Malcolm Butler Mega Thread

[Soliel]

No, they lost. It was the right call, in hindsight, but it didn't work. They didn't get the first down. If you're referring to a chitty spot, it's irrelevant now. They didn't get it.



I don't really care about his status. My job is to root for the team, not protect some malcontent who thinks he was jobbed. He was a RFA, not an UFA. Shut up, do your job, do it well, and cash in on the next contract. I certainly differ from BB on this. I wouldn't protect any player who jeopardized the other 52 guys, the coaches, and the organization from attaining the goal. I would let it be known why he didn't play. I'd burn the SOB down. Nothing would stop me from protecting the other 52 guys. As a coach, I would work my ass of to keep the player in the fold, but once he's a lost cause, I would not let him take away from the other players.

I agree. Butler should be publicly humiliated. Preferably in stocks so crowds could toss rotten vegetables at him

 

[aluminum seats]

I do. Everyone should. You don’t want to ever reach a conclusion and work backwards from there. And I guarantee you something will get leaked either way after Butler signs his new deal. It’ll probably come from either him or his camp. There will more than likely also be more details about the negotiations that went down last offseason as well, too.

What I'm saying is can you come up with a hypothetical that would justify benching Butler for the entire Super Bowl except for one snap? I can't.

 

[IllegalContact]

What I'm saying is can you come up with a hypothetical that would justify benching Butler for the entire Super Bowl except for one snap? I can't.

neither can anyone else........not with a straight face, anyway

 

[Chris Stevenson]

No, they lost. It was the right call, in hindsight, but it didn't work. They didn't get the first down. If you're referring to a chitty spot, it's irrelevant now. They didn't get it.



I don't really care about his status. My job is to root for the team, not protect some malcontent who thinks he was jobbed. He was a RFA, not an UFA. Shut up, do your job, do it well, and cash in on the next contract. I certainly differ from BB on this. I wouldn't protect any player who jeopardized the other 52 guys, the coaches, and the organization from attaining the goal. I would let it be known why he didn't play. I'd burn the SOB down. Nothing would stop me from protecting the other 52 guys. As a coach, I would work my ass of to keep the player in the fold, but once he's a lost cause, I would not let him take away from the other players.

Well, Butler, and his selfish behaviors in 2017 with delicate sensibilities, certainly cared about his contract and status more than the team.

I equate 2012 SB 46 Welker, to SB 52 Butler. Each failed in the postseason, selfishly putting greed above the team. Sucks, but that's essentially what happened.

I don't want a dwarf slot WR demanding "Andre Johnson" money with cap hell Texans and expecting that to help our team, just like Butler rejecting a generous 7 mil per deal from the Pats, only to also not show up when we needed him in a SB.

It's pretty much all the same thing, just like with Jamie Collins and his delusioas last year, forcing a benching/trade.

Butler succumbed to the "contract demand beast".

Can't blame BB for feeling inadequate with Butler, moving more deserving players (Bademosi) above him.

Bademois's 11 snaps proves Butler wouldn't have played much anyway.

 

[Chris Stevenson]

No, they lost. It was the right call, in hindsight, but it didn't work. They didn't get the first down. If you're referring to a chitty spot, it's irrelevant now. They didn't get it.



I don't really care about his status. My job is to root for the team, not protect some malcontent who thinks he was jobbed. He was a RFA, not an UFA. Shut up, do your job, do it well, and cash in on the next contract. I certainly differ from BB on this. I wouldn't protect any player who jeopardized the other 52 guys, the coaches, and the organization from attaining the goal. I would let it be known why he didn't play. I'd burn the SOB down. Nothing would stop me from protecting the other 52 guys. As a coach, I would work my ass of to keep the player in the fold, but once he's a lost cause, I would not let him take away from the other players.

Yes, I am referring to the spot of the ball and Goodell cheating. You can see the ref come in to mark it and he's about to do it right, and then he takes two steps to his left in front of the Indy sideline. The Clement TD, the Dion Lewis fumble, etc, I could go on for days with ho many games our team has been robbed in since Goodell took over.

These refs either don't know the rules are all told things before the game. I believe the latter.

Tapping the ball to yourself to make final possession is about forward progress, not where the player lands.

He clearly had full control up against his chest, with forward progress in mid air at the 30.

Marking it at the 28 means the ref doesn't know the rules or cheated.

