Malcolm Butler Mega Thread

[Kontradiction]

You don't have to want BB fired just because his decision was wrong.

Bingo. BB is the GOAT head coach. But he isn't infallible. When he makes strategic personnel mistakes that cost the team games (a championship in this case), he should rightfully be called on it just like he eviscerates players in the film room. I never saw any such posts advocating for Bademosi being on the field over Butler in the lead-up to the Super Bowl. There's a good reason for that. That's because Bademosi sucks. He sucks so badly that the team didn't lift a finger to bring him back. I didn't see any posts prior to the lead up to the Super Bowl advocating putting Richards on Ertz instead of Chung in crunch time. There's a reason for that. That's because Richards sucks.

So yeah, people can harp on "DA EXECUSHUN" all they want. What they fail to realize is the reason why the execution was so bad is because the coaching staff rolled out a game plan which gave snaps to players who sucked on top of having multiple key positions doing things that exploited their weaknesses instead of playing to their strengths. But this has been gone over again and again and those that argue with me can't even bring themselves to say that the game plan didn't flat out suck.

 

[Tony2046]

How many Malcolm Butler's does it take to change a light bulb?

I sense this is a trick question and I'm not falling for it. Maybe it's Butler that needs to change. Maybe the bulb is fine the way it is. Maybe we'd progress as a society quicker if we learned to accept things for what they are.

Ok, that's my contribution.

Maybe I should of have said bump.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Please produce posts from before the Superbowl where you advocate for someone other than BB to run the team?

Go look at Captain Stone's posts from the past 10 years.

Hes fine with BB coaching. Its drafting and FAs that get his skivvies in a bunch.

 

[signbabybrady]

I don't think anyone was advocating that then, nor are they doing that now.

I pretty sure everyone is in agreement that BB is the best coach. The discussion is how the best coach of all time, somehow managed to throw the superbowl for "reasons"

You really think BB threw the SB?

 

[captain stone]

Bill didn't throw the SB, but he wanted to win it on his own terms, the consequences be damned.

 

[signbabybrady]

Bill didn't throw the SB, but he wanted to win it on his own terms, the consequences be damned.

What terms are those?

 

[Ring 6]

Bill didn't throw the SB, but he wanted to win it on his own terms, the consequences be damned.

He wanted to win it by coaching the way he has here for 18 years. I’m not sure why anyone would think he should change his approach to coaching this team.
His “terms” are what he believes is best and anyone who thinks they know better what is best for a football team to win than Bill Belichick is our of their mind.
Sure a different philosophy would work better in some isolated situations but it most definitely would not have produced better results than we’ve seen on his tenure.

 

[Kontradiction]

He wanted to win it by coaching the way he has here for 18 years. I’m not sure why anyone would think he should change his approach to coaching this team.
His “terms” are what he believes is best and anyone who thinks they know better what is best for a football team to win than Bill Belichick is our of their mind.
Sure a different philosophy would work better in some isolated situations but it most definitely would not have produced better results than we’ve seen on his tenure.

His goal is to win championships. If he thought that removing a player that is clearly better than the two others (Rowe and Bademosi) that played over him when that player is riding off into the sunset after the season anyway was for the best, then perhaps it might be time to call his mental faculties into question. I think it's much more realistic that he just stubbornly stuck to the plan and hoped that #12 would bail out his defense (again) and it just didn't happen. I'm not sure if that's better than just flat-out going full ****** that day, but it is what it is.

 

[SammyBlueCat]

We needed to be quicker on that day

 

[captain stone]

Bill didn't throw the SB, but he wanted to win it on his own terms, the consequences be damned.

What terms are those?

His terms were, that Malcolm Butler was not going to play at all that game, no matter how poorly his replacements performed.

 

[Soliel]

His terms were, that Malcolm Butler was not going to play at all that game, no matter how poorly his replacements performed.

I agree. B.B. has some kind of reason.

 

[chasa]

You really think BB threw the SB?

I think he intentionally put an inferior roster on to the field, then refused to put better players onto the field despite the fact that the defense was getting its ass handed to them.

IMO that meets the definition of throwing the game.

"Games that are deliberately lost are sometimes called thrown games. When a team intentionally loses a game, or does not score as high as it can, to obtain a perceived future competitive advantage, the team is often said to have tanked the game instead of having thrown it. In pool hustling, tanking is known as dumping."

I don't think he wanted to lose, I don't think he gained anything from losing. But he intentionally didn't field the best players available.

I know you're going to say "butler wasn't available" then go tell me to dig through 260 pages to find the post where you say you have a "source" but i honestly dont give a ****. Butler was dressed, Butler was active. Butler WAS available. Butler played ZERO snaps in a game where we only needed ONE stop

 

[Ring 6]

I think he intentionally put an inferior roster on to the field, then refused to put better players onto the field despite the fact that the defense was getting its ass handed to them.

IMO that meets the definition of throwing the game.

"Games that are deliberately lost are sometimes called thrown games. When a team intentionally loses a game, or does not score as high as it can, to obtain a perceived future competitive advantage, the team is often said to have tanked the game instead of having thrown it. In pool hustling, tanking is known as dumping."

