Stop blaming the coordinators

[Ring 6]

We did go 10-6 in 2009 and we did win the division.

I'm not the one talking about the decline of the team.

I think that Belichick is one of the best GM's in the nfl.
I think that Belichick is one the best HC's in the nfl.
I think that Belichick is one of the best DC's in the nfl.
Belichick is one of the best secondary coaches in the nfl.
And I think Belichick could be one of the best OC in the nfl.

The issue is delegation. Just because the boss can do each job better than anyone else is not reason to try to do so. Belichick has succeeded. However, I think that the lack of top level help is catching up to us. It is not that we don't have reasonable position coaches. We do, except at QB. The issue is Belichick's blind spot. He wants no one around who might be in anyway be really responsible for anything. That is Belichick's job.

This assumes you correctly perceve the inner workings of the management structure, and no offense, but you could only be guessing.
It is often the case that when a team lacks a coordinator, it is simply because the coordinator duties are split among assistants. After all, coordinator is in most cases a position coach with additional responsibilities. There is little difference in having one designated coordinator for all of those duties (which include play calling, game planning, organizing and running practice, film study, etc) and splitting those duties among all of the assistants. Does it really matter if Corwin Brown and Matt Patricia are 'coleaders' of game planning rather than one being solely in charge? Not really, and it certainly doesnt put extra responsibility on BB than a different structure would.
You are assuming that he delegates no responsibility and past seasons when we did not have an official coordinator totally conflct with that opinion.

 

[Deus Irae]

From Brady's interview today on WEEI:

"To me, it wasn't about the plays. You know, it's not about the adjustments. It's not about the schemes. The schemes are there. We had a great plan. I think part of the reason I was frustrated is going into the game, I really didn't think they'd be able to stop us, and the first half, you know, we did a good job moving the ball, so you know, at halftime, everyone's thinking, you know it's kind of going how we thought it would go, and then to come out in the second half and not be able to do anything. You know, I don't think it was a scheme thing, I mean I think, you know they're a very much of a scheme defense, but offensively we just didn't make any plays."

 

[lillestroom]

1) I think that Belichick is one of the best GM's in the nfl.
2) I think that Belichick is one the best HC's in the nfl.
3) I think that Belichick is one of the best DC's in the nfl.
4) Belichick is one of the best secondary coaches in the nfl.
5) And I think Belichick could be one of the best OC in the nfl.

1) Hmm. One of the better.
2) Correct.
3) On the money.
4) Wrong.
5) Cant see it.

 

[DropKickFlutie]

This thread is ridiculous.
Always blaming losses on lack of talent is what losers do.

This team has a CLEAR problem in the 2nd half of games. The stats aren't even close from the 1st half to 2nd half, going back at least the past 18 games. The numbers are dramatic. In 2009, 2/3 of the offensive points scored came in the 1st half, only 1/3 came in the 2nd half. The trend appears to continue this year.

The players aren't suddenly playing like crap in the 2nd half of games for no reason. Tom Brady is 1-8 in his last 8 road games, he didn't suddenly become a crappy away-game QB.

It may not be all about play calling, but to constantly deny the role of play calling on performance, is extreme homerism.

Some of you must definitely be family members of the Pats organization, to continue to blindly claim that it's still a talent issue. The same excuses from last year (no 3rd WR, bad tight ends, etc) don't apply anymore. The excuse making needs to stop.

 

[wdkantro2]

Defense:

Gerard Warren - liability against the run
Wilfork - All world
Wright - liability against the run

Ninkovich - Liability against the run, not much better against the pass
Spikes - rookie having rookie issues
Guyton - major liability against the run
Mayo - quality player
TBC - liability against the run

McCourty - Rookie succeptible to double moves
Butler - Second year DB with a confidence problem an overreliance on his talent
Meriweather - Veteran who's struggled enough to lose his starting job
Chung - Second year player who's a liability against the pass
Sanders - solid, but nothing more


Offense:

Moss - Top tier talent who's lost about 2 steps
Welker - Top tier talent who's coming back from ACL surgery and took a shot to the head
Tate - Second year man who got almost no playing time as a rookie
Edelman - sub for Welker and oft-injured himself

Crumpler - Mauler, not a pass catcher at this stage of his career
Gronkowski/Hernandez - Rookies who still have things to learn

Light - Solid Left tackle
Connolly - Backup forced to start
Koppen - Oft-injured player who seems to have declined a bit due to those injuries
Neal - Oft-injured player (he missed time yesterday, as a matter of fact)
Vollmer - Second year player still making mistakes

Taylor - Talented, but aging and oft-injured.
Morris - Aging and oft-injured, he doubles as the fullback
BJGE - JAG

Brady - All world, but needs to break a bad habit he picked up last year


Far too many people are laying the blame on the coordinators. Well, players were getting open in the passing game, and the running game wasn't able to open holes. The defense is loaded with players who, for one reason or another, aren't really ready to be starting on top defenses.


