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

[aluminum seats]

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?

Couple things wrong with this--number one it's not true that "this is the way this team plays every year." Second, even if it WERE true, that doesn't make it right.

First, the Pats have done different things at the end of the season, including yesterday. Resting guys who otherwise would have played, back-up QBs playing, etc. The approach is different than in normally is. So they don't always play a certain way.

More importantly, who cares if they do? The decision could still be wrong. I think the Colts tanking a potential perfect season is absurd. But Welker did not have to play yesterday. Rodney Harrison did not have to play against the Titans a few years back. And if they didn't play, they wouldn't be hurt.

And the idea that you have to play "somebody" is silly. Welker is one of the guys at the top of the list you wouldn't want to lose, and we lost him.

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

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

Yup got that right.

During the "dynasty" years of patsfans.com, there would be multiple threads discussing offensive groupings and formations that might work against various opponents.

Now we have Deus.

This site used to be #1. Today all we have is a bunch of #2 from the likes of "the deuce". It's really, really Iraeritating.

 

[Deus Irae]

It's easy to criticize the decision after an injury. But hey, you love the easy ones eh?

I have no problem with playing every starter, if you're actually going full tilt in your attempt to win the game, although I might disagree with going for the win (separate issue). However, if you're not doing that, you rest your players based upon priorities in some order:

1.) Need due to injury

2.) Importance to the team

3.) Need for backups to get reps

4.) Other


Once the inactive list came out with Bodden, Maroney and Faulk on it, we knew that the team wasn't going all out to win the game. From that moment forth, since Faulk was getting a full game off, it made no sense to play Welker. This isn't rocket science. We've seen what happens to this offense without Welker in more than just this season. We saw it when he got his bell rung against Pittsburgh, too.

 

[fumbrunner]

Couple things wrong with this--number one it's not true that "this is the way this team plays every year." Second, even if it WERE true, that doesn't make it right.

First, the Pats have done different things at the end of the season, including yesterday. Resting guys who otherwise would have played, back-up QBs playing, etc. The approach is different than in normally is. So they don't always play a certain way.

tHey have rested players? really? when? Certainly not in 2007. Not in 2003 or 2004 either. Please show me where they have taken this approach?

 

[JackBauer]

Yup got that right.

During the "dynasty" years of patsfans.com, there would be multiple threads discussing offensive groupings and formations that might work against various opponents.

Now we have Deus.

This site used to be #1. Today all we have is a bunch of #2 from the likes of "the deuce". It's really, really Iraeritating.

I meant that only to mean it's him versus the world on this forum

 

[BadMoFo]

Yup got that right.

During the "dynasty" years of patsfans.com, there would be multiple threads discussing offensive groupings and formations that might work against various opponents.

Now we have Deus.

This site used to be #1. Today all we have is a bunch of #2 from the likes of "the deuce". It's really, really Iraeritating.

Not to be a ****, but how would you know what it was like in the dynasty years when you joined the site around the time a certain team was going for a perfect season?

 

[Sicilian]

Not to be a ****, but how would you know what it was like in the dynasty years when you joined the site around the time a certain team was going for a perfect season?

Says the man who joined only a few months before that season...

But either way, he could have been a lurker. I lurked for years before signing up, it happens.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Says the man who joined only a few months before that season...

But either way, he could have been a lurker. I lurked for years before signing up, it happens.

Me too. I lurked for some time before coming up with a BS name like "robertweathers".

 

[BadMoFo]

Says the man who joined only a few months before that season...

But either way, he could have been a lurker. I lurked for years before signing up, it happens.

The big difference is that I am not the one making comparisons about what this site was five years ago and now.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Couple things wrong with this--number one it's not true that "this is the way this team plays every year." Second, even if it WERE true, that doesn't make it right.

First, the Pats have done different things at the end of the season, including yesterday. Resting guys who otherwise would have played, back-up QBs playing, etc. The approach is different than in normally is. So they don't always play a certain way.

More importantly, who cares if they do? The decision could still be wrong. I think the Colts tanking a potential perfect season is absurd. But Welker did not have to play yesterday. Rodney Harrison did not have to play against the Titans a few years back. And if they didn't play, they wouldn't be hurt.

And the idea that you have to play "somebody" is silly. Welker is one of the guys at the top of the list you wouldn't want to lose, and we lost him.

When haven't we started Brady and his WR in the last game of the season... Again, you can only sit so many guys and the kind of injury Welker suffered could have just as easily happened in practice this week if not during the first series against Baltimore, when it would be even more devastating. If we're going to start at the top why not sit Brady, Welker, Moss, Faulk, Taylor, Morris, Maroney and Wilfork and screw the rest of 'em, they're getting paid to play... That way if we'd lost Light or Neal or Warren or Bodden or even Hoyer or Edleman or Aiken or Mayo or any other starter or his backup it's not like the fanbase would be critical and complain that he didn't do something else...

Bill is on WEEI now and he just confirmed that the turf at Reliant is one of the worst he's ever seen. Inconsistent from section to section, which is the worst thing for a player.

