Patriots ask for permission to speak with Josh McDaniels

[Ring 6]

And Luc Longley played for the 98' Bulls what's your point in referencing that he was on the roster? Are you insinuating that Maroney was a key contributor to said historical offense? If so, then man that's some serious spin.

He was the starting RB on that team.

 

[West Philly Patriot]

Not that I really like Maroney, but he contributed far more than the other backs on the roster and averaged a very respectable 4.5ypc.

4.5 is respectable, but in that offense c'mon man.

 

[Ring 6]

Not that I really like Maroney, but he contributed far more than the other backs on the roster and averaged a very respectable 4.5ypc.

I know everyone here hates Maroney, but to talk about him like he was Reggie Dupard is ridiculous.

 

[strngplyr]

I know everyone here hates Maroney, but to talk about him like he was Reggie Dupard is ridiculous.

Won't lie, don't know who that is. So I'm not sure what you're getting at.

 

[Huckleberry1]

If only we could somehow get Belichik to read War Room, then he could see how McDaniels took over his drafts and make him pledge to never do it again if he brings him back.

 

[West Philly Patriot]

I know everyone here hates Maroney, but to talk about him like he was Reggie Dupard is ridiculous.

I don't hate Maroney, I don't even consider him a bust he just didn't live up to his draft billing. But he was the recipient of the greatest offense ever in 07' I don't think many people would say his job was very difficult considering what defenses were gearing up to defend every Sunday that year.

 

[Ring 6]

Maroney wasn't the Pats #1 RB for 4 years. Nice try at re-writing history, Andy. There are plenty of people left to give input. It's called the position coaches and the national scouts who proved that they had a better read on those two than McDaniels did. But, again, ignore reality and go with your homer BS.

OK, he split the #1 role with Dillon in the 1st of those 4 years. Big differnece?
I am focussing on the reality. The guy was the top RB on the team for most of his rookie contract. You talk like he never played a game.

I was a huge Maroney defender, but the fact is that, in the end, Maroney just never got it.

But he was productive for years. If missing by that much on a late 1st is the worst you do, that is far from a condemnation of talent evaluation. You should look at the history of the draft. There are many much bigger misses.

As for Jackson, the Pats taking him almost directly led to Daboll leaving with Mangini... And, while McDaniels is a good OC, Daboll is just as good and seems to have a better grip on judging players.

Based on what?
What offense has Daboll ever been successful running? Ever? He stinks as an OC.
What decisions are you saying show he has a better grip on talent evaluation?
Are you seriously telling me that in their entire careers, being right on 1 guy is iron clad proof of being a better talent evaluator?

Anyway, I'd love to see all of the examples you have to show me how great an OC Brian freaking Daboll is.

 

[PatsLancer27]

This is horrible news.

Teams do NOT ask to interview other teams OCs to hire them as their own OC. They interview other team's OCs to hire them has head coaches.

This can only mean that BB is planning to retire at the end of the season, or become the GM and give up the coaching portion. Or maybe do the gig that Parcells wanted to have with the Jets, before BB quit that job.

NO.........JUST........NO - NOT GONNA HAPPEN:bricks:

 

[Ring 6]

I don't hate Maroney, I don't even consider him a bust he just didn't live up to his draft billing. But he was the recipient of the greatest offense ever in 07' I don't think many people would say his job was very difficult considering what defenses were gearing up to defend every Sunday that year.

But he produced. Perhaps not significantly better but certainly no worst than any other RB of that Patriot offensive era.
I think what everyone refuses to accept is that Maroney's career was pretty much average for his draft slot. He played 4 years as a major contributor. No, he didn't become a star, but I bet if you took everyone picked in his slot and 2-3 above or below over a 5 year period you would find as many players who did less than him as did more.
I know this board expected Walter Payton Jr, but just because the expectations were stupid doesn't mean the result was any further away from the norm for that part of the draft than it really was.

 

[Ring 6]

Won't lie, don't know who that is. So I'm not sure what you're getting at.

Reggie Dupard was a RB picked in the first round by the Pats in the 80s (86-ish IIRC) that was a total bust, probably didn't gain 500 yards in his career

 

[strngplyr]

Reggie Dupard was a RB picked in the first round by the Pats in the 80s (86-ish IIRC) that was a total bust, probably didn't gain 500 yards in his career

Then I think you quoted the wrong person when you made your comment. I did nothing remotely close to comparing him to Dupard.

In fact, I was actually posting evidence supporting your claim that he was the #1 RB for 4 years.

 

[Ring 6]

And, while McDaniels is a good OC, Daboll is just as good and seems to have a better grip on judging players.

Brian Daboll has been an OC 3 years.
His offenses ranks in yards:

32
29
22

In Points
29
31
20

Care to restate?

If not yet, here are McDaniels

11
1
5
15
13
31


7
1
8
20
19
32


Still gonna tell me those are equals?

 

[Ring 6]

Then I think you quoted the wrong person when you made your comment. I did nothing remotely close to comparing him to Dupard.

In fact, I was actually posting evidence supporting your claim that he was the #1 RB for 4 years.

I didn't quote you to disagree with you, I quoted you to add to your point.

 

[Ring 6]

Out of curiosity I looked up Dupards numbers.
Drafted 1/26 in 1986 out of SMU.

