Gronk and Brady should have sat against Miami

[mosslost]

Any Pats fan that does not realize how poor the game plan BB employed for the Miami game was is simply in some form of denial

 

[Tunescribe]

It was a VERY bad plan

If it worked, you wouldn't be saying that. Again, sometimes good plans don't work out.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Whats done is done. Get over it.

 

[Whitt25]

Gronk's re-injury in week 17 is NEW information

Oh, I know. I've been following everything. That still doesn't change the fact that the Miami game happened two weeks ago and we didn't sit Brady or Gronk. So, again, it's in the past. Nothing we can do about it now.

 

[New England Pride]

BB has a standing offer; that if you know the play a person will get hurt. He's willing to pull the player.

You have to let him know when the player is going to get hurt though.

 

[mosslost]

If it worked, you wouldn't be saying that. Again, sometimes good plans don't work out.

I think it actually INCREASED the likelihood of injury to important players and reduced the chance of winning HFA. And the fans that are all so confident about a win in Denver are just not facing the facts, and/or are forgetting how painful that loss will be especially if ****ing Manning is the ****ing QB.

Pats coaches blew it this year if they go down in Denver. We would win the game in Foxboro.

 

[Ring 6]

You cannot judge those decisions until the you see what happens in the playoffs.
There are a plethora of considerations that BB had to make in order to handle that situation, and posters on a message board have none of those facts, dynamics or the ability to effectively analyze them.
A few examples:
-What are the actual injuries
-What was the recovery time and progress?
-Could any of those players have even played
-What message was the HC trying to send to his team (I can think of dozens of possibilities)
-Why run so often? Was it to protect Brady? Was it to work on the running game? Was it to see what we can expect if we have to run the ball in obvious run situations in the playoffs?
-How important was winning (I believe BB felt it was very important, others think he didn't care)
-What did he communicate to the team? Was it any different than any normal week?

BB obviously did what he felt was best in order to best achieve the goal of winning the SB.
He may have been right, he may have been wrong, or he may have been somewhere in between. BTW, if he felt it was important to win, played everyone who really was healthy enough to play, actually felt that gameplan was the one that gave them the best chance to win, he would have been a bad gameplanner making the decisions he felt were best for his team. Whether it hurt the team or not is yet to be determined.
There is no way observers from outside the organization can pretend to have enough facts to judge these decisions yet. There is simply no point in doing a post-mortem of decisions where the goal is post-season success when the post-season hasn't even begun yet.

 

[New England Pride]

@Gronkowski123 this thread is right up your alley. You can take it from here.

 

[mosslost]

 

[neuronet]

You have to let him know when the player is going to get hurt though.

That's why he said if you know the play a player will get hurt, he'll pull that player. It all checks out.
We should definitely discuss this more.

 

[mosslost]

Oh, I know. I've been following everything. That still doesn't change the fact that the Miami game happened two weeks ago and we didn't sit Brady or Gronk. So, again, it's in the past. Nothing we can do about it now.

True.

 

[mosslost]

Whats done is done. Get over it.

I am actually "over it" in the sense that is only football. Does not change my life at all. But this is a Patriots message board, that I have been on or followed for many years... and the **** I have seen on here over the years, my complaints barely come close to rivaling.

 

[IllegalContact]

 

[RobertWeathers]

I am actually "over it" in the sense that is only football. Does not change my life at all. But this is a Patriots message board, that I have been on or followed for many years... and the **** I have seen on here over the years, my complaints barely come close to rivaling.

True but the flack you are getting is that you are starting a thread on a topic that was hot almost two weeks ago.

 

[mosslost]

You cannot judge those decisions until the you see what happens in the playoffs.
There are a plethora of considerations that BB had to make in order to handle that situation, and posters on a message board have none of those facts, dynamics or the ability to effectively analyze them.
A few examples:
-What are the actual injuries
-What was the recovery time and progress?
-Could any of those players have even played
-What message was the HC trying to send to his team (I can think of dozens of possibilities)
-Why run so often? Was it to protect Brady? Was it to work on the running game? Was it to see what we can expect if we have to run the ball in obvious run situations in the playoffs?
-How important was winning (I believe BB felt it was very important, others think he didn't care)
-What did he communicate to the team? Was it any different than any normal week?

BB obviously did what he felt was best in order to best achieve the goal of winning the SB.
He may have been right, he may have been wrong, or he may have been somewhere in between. BTW, if he felt it was important to win, played everyone who really was healthy enough to play, actually felt that gameplan was the one that gave them the best chance to win, he would have been a bad gameplanner making the decisions he felt were best for his team. Whether it hurt the team or not is yet to be determined.
There is no way observers from outside the organization can pretend to have enough facts to judge these decisions yet. There is simply no point in doing a post-mortem of decisions where the goal is post-season success when the post-season hasn't even begun yet.

This post is quite well organized and thoughtful. I suppose it is a little ridiculous for me, someone who has never even played football, to state unequivocally that BB had a "stupid" game plan. The other thing I am remembering is that I was one of the "WTF!? Gronk why wont you play unless 100% crowd" Now I am saying they should have held him in arguably extremely important game (HFA) My problem is it still seems to me they did not try to win the game. But that can't really be true, it was just an unusual game plan for them and your post does a good job describing what might be the case... How do we win and protect players? It might have looked ugly but what you are saying makes it seem plausible they just tried something they thought best but it failed.

 

[mosslost]

True but the flack you are getting is that you are starting a thread on a topic that was hot almost two weeks ago.

The Gronk re-injury in week 17 is new information though.

 

[mosslost]

LOL

 

[IllegalContact]

The Gronk re-injury in week 17 is new information though.

who said he was reinjured week 17?

 

[SalemPats]

This is a dumb thread, we can't go back in the past

 

[mosslost]

who said he was reinjured week 17?

New information on internet stories that he tweaked it some both week 15 and 17...