It's a personnel/talent/experience/execution problem for the most part. Blaming the coordinators is a cop out.

I guess we should be praising the coaching staff for even scoring a single point with that pathetic roster then, right?
Can you explain why that awful team outscored the opponent 52-34 in the first 3 halves of the year, and lost 18-0 in the fourth? Did they play over their heads for 3 halves and then came back to earth?

 

[JMarr]

I'd take this roster any day of the week!!!

It's a great roster.

The coordinators are not infallible, not matter what you all think.

How many times do you need to see Brady plaintively look toward the sideline asking to get the call.

O'Brien is not prepared to call the next play.

Which says a lot.

Clearly. That otherwise rational human beings can say that in-game coaching adjustments/playcalling have relatively little bearing on the ultimate success of an offense or defense is nothing short of mind-boggling. Can anyone here say with a straight face that we aren't missing the pre-2007 versions Weiss/ and Crennel right now?

Our coordinators and coaching in general is suffering right now, just like much of last season. And this is a Belichick-led staff we're talking about--not some kind of Childress/Herm Edwards/Brian Billick trainwreck. I always thought we had higher standards around here.

 

[Deus Irae]

Aah! I have forgotten. The memory of fans is exactly one game.

Well, given that we're talking about one game, that would be appropriate.

Blame the ZERO POINTS in the second on whoever you want. Blame Moss if you must. But consider that if belichick wasn't trying to be HC, OC, and secondary coach for the past year, our adjustments and production in the second half might be better.

The same complaints were made under Weis/Crennel. They were made under McDaniels/Pees. Now they're being made again. There's nothing new here. The only thing that's changed is the final outcomes, and that's because this team isn't as good as it used to be, on the field. This should be telling to anyone with a rational mind, but it seems to bounce off of the minds of a lot of internet message board posters. Perhaps, one day, doctors will find a cure for this sort of willful amnesia.

You are correct, there is no way to prove the incompetence or fault of the coordinators. After all, had Moss made both catches, we might have won, and no one would have any critcism at all for the coaordinators and coaches.

If the coordinators were at fault, I'd want that demonstrated and them replaced. However, as I noted repeatedly last year while people were clamoring for the head of Dean Pees, the problems in New England are mostly personnel. They are not coaching issues.

 

[D-Money]

I am sure that Brady misses Mcdaniels.

 

[Deus Irae]

This thread is ridiculous.
Always blaming losses on lack of talent is what losers do.

This team has a CLEAR problem in the 2nd half of games. The stats aren't even close from the 1st half to 2nd half, going back at least the past 18 games. The numbers are dramatic. In 2009, 2/3 of the offensive points scored came in the 1st half, only 1/3 came in the 2nd half. The trend appears to continue this year.

The players aren't suddenly playing like crap in the 2nd half of games for no reason. Tom Brady is 1-8 in his last 8 road games, he didn't suddenly become a crappy away-game QB.

It may not be all about play calling, but to constantly deny the role of play calling on performance, is extreme homerism.

Some of you must definitely be family members of the Pats organization, to continue to blindly claim that it's still a talent issue. The same excuses from last year (no 3rd WR, bad tight ends, etc) don't apply anymore. The excuse making needs to stop.

The fact that you're using "homerism" in conjunction with me should have told you just how far off the mark you were with your post.

 

[JMarr]

Always blaming losses on lack of talent is what losers do.

This team has a CLEAR problem in the 2nd half of games. The stats aren't even close from the 1st half to 2nd half, going back at least the past 18 games. The numbers are dramatic. In 2009, 2/3 of the offensive points scored came in the 1st half, only 1/3 came in the 2nd half. The trend appears to continue this year.

The players aren't suddenly playing like crap in the 2nd half of games for no reason. Tom Brady is 1-8 in his last 8 road games, he didn't suddenly become a crappy away-game QB.

It may not be all about play calling, but to constantly deny the role of play calling on performance, is extreme homerism.

Some of you must definitely be family members of the Pats organization, to continue to blindly claim that it's still a talent issue. The same excuses from last year (no 3rd WR, bad tight ends, etc) don't apply anymore. The excuse making needs to stop.