I don't think he wanted to lose, I don't think he gained anything from losing. But he intentionally didn't field the best players available.

I know you're going to say "butler wasn't available" then go tell me to dig through 260 pages to find the post where you say you have a "source" but i honestly dont give a ****. Butler was dressed, Butler was active. Butler WAS available. Butler played ZERO snaps in a game where we only needed ONE stop

You act as if he did it for no reason.

 

[PatsDeb]

He wanted to win it by coaching the way he has here for 18 years. I’m not sure why anyone would think he should change his approach to coaching this team.
His “terms” are what he believes is best and anyone who thinks they know better what is best for a football team to win than Bill Belichick is our of their mind.
Sure a different philosophy would work better in some isolated situations but it most definitely would not have produced better results than we’ve seen on his tenure.

Actually, I think he DID go against his coaching philosophy in the Super Bowl and it cost us. He was pig-headed and refused to put a player out there because he was pissed at him for whatever reason. He did not do what was best for the team, certainly in the 2nd half of the game. As others have pointed out, Butler was gone after the season any way. You never have to look at his face again if you don't want to. Leave him off the team plane. Tell him to clean out his locker the second you get back to Foxboro. But don't do what you did, which is sacrifice a Super Bowl win for the other 52 guys and all your coaches and fans. BB blew it and anyone who thinks he didn't is out of their mind.

 

[Ring 6]

Actually, I think he DID go against his coaching philosophy in the Super Bowl and it cost us. He was pig-headed and refused to put a player out there because he was pissed at him for whatever reason. He did not do what was best for the team, certainly in the 2nd half of the game. As others have pointed out, Butler was gone after the season any way. You never have to look at his face again if you don't want to. Leave him off the team plane. Tell him to clean out his locker the second you get back to Foxboro. But don't do what you did, which is sacrifice a Super Bowl win for the other 52 guys and all your coaches and fans. BB blew it and anyone who thinks he didn't is out of their mind.

He made the decision based upon the way he coaches.
Making up different ways to deal with it does not change that.
You can disagree all you want with his decision but I have no doubt whatever the facts were it was consistent with the way he had made decisions for 18 years.
And he did what he thought was best for the team. That is what he always does.

 

[signbabybrady]

I think he intentionally put an inferior roster on to the field, then refused to put better players onto the field despite the fact that the defense was getting its ass handed to them.

IMO that meets the definition of throwing the game.

"Games that are deliberately lost are sometimes called thrown games. When a team intentionally loses a game, or does not score as high as it can, to obtain a perceived future competitive advantage, the team is often said to have tanked the game instead of having thrown it. In pool hustling, tanking is known as dumping."

I don't think he wanted to lose, I don't think he gained anything from losing. But he intentionally didn't field the best players available.

I know you're going to say "butler wasn't available" then go tell me to dig through 260 pages to find the post where you say you have a "source" but i honestly dont give a ****. Butler was dressed, Butler was active. Butler WAS available. Butler played ZERO snaps in a game where we only needed ONE stop

Cause and effect my man. Without police officers no one would get arrested do you blame cops for crime?

 

[signbabybrady]

Actually, I think he DID go against his coaching philosophy in the Super Bowl and it cost us. He was pig-headed and refused to put a player out there because he was pissed at him for whatever reason. He did not do what was best for the team, certainly in the 2nd half of the game. As others have pointed out, Butler was gone after the season any way. You never have to look at his face again if you don't want to. Leave him off the team plane. Tell him to clean out his locker the second you get back to Foxboro. But don't do what you did, which is sacrifice a Super Bowl win for the other 52 guys and all your coaches and fans. BB blew it and anyone who thinks he didn't is out of their mind.

Pig-headed. 18 years of a consistent approach that leads to double digit wins every year. But one idiot goes rogue and BB is then pig headed for not folding. You've got it backwards saying BB went against his philosophy Butler stopped following his philosophies and BB stuck to his.

 

[Tony2046]

Pig-headed. 18 years of a consistent approach that leads to double digit wins every year. But one idiot goes rogue and BB is then pig headed for not folding. You've got it backwards saying BB went against his philosophy Butler stopped following his philosophies and BB stuck to his.

I don't necessarily fault BB for the loss or disagree with what he did but do think if he had a do over Butler would play more than 1 snap.

 

[DropKickFlutie]

This is one of those bad decisions, like losing to the Colts after going for it on 4th down on their own 30 yard line.

It's possible to think Belichick is the greatest of all time and at the same time, think that not playing Butler was a huge mistake and lost the Super Bowl with a crappy 3-safety game plan

 

[BaconGrundleCandy]

He wanted to win it by coaching the way he has here for 18 years. I’m not sure why anyone would think he should change his approach to coaching this team.
His “terms” are what he believes is best and anyone who thinks they know better what is best for a football team to win than Bill Belichick is our of their mind.
Sure a different philosophy would work better in some isolated situations but it most definitely would not have produced better results than we’ve seen on his tenure.

Bill changes his approach from week to week, year to year. In terms of game planning, overall philosophy etc nobody is more fluid than Bill.

Pