coaches deserve some of the blame and made some very poor decisions and calls, but I felt the biggest problem in this game was execution. That is something that even Weis and Crennel probably can't overcome.

I am just tired of the lunacy that many people have who don't give credit to the coordinators when things work near perfectly, but blame them for everything bad because their names aren't Weis or Crennel. You are doing the latter. I am guessing you have done the former too.

This is getting redundant. I am tired of arguing with you on this. I guess I will chock this as we will have to agree to disagree. I personally am happy McDaniels is leading this offense and may end up being a better OC than Weis (and may already be).

 

[richpats]

I have said that the coaches deserve some of the blame and made some very poor decisions and calls, but I felt the biggest problem in this game was execution. That is something that even Weis and Crennel probably can't overcome.

Well, if execution was the biggest problem, are you saying we need better players? You're saying the coaches can't make them execute better, so it sounds like you think our personnel, the personnel that executed 18 consecutive victories, is insufficient.

 

[NEPatriot]

we all feel the same way but please do not be unreasonable about our coaches and players after we lost our game.

Yes, we lost the BIGGEST game in NFL history but we had set many NFL records in 1 season. It's something to be cheerful about it.

pats will return and it's dejavu.

 

[Rob0729]

Well, if execution was the biggest problem, are you saying we need better players? You're saying the coaches can't make them execute better, so it sounds like you think our personnel, the personnel that executed 18 consecutive victories, is insufficient.

I do think we need better players, but not because we lost in the Super Bowl. Like every team, this team still had flaws going through 18-0 and we could use upgrades from our older players.

I think we need an upgrade at RT and I am worried about Stephen Neal's ability to stay healthy. But I felt that way before a single snap on Sunday. I think we need to look for upgrades at ILB and at safety, but I felt that way in the regular season too.

One bad game even the size of the Super Bowl doesn't change my opinion of this team one bit. I think players AND coaches did choke at least in certain situations on Sunday. It doesn't mean I think guys who struggled need to be replaced. Losing the Super Bowl doesn't mean I think the coaches are not good enough of coaches or the players are not good enough to bring this team to the next level. It means the Pats were beat by a team that was a better team that day.

Sorry, I just don't think I feel the sky is falling. I think you could take this same exact team next year assuming age and injuries didn't affect it and still have a strong chance to go 19-0 and win the Super Bowl. That includes the coaching staff staying the same.

 

[JoeSixPat]

I'd rather they come through in game #19, end of story.

I don't think you'll find too many people arguing with you... but that wasn't your point.

Your point was that this season (at 18-1, a record which stands as the best overall season ever in the modern era offootball) proves that the Patriots are clearly in decline.

You cite numerous close wins to support your theory.

I think you're in denial, asserting that winning 18 games, including some by close margins, means a team is in decline.

I think you're basing your assessment of Belichick and his coaching staff on one game only - and that's wrong on a lot of different levels.

And I don't think anyone can credibly point to a playoff game from the Reche Caldwell era and assert that BB has lost his coaching abilities.

 

[IcyPatriot]

I think Belichicks brain is wired so much for defensive excellance that he at times has neglected the offense side of the ball. How can such a defensive genius not know how to scheme backwards.

I don't think he has yet adjusted to the loss of Charlie Weiss.
Perhaps McDaniels is not the answer.
Perhaps McDaniels comes back in 2008 a top flight OC.
My guess is option #2 but Belichick needs to learn to take
a greater role in the offense next year...just in case.

 

[richpats]

Your point was that this season (at 18-1, a record which stands as the best overall season ever in the modern era offootball) proves that the Patriots are clearly in decline.

When you take 14-2 teams and win Super Bowls, then take a 16-0 team and LOSE the Super Bowl, that does suggest the Patriots' coaching staff is not as effective as it was with our former coordinators. Call it "decline" or whatever, you won't be seeing any more Lombardi's around here until the coaching staff improves.

 

[Pats726]

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

Not wasting my time..so in your theory...if Asante had picked off that last pass...you would not be crtiticizing the COs..is that a YES?? or a NO??

 

[Pats726]

I am just tired of the lunacy that many people have who don't give credit to the coordinators when things work near perfectly, but blame them for everything bad because their names aren't Weis or Crennel. You are doing the latter. I am guessing you have done the former too.

This is getting redundant. I am tired of arguing with you on this. I guess I will chock this as we will have to agree to disagree. I personally am happy McDaniels is leading this offense and may end up being a better OC than Weis (and may already be).

If the Pats had pulled it off in that last drive..the OC and DC basically would not be trashed here and YET..there performance was what it was...the same....Not difference..if you are judging it all by one drive..which is what it was and is being done..you missed it totally..NO perspective at all...I agree...redundant...

 

[richpats]

Not wasting my time..so in your theory...if Asante had picked off that last pass...you would not be crtiticizing the COs..is that a YES?? or a NO??

Again with the "if/then" ....WE LOST. There was no other outcome. I really think people are in denial when they start thinking about "what if's" - don't waste your energy.

 

[richpats]

If the Pats had pulled it off in that last drive.....

Again, that's all you think "what if" - if a play goes the other way, then the coaches still have to accept responsibility for being in that position to begin with.

And I'd love to hear your opinion on our coaches leaving Hobbs 1-on-1 with Plaxico ....I think it would go something like:

"Well, if he doesn't catch that WIDE OPEN pass, you guys wouldn't be criticizing the coaches, would you?"

Revisionist history is for the weak.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Again, that's all you think "what if" - if a play goes the other way, then the coaches still have to accept responsibility for being in that position to begin with.

And I'd love to hear your opinion on our coaches leaving Hobbs 1-on-1 with Plaxico ....I think it would go something like:

"Well, if he doesn't catch that WIDE OPEN pass, you guys wouldn't be criticizing the coaches, would you?"

Revisionist history is for the weak.

You're right. Corrective action is for the strong.

What corrective action must be taken to prevent further unsatisfactory outcomes?

There is no need to talk any more about a single game, no matter how much weight you give it.

We need to discuss how to win Super Bowl XLIII.

What, exactly, must be done?

PFnV

 

[Pats726]

Again with the "if/then" ....WE LOST. There was no other outcome. I really think people are in denial when they start thinking about "what if's" - don't waste your energy.

The problem is you are missing the whole thing...making ALL your points about the winning or losing of the game...THAT is silly...what the OC DC did BEFORE that last drive is the same whether that game was won or lsot IT does not change..If you have criticisms of them..make them..but you are making FULL judgement on outcome..NOT on what was really done..the pts win the game..then they are heroes..if they lose they must improve..THAT is myopic and purely dumb...Whatever mistakes the COs made are there whether they won or lost... NOT IF...and that is what my friend you are missing totally.
And I think many feel the same way...and the fact is you refuse to answer the question about that because you know how foolish you would be...
If Asante had picked off teh pass would you have been talking about teh COs needing improvement?? ONE play... you refuse to answer because you KNOW if they had won..you wouldn't be posting a THING about the COs..
If you have particular gripes with the COs..that is certainly legitimate..but that is legitmate to the situations whether the game is won or lost...If they made bad calls..they don't automatically go away if the team won..On the other hand..because they lost it doesn't AUTOMATICALLY mean that what they did was bad... you see things in black and white..when there is a LOT of gray and in book..missing a great deal A stubborn fool is more like it..

 

[richpats]

You're right. Corrective action is for the strong.

What corrective action must be taken to prevent further unsatisfactory outcomes?

Offensively, assuming we make the playoffs, we've got to be more potent in the first 3 quarters of play. As we saw in the SB, just because we deliver a go-ahead TD doesn't mean it's the clincher. We need to have a 2-possession lead, especially in the Super Bowl. All 4 Patriot SB's under Belichick have come down to the wire, no matter how good the Patriots or their opponent is. If that continues to be the case, we subject ourself to more potential losses.

Defensively, I would place a HIGH priority on stopping the 2-minute drill, as well as improving red-zone D. We sucked in the red zone last year, and how did we lose the SB? On a red-zone TD. The 2-minute drill speaks for itself, TWO CONSECUTIVE SEASONS have ended by giving up a last-minute TD.

 

[Pats726]

Offensively, assuming we make the playoffs, we've got to be more potent in the first 3 quarters of play. As we saw in the SB, just because we deliver a go-ahead TD doesn't mean it's the clincher. We need to have a 2-possession lead, especially in the Super Bowl. All 4 Patriot SB's under Belichick have come down to the wire, no matter how good the Patriots or their opponent is. If that continues to be the case, we subject ourself to more potential losses.

Defensively, I would place a HIGH priority on stopping the 2-minute drill, as well as improving red-zone D. We sucked in the red zone last year, and how did we lose the SB? On a red-zone TD. The 2-minute drill speaks for itself, TWO CONSECUTIVE SEASONS have ended by giving up a last-minute TD.

I actually agree with you here...more on the defensive side..especially with the 2 minute offense..and stopping last minute scores..THAT I think is an achilles heel....and that is clear... Offensively, MORE potent?? This was the highest scoring offense in the NFL...Agreed in the Bowl they needed a larger lead..but where do u make improvements in an offense that was the best ever? I see the D as where the focus has to be so much more than the offense....of course with players leaving..etc..nothing is ever frozen in place..improvements?? On both..but to me more needed there..

 

[richpats]

The problem is you are missing the whole thing...making ALL your points about the winning or losing of the game...THAT is silly...

Here's a question - do you think the Patriots would have approached the 2008 offseason the same way, win or lose? Fact is, when you win you've done enough, when you don't, it's not enough. That's the reality. And the outcome of this game (much like the outcome of the Indy game) will affect a lot of decisions to be made from the coaches and the players themselves.