I'm exhausted of this argument since I think the whole exercise is rather silly since I don't think the fundamental conclusions we're coming to are worlds apart - we're getting bogged down in hyperbole, and I apologize for introducing it from the getgo.
Now, that said, I don't think your comparisons to Wilfork playing some DE or Harrison playing CB to confuse Manning are fair at all. With the exception of Bruschi's situation, mostly those were situations where Belichick asked one of the best players ever to play on this team to move to a slightly different spot for a tactical game-planning reason. IE, Wilfork playing DE against teams that run outside (Miami with Jake Long) or the Harrison v Manning in the playoff games. So I don't see the connection.
You said he has never, ever moved a player to a diferent position and put a weaker one in his spot. Wilfork is exactly the same thing, right down to doing it situationally. Now you are saying that exact sdame situations don't apply because you are trying to prove McCourty sucks, so using good players doenst count. Circular argument 101.
By the way,Wilfork played DE A LOT, not just against Miami, that was the first time.
Bottom line for me, if McCourty were playing Pro Bowl level CB, he would not have made such a permanent (at least for 2011) to subpackage FS.
A) It was only a few games, so I don't know why you say permanent.
B) As I have said it is very reasonable that it was done to fix the S problem.
C) We don't have a FS and SS we have a LS and RS
And you have to realize that by your own logic re: McCourty's CB skills (that the fact he was starting indicates a certain level of play) you unknowingly to detriment your argument for what it says about Ihedigbo. We can't have it both ways.
A) It is incorrect that Ihedigbo always came out in sub
B) Safeties require different skills in base and sub. There is no detriment. If I take a safety off the field in passing downs who is better in running downs, that says nothing about the quality of my corner and where I align him when I don't have a safety who can cover.
Last, the notion that only a few plays were the difference in McCourty's season - well that's sort of like saying "well, other than that how was the play, Mrs. Lincoln." It's a huge chunk of production yielded for a CB and it can't flippantly be dismissed.
Thank you Mr Strawman. Where have I flippantly dismissed it? I have in fact done the opposite, stating that if it isn't fixed it is a disaster.
I am simply explaining what happened. The fact is that those handful of plays (and the struggle with the particular technique) are the difference. I have never told anyone how much weight to place on them, just that isolating them illustrates the difference in his play in those 2 seasons.
It's clear to me that Belichick shifted the secondary in order to get guys with appropriate coverage skills in the right spot. To me, the fact that the perceived dropoff he had between McCourty's CB skills and a street free agent who was just playing safety were small enough to allow McCourty to shift over and bring better coverage to the safety position than Ihedigbo says something. And I don't know why you would think it only says something about Ihedigbo. The more accurate assessment is to see what it says about Moore, Ihedigbo and McCourty. We clearly come to some different evaluations here.
You are guessing.
Safeties sucked, especially in coverage. When I choose my 5 or 6 best DBs, I have 3 corners a S a WR, and some misfits. I align them in a way to make my defense the best.
You assume that the best guy plays corner, but in fact, if you watch the plays, you will see that the most thinking fell on McCourty and we played a scheme that limited what the corners do. The corners can hurt you less than the safety. In some of those games we play cover 0 with Mccourty free. That isn't hiding McCourty, its freeing him up.
You have to get over this best guy lines up at corner and the rest fill out the spots blindspot you have.
I'd suggest that in a sub package, at the end of the season, Chung and McCourty were the only guys we had who could play competant S, so there was necessity in the move too.
But - in the end - McCourty will probably be fine no matter where he is next year. He had limitations in his game - injuries derailed his season, and I think mentally he was affected. His production was affected.
Since we generally probably both feel comfortable with McCourty going forward, I'll let you have the last word on this debate and then bow out of this argument.
OK, last word is good exchange, some things we agree, some we do not, may be a good topic to resume during the season.