:agree::agree::agree::agree::agree:

 

[mgteich]

I do think that there is a difference between have a coordinator and not ahving one, and the difference is much more than a title.

IMHO, having a Weiss and Crennel whose job was to coordinate and be responsible for the offense and defense really helped. The responsibilities you mention were still split among the coaching staff. It is indeed a matter of management structure. How many folks should be considered to working directly for Belichick? How many folks should he have to be dealing with on a regular basis. I maintain that it helps to have an OC, a DC, a head of personnel, an assistant HC and an assistant to the HC. That's more than plenty direct reports.

What Belichick has done is to remove the top management layer. There is simply Belichick and all the coaches and front office staff. IMHO, this does indeed remove a lot of potential controversy. There are no arguments. There is no power sharing at all. It is indeed a personal preference of mine and a personal opinion. I think that the earlier management structure worked better, and is a better structure.

This assumes you correctly perceve the inner workings of the management structure, and no offense, but you could only be guessing.
It is often the case that when a team lacks a coordinator, it is simply because the coordinator duties are split among assistants. After all, coordinator is in most cases a position coach with additional responsibilities. There is little difference in having one designated coordinator for all of those duties (which include play calling, game planning, organizing and running practice, film study, etc) and splitting those duties among all of the assistants. Does it really matter if Corwin Brown and Matt Patricia are 'coleaders' of game planning rather than one being solely in charge? Not really, and it certainly doesnt put extra responsibility on BB than a different structure would.
You are assuming that he delegates no responsibility and past seasons when we did not have an official coordinator totally conflct with that opinion.

 

[DropKickFlutie]

The same complaints were made under Weis/Crennel. They were made under McDaniels/Pees. Now they're being made again. There's nothing new here. The only thing that's changed is the final outcomes, and that's because this team isn't as good as it used to be, on the field.

I don't know anyone who was criticizing Weiss and Crennel.

You're wrong about talent. The 2001 Patriots team was a far inferior team talent-wise and beat several teams in the playoffs. That was pure coaching, adjustments, and out-smarting the opponent, not talent. The 2001 team was full of re-treads and new players and rookies or over-the-hill castoffs.

The 2003 and 2004 teams were infirmaries, they had the most injuries in the entire league two years in a row, to star players as well.

The 2003 team had the worst rushing attack in the entire league. None of those championship teams had receivers that were even #3 receivers after leaving the Pats.

You are completely mis-representing the talent level on those championship teams. They were not vastly superior talent-wise to what we have on the current roster. The current offense is completely stacked at every position.

This team has a CLEAR problem in the 2nd half of games. The production in the 1st half is great for both offense and defense -- the team goes in with good game plans, and then they fall apart after half time.

Your arguments are completely illogical, and I can't believe you're clinging to these. You're losing respect here with every single post about this.

 

[Deus Irae]

I do think that there is a difference between have a coordinator and not ahving one, and the difference is much more than a title.

IMHO, having a Weiss and Crennel whose job was to coordinate and be responsible for the offense and defense really helped. The responsibilities you mention were still split among the coaching staff. It is indeed a matter of management structure. How many folks should be considered to working directly for Belichick? How many folks should he have to be dealing with on a regular basis. I maintain that it helps to have an OC, a DC, a head of personnel, an assistant HC and an assistant to the HC. That's more than plenty direct reports.

What Belichick has done is to remove the top management layer. There is simply Belichick and all the coaches and front office staff. IMHO, this does indeed remove a lot of potential controversy. There are no arguments. There is no power sharing at all. It is indeed a personal preference of mine and a personal opinion. I think that the earlier management structure worked better, and is a better structure.

Josh McDaniels would say "hi" and note that he was not the O.C. in name in 2005, but he's too busy being a head coach in Denver while being one of the finest offensive young minds in the NFL.

 

[mgteich]

I agree with your analysis but not with your memory.

There were plently of folks criticizing Weiss and Crennel. NEM is the most infamous of the critics.

Belichick came in with a 5-year plan and it took him 5 years to build an elite team in 2004.

I don't know anyone who was criticizing Weiss and Crennel.

You're wrong about talent. The 2001 Patriots team was a far inferior team talent-wise and beat several teams in the playoffs. That was pure coaching, adjustments, and out-smarting the opponent, not talent. The 2001 team was full of re-treads and new players and rookies or over-the-hill castoffs.

The 2003 and 2004 teams were infirmaries, they had the most injuries in the entire league two years in a row, to star players as well.

The 2003 team had the worst rushing attack in the entire league.

You are completely mis-representing the talent level on those championship teams. They were not vastly superior talent-wise to what we have on the current roster. The current offense is completely stacked at every position.

This team has a CLEAR problem in the 2nd half of games. The production in the 1st half is great for both offense and defense -- the team goes in with good game plans, and then they fall apart after half time.

Your arguments are completely illogical, and I can't believe you're clinging to these. You're losing respect here with every single post about this.

 

[IcyPatriot]

This thread is ridiculous.
Always blaming losses on lack of talent is what losers do.

This team has a CLEAR problem in the 2nd half of games. The stats aren't even close from the 1st half to 2nd half, going back at least the past 18 games. The numbers are dramatic. In 2009, 2/3 of the offensive points scored came in the 1st half, only 1/3 came in the 2nd half. The trend appears to continue this year.

The players aren't suddenly playing like crap in the 2nd half of games for no reason. Tom Brady is 1-8 in his last 8 road games, he didn't suddenly become a crappy away-game QB.

It may not be all about play calling, but to constantly deny the role of play calling on performance, is extreme homerism.

Some of you must definitely be family members of the Pats organization, to continue to blindly claim that it's still a talent issue. The same excuses from last year (no 3rd WR, bad tight ends, etc) don't apply anymore. The excuse making needs to stop.

Your argument is valid if we are not maximizing the talent we have.

Your argument fails if we are maximizing the talent we have.

I think Bill is maximizing the talent he has.



The experts say overall we have middle of the pack talent ... if that.

Our overall record the last 18 games puts us in the upper 25% of the league.

That shows we are maximizing the talent we have ... your argument IMO is not valid.

The overall players we have do not have another gear to shift to mentally or physically.

We win by playing all 60 minutes flat out ... we lose when we don't.

 

[D-Money]

Wasnt Mike Martz available?Look at wat he is doing with the bears.Does BB have a big ego working with a guy like Martz.

 

[D-Money]

Well he has built this young defense and its still a question mark.Sanchez always seems to have a clean pocket.U can say we had 3 sacks but the pressure from the edge is just not there right now and it hasnt been for awhile.

 

[Joker]

I understand your assessment in your first post ,Deus...I agree with most of it but I get the feeling you don't think there will be much improvement as the season progresses...2 games and we've seen some good and some bad. If what you posted is still true at the game 9 juncture, then what this will probably be is a .500 squad, if that. Unacceptable by current standards established by this team the past decade.

 

[Deus Irae]

I don't know anyone who was criticizing Weiss and Crennel.

You signed up this year. Weis and Crennel have been gone for some time. NEM has been gone for some time. I'll leave it at that.

You're wrong about talent. The 2001 Patriots team was a far inferior team talent-wise and beat several teams in the playoffs. That was pure coaching, adjustments, and out-smarting the opponent, not talent. The 2001 team was full of re-treads and new players and rookies or over-the-hill castoffs.
The 2003 and 2004 teams were infirmaries, they had the most injuries in the entire league two years in a row, to star players as well.

The 2003 team had the worst rushing attack in the entire league. None of those championship teams had receivers that were even #3 receivers after leaving the Pats.

You are completely mis-representing the talent level on those championship teams. They were not vastly superior talent-wise to what we have on the current roster. The current offense is completely stacked at every position.

I'm not sure what any of this has to do with any position I've taken about the talent of the current team. In fact, I'm sure it has nothing to do with it.

This team has a CLEAR problem in the 2nd half of games. The production in the 1st half is great for both offense and defense -- the team goes in with good game plans, and then they fall apart after half time.

This team has played two games, and was playing "eat the clock" in the first one after amassing a huge lead. To claim that it's got a CLEAR problem in the 2nd half of games is asinine.

Your arguments are completely illogical, and I can't believe you're clinging to these. You're losing respect here with every single post about this.

Get a mirror.

 

[Deus Irae]

I understand your assessment in your first post ,Deus...I agree with most of it but I get the feeling you don't think there will be much improvement as the season progresses...2 games and we've seen some good and some bad. If what you posted is still true at the game 9 juncture, then what this will probably be is a .500 squad, if that. Unacceptable by current standards established by this team the past decade.

I think we'll see improvement. Rookies will adapt to the pace of the game, and they'll keep learning tricks of the trade, for example. Mankins returning would help.

However, this is a very young and inexperienced team facing a brutal overall schedule. When the defense has games like it did yesterday, this team is going to get beaten, unless the offense can get to 2007 levels consistently. And, despite the cries of some people here, this offense hasn't yet demonstrated anything approaching that sort of capability, regardless of coordinators, adjustments, or anything else.