 

[Steve102]

Yes, I am referring to the spot of the ball and Goodell cheating. You can see the ref come in to mark it and he's about to do it right, and then he takes two steps to his left in front of the Indy sideline. The Clement TD, the Dion Lewis fumble, etc, I could go on for days with ho many games our team has been robbed in since Goodell took over.

These refs either don't know the rules are all todl things before the game. I believe the latter.

Tapping the ball to yourself to make final possession is about forward progress, not where the player lands.

He clearly had full control up against his chest, with forward progress in mid air at the 30.

Marking it at the 28 means the ref doesn't know the rules or cheated.

I'm not going there on any of this, sorry brother.

 

[Chris Stevenson]

I'm not going there on any of this, sorry brother.

There's no need to. I know the rules and know what Goodell does.

 

[Kontradiction]

Do you watch these SBs? The fact you regurgitate stats means your play fantasy football.

There are other things that occur in games that are not tied to stat accumulation.

Brady had multiple gaffes in that game, so he is far from removed from any criticism.

If Foles dropped his TD or fumbled the ball when he should have tucked it and taken a sack, he should have gotten criticism in a loss for that, too, regardless of total yards accumulated.

Pretty much all these SBs come down to the final minutes because of how the league is set up, to cater to fantasy people like you.

The irony.

I watch football and played it until the college level. Every player on the field has gaffes at points in games. Every player has plays they would like back at the end of the day, win or lose. Brady is no different. So I'm not sure what you're driving at here (other than to maybe tell me that you've never played the game competitively), but you're doing a very poor job of putting the blame on him for this game. On the other hand, that you expect perfect games with zero gaffes from the players on the field speaks volumes as to why your takes on the game are often woefully off. In the end...

1. The defense gave up 41 points.

2. Brady handed them the keys to the lead.

3. Brady dominated on the offensive side of the ball and was the only reason the team was in this position in the first place.

The issue was the defensive side of the ball. The pass protection holds up and Brady drives to win that game, he's now turned in two of the finest Super Bowl games, back to back, in the history of the league, NEM.

 

[Kontradiction]

What I'm saying is can you come up with a hypothetical that would justify benching Butler for the entire Super Bowl except for one snap? I can't.

Nope.

 

[Jlaff]

How long until the website is renamed the Chris Stevenson forum?

 

[lancerman]

Like I said before... if this was such an egregious crime to leave Butler on the bench... why wasn't BB fired after the game? If it is so black and white and clearly the wrong decision was made and BB singlehandedly blew the Super Bowl - that's a no-brainer fireable offense no matter who you are.

Unless of course the team knows it wasn't egregious at all and they agree with the decision.

That''s incredibly poor logic imo. Regardless of whether it's a bad decision, Bill Belichick still has more Super Bowls than any coach of all time, is regarding as one of if not the greatest coach of all time, and is in the midst of a run where his team has went to 7 straight conference finals games, 4 Super Bowls, and won 2 championships.

You don't fire a coach like that based off one bad costly decision.

Imo it's a clear attempt to set a completely false standard by which you can argue by. "Oh if he was clearly wrong he would be fired". No. He could have replaced Brady for Hoyer in that game and he would have enough capital to not get fired. That's nonsense. It's something to criticize him over. But I have suspicion that you are trying to frame a false narrative of firing being the barometer for how bad the decision was so that you can justify your viewpoint.

 

[sb1]

That''s incredibly poor logic imo. Regardless of whether it's a bad decision, Bill Belichick still has more Super Bowls than any coach of all time, is regarding as one of if not the greatest coach of all time, and is in the midst of a run where his team has went to 7 straight conference finals games, 4 Super Bowls, and won 2 championships.

You don't fire a coach like that based off one bad costly decision.

Imo it's a clear attempt to set a completely false standard by which you can argue by. "Oh if he was clearly wrong he would be fired". No. He could have replaced Brady for Hoyer in that game and he would have enough capital to not get fired. That's nonsense. It's something to criticize him over. But I have suspicion that you are trying to frame a false narrative of firing being the barometer for how bad the decision was so that you can justify your viewpoint.

LOL yes you certainly can fire a good coach based on one decision. Ask Grady Little.

And you know as well as I do what would have happened to Belichick after the game if he benched Brady for Hoyer in that game for no good reason and to claim otherwise is being disingenuous. That's called a fireable offense.

If the organization believed Belichick put his ego and pride above the team and a championship or whatever else he's accused of with this decision to sit Butler at the expense of dividing the locker room... that too is a fireable offense. No matter what your track record is.

Clearly the organization believes it wasn't and therefore they believe Belichick really did have a good reason to sit Butler, regardless of what us fans think. It's also clear that a lot of us Pats fans think Butler is a much better corner than he actually is, at least for this year. PFF had him ranked as no better than an average corner this season and a guy who really doesn't have much upside beyond being a role player. Which IMO sounds about right.

 

[sb1]

Do you watch these SBs? The fact you regurgitate stats means your play fantasy football.

There are other things that occur in games that are not tied to stat accumulation.

Brady had multiple gaffes in that game, so he is far from removed from any criticism.

I dunno about that, 10.5 yards per pass attempt and a 115 passer rating is a very good game by any measure and this was a very good defense he was facing.

I do agree he was quite a bit better in the second half than he was in the first half. Unfortunately I think his underthrow to Amendola on the blown coverage indirectly cost us 7 points - the Pats got 0 on that drive and if Brady put the ball where it should have been Amendola would have had as easy a TD as you'll see in a Super Bowl. Not all his fault though, there was a pass rush in his face on that play and they got the long completion anyway.

I don't really blame him for the drop, that play should have never been run in the first place, he is not a young athletic QB that can do things like that, he's 40 years old and he looked it on that play.

 

[bormio]

LOL yes you certainly can fire a good coach based on one decision. Ask Grady Little.

And you know as well as I do what would have happened to Belichick after the game if he benched Brady for Hoyer in that game for no good reason and to claim otherwise is being disingenuous. That's called a fireable offense.

If the organization believed Belichick put his ego and pride above the team and a championship or whatever else he's accused of with this decision to sit Butler at the expense of dividing the locker room... that too is a fireable offense. No matter what your track record is.

Clearly the organization believes it wasn't and therefore they believe Belichick really did have a good reason to sit Butler, regardless of what us fans think. It's also clear that a lot of us Pats fans think Butler is a much better corner than he actually is, at least for this year. PFF had him ranked as no better than an average corner this season and a guy who really doesn't have much upside beyond being a role player. Which IMO sounds about right.

Grady Little - a good coach? A wee bit of a stretch. Belichick’s resume might be somewhat better.

 

[Steve102]

LOL yes you certainly can fire a good coach based on one decision. Ask Grady Little.

Bad analogy. You might want to re-frame. BB would never go with a hunch.

 

[bormio]

Bad analogy. You might want to re-frame. BB would never go with a hunch.

How about no timeout vs Seattle? He pretty much admitted it was a hunch.

 

[sb1]

Grady Little - a good coach? A wee bit of a stretch. Belichick’s resume might be somewhat better.

Of course Belichick's track record is better than Little's but Little still had the Sox as a powerhouse team in 03 which IMO might have been better on paper than the team that won it all in 04 and embarrassed the Yankees on the way there. I doubt say... Bobby Valentine does nearly as well with that team.

You can screw up and get fired regardless of your accomplishments if the screwup is big enough, it happens in sports. Belichick does have some rope, as shown by his continued employment after spygate, but I don't believe it's limitless.

 

[Steve102]

How about no timeout vs Seattle? He pretty much admitted it was a hunch.

ok yes. Different situations. Put him in Grady's shoes, and he knows what Pedro's avg. against is after so many pitches.

 

[Ras-IR Dowling]

Well, Butler, and his selfish behaviors in 2017 with delicate sensibilities, certainly cared about his contract and status more than the team.

I equate 2012 SB 46 Welker, to SB 52 Butler. Each failed in the postseason, selfishly putting greed above the team. Sucks, but that's essentially what happened.

I don't want a dwarf slot WR demanding "Andre Johnson" money with cap hell Texans and expecting that to help our team, just like Butler rejecting a generous 7 mil per deal from the Pats, only to also not show up when we needed him in a SB.

It's pretty much all the same thing, just like with Jamie Collins and his delusioas last year, forcing a benching/trade.

Butler succumbed to the "contract demand beast".

Can't blame BB for feeling inadequate with Butler, moving more deserving players (Bademosi) above him.

Bademois's 11 snaps proves Butler wouldn't have played much anyway.

You may be right that butler succumbed to the contract demand beast. And I’ll still blame BB for that crap defensive game plan all day long. Even the GOAT HC isn’t immune to criticism.

 

[makoute]

The team has sucked defending offenses where the quarterback is a threat to run for as long as I can remember. The game plans are garbage. Having multiple guys in the back end playing out of their natural roles didn’t help, either.

Problem is foles isn’t a running qb.