Career lasted 5 years (3+ in NE) 217 carries 704 yards 3.2 per carry.
Best season 1987 94-318 3.4
Nickname "OneYard Dupard"

 

[Deus Irae]

Belichick makes the best decisions with the information he has available for him. He can't be everywhere at once, he has to believe the info he gets is reliable. Belichick has gotten bad info in the past that he has acted upon. In his book, Holley clearly states that in 2006 Belichick made draft picks against the objections of all of his national scouts, just because McDaniels said that his brother said someone was good. Something was clearly not right in that war room decision, and I find it hard to believe it was simply Josh McDaniels passively "giving his opinion" that caused BB to basically give his own national scouts a slap in the face.

So you're going to bash on McDaniels for those picks, but you're not going to give him credit for Asante?

 

[DaBruinz]

OK, he split the #1 role with Dillon in the 1st of those 4 years. Big differnece?
I am focussing on the reality. The guy was the top RB on the team for most of his rookie contract. You talk like he never played a game.

No, Andy. You aren't focusing on reality. You are focusing on what your own biased opinion. Just because others have chosen to disagree with you.

But he was productive for years. If missing by that much on a late 1st is the worst you do, that is far from a condemnation of talent evaluation. You should look at the history of the draft. There are many much bigger misses.

It's called the total body of work, Andy. That is what you are ignoring. McDaniels body of work with talent evaluation is horrible. Just because you want to ignore it doesn't change that reality.

Based on what?
What offense has Daboll ever been successful running? Ever? He stinks as an OC.

Daboll actually ran a very good offense in Miami. Especially considering the poor talent he has at QB. The same can be said for Carolina and when he was with the Jets. His offenses were good. Not outstanding. But good. Especially when you consider the talent he was handed. Not like what McDaniels was given here in New England.

What decisions are you saying show he has a better grip on talent evaluation?
Are you seriously telling me that in their entire careers, being right on 1 guy is iron clad proof of being a better talent evaluator?

Clearly, you need to stop with your BS, get off your arse and get yourself a copy of War Room. Daboll was against both Maroney and Jackson. It wasn't just ONE guy. That is the problem with you. You make these absurd claims off of one smidgen of something someone says and then you act like you are dealing with FACT. The reality is that your BS is tiresome. Get off your knees, zip up McDaniels' zipper and stop with this garbage already.

Anyway, I'd love to see all of the examples you have to show me how great an OC Brian freaking Daboll is.

Listen. I understand you have an issue with reading comprehension. Clearly you don't understand the difference between GOOD and GREAT. I said that Daboll was good as an OC. He's shown it with 3 different teams. Maybe you should actually watch other teams every now and then so you actually can look intelligent when you start ripping on people you are absolutely clueless about.

 

[DaBruinz]

Brian Daboll has been an OC 3 years.
His offenses ranks in yards:

32
29
22

In Points
29
31
20

Care to restate?

If not yet, here are McDaniels

11
1
5
15
13
31


7
1
8
20
19
32


Still gonna tell me those are equals?

You aren't too intelligent, are you? Those numbers don't mean sh!t. Not to mention that Daboll has been an OC more than 3 years. But thanks for opening your trap and showing that you don't know a damn thing about what you are talking about.

 

[brady199]

Reggie Dupard was a RB picked in the first round by the Pats in the 80s (86-ish IIRC) that was a total bust, probably didn't gain 500 yards in his career

Yup, "Reggie One Yard Dupard"

704 career yards

 

[DropKickFlutie]

Still gonna tell me those are equals?

That's not a fair comparison. Let's compare them in their years without the guidance of Belichick. Daboll didn't have great talent to work with and didn't have huge success after New England. On the other hand, without Brady and Belichick, McDaniels lost almost all of his last 20 games in Denver, and in St Louis with Bradford and Steven Jackson ran the worst offense in the league in points (11 a game), yards, etc etc.

Nobody will ever know why Daboll was passed over in New England, but regardless of this debate Bill Belichick has already proven multiple times that he can take no-name coaches from no-name college programs and make them look really good as coordinators. It's not unlike what Belichick has done in the past with no-name players like David Givens, Cassel, etc etc. Belichick just makes the coaches and players around him look a little or a lot better than they are compared to after they leave.

 

[jays52]

Belichick makes the best decisions with the information he has available for him. He can't be everywhere at once, he has to believe the info he gets is reliable. Belichick has gotten bad info in the past that he has acted upon. In his book, Holley clearly states that in 2006 Belichick made draft picks against the objections of all of his national scouts, just because McDaniels said that his brother said someone was good. Something was clearly not right in that war room decision, and I find it hard to believe it was simply Josh McDaniels passively "giving his opinion" that caused BB to basically give his own national scouts a slap in the face.

I don't think that situation was as black and white as you portrayed it to be. I have read the book three times now and never have come to the conclusion that you have. McDaniels had input which was positive, but Belichick was overwhelmingly portrayed to have gone off of his instinct that he could make any player work. He had a positive recommendation from Meyer on Jackson which he ran with, while he ended up (and he even admitted to this) valuing Jackson's athleticism over his datasheets. McDaniels liked Maroney but the scouts thought he was dumb and immature. That seems to me like a fairly common coin flip decision for most decision makers in the draft.

As someone who has made it a point to pay specific attention to this particular section because of your posts, I can only describe them as being flatly wrong. I think that it's a disservice to the board to present such a biased, close-minded analysis of text that clearly is different from what you present as dogma. I'm not trying to make an argument out of this, nor attack you, but I think that the board deserves to hear an objective opinion before yours begins to seep into the zeitgeist.