 

[RobertWeathers]

When haven't we started Brady and his WR in the last game of the season... Again, you can only sit so many guys and the kind of injury Welker suffered could have just as easily happened in practice this week if not during the first series against Baltimore, when it would be even more devastating. If we're going to start at the top why not sit Brady, Welker, Moss, Faulk, Taylor, Morris, Maroney and Wilfork and screw the rest of 'em, they're getting paid to play... That way if we'd lost Light or Neal or Warren or Bodden or even Hoyer or Edleman or Aiken or Mayo or any other starter or his backup it's not like the fanbase would be critical and complain that he didn't do something else...

Bill is on WEEI now and he just confirmed that the turf at Reliant is one of the worst he's ever seen. Inconsistent from section to section, which is the worst thing for a player.

So cool how he can comment on fields from 25 years ago. High grass, low grass, soft, hard...

 

[MoLewisrocks]

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.

This is probably your most incomprehensible post ever. So in the game thread you gave some cryptic signal you agreed they should not play Brady so much. That was likely Belichick's plan prior to the Welker injury, too, although it generally is dependent on how the game and the teams performance is going. You know why that changed. But what does that tell us about your feelings on Welker playing at all in other than hindsight...

 

[MoLewisrocks]

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.

This team has sent the past 12 months making the same sort of moves it always made whether posters here (like lets say NEM) laughed at them of not. But it's true a lot of posters have flipped a switch...

I see things I question but compared to pros I realize I don't always know all the reasoning and it isn't always black and white.

I've become more defensive because the moronic level of criticism on this board is now even more widespread than it was back in the good old days when a delusional clown like NEM was the only poster arrogant enough to stick to his ignorant guns in every thread he entered in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary...

 

[QB12]

I remember him saying something to this effect during the game, and I fully agree. Just ****ty luck is all it is. I hope Welker has a speedy and healthy recovery. He has easily become one of my favorite Pats, if not my favorite, since the day he came to this club.

Im just broken hearted having to always watch our D get absolutely lit up by good passing teams. It really hurts my soul.

However, to be fair to Wilcots, he did call the Pats out for not running the ball after Houston had taken the lead in the fourth quarter.

QB12

 

[MoLewisrocks]

So cool how he can comment on fields from 25 years ago. High grass, low grass, soft, hard...

This is one of the best interviews Bill has given all year... Should be required listening for posters here before they post another informed opinion...

 

[BritPat]

This is one of the best interviews Bill has given all year... Should be required listening for posters here before they post another informed opinion...

Indeed.

Fantastic segment from him, especially about the field and Charlie Casserly.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Indeed.

Fantastic segment from him, especially about the field and Charlie Casserly.

Also when talking about the blame game played by fans and mediots who have no clue what went into a play failing even if they have access to coaches film because they don't know the adjustments and coverage rules specific teams apply in a variety of situations and depending on opponent performance running true to form...

And for a cranky ass he's so much more pleasant and matter of fact when explaining the rationale than I tend to be lately...

 

[aluminum seats]

tHey have rested players? really? when? Certainly not in 2007. Not in 2003 or 2004 either. Please show me where they have taken this approach?

Sure. Yesterday.

 

[aluminum seats]

When haven't we started Brady and his WR in the last game of the season... Again, you can only sit so many guys and the kind of injury Welker suffered could have just as easily happened in practice this week if not during the first series against Baltimore, when it would be even more devastating. If we're going to start at the top why not sit Brady, Welker, Moss, Faulk, Taylor, Morris, Maroney and Wilfork and screw the rest of 'em, they're getting paid to play... That way if we'd lost Light or Neal or Warren or Bodden or even Hoyer or Edleman or Aiken or Mayo or any other starter or his backup it's not like the fanbase would be critical and complain that he didn't do something else...

Starting is meaningless--if the game is going to be played differently than usual, as yesterday's was, then who cares who starts?

Obviously Welker could have gotten hurt in the playoffs. But he would not have gotten hurt yesterday if he was watching from his couch. As for the "screw the rest of 'em" line, I assume that refers to team unity if the top guys don't play. That could be an issue, I suppose, I don't know. But ask yourself if you'd rather have an injured Wes Welker or a pouty whoever. Come on.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Starting is meaningless--if the game is going to be played differently than usual, as yesterday's was, then who cares who starts?

Obviously Welker could have gotten hurt in the playoffs. But he would not have gotten hurt yesterday if he was watching from his couch. As for the "screw the rest of 'em" line, I assume that refers to team unity if the top guys don't play. That could be an issue, I suppose, I don't know. But ask yourself if you'd rather have an injured Wes Welker or a pouty whoever. Come on.

Tell you what, if I'm gonna lose a guy I'd rather lose him in week 17 than week 18 because Bill has a week to coach his replacement up and get the team aclimated to playing with him as a starter. We've always played the last game of the season differently. Bill coaches them to play 60 minutes every week because we know what the alternative is. Then he manages the game and the roster as sees fit to best prepare his team for the post season. It's what he's always done. Like Parcell's taught him and someone taught Paarcell's (but you can't teach message board posters much of anything) football players play football and you can't coach to protect them from injury because that's part of the fabric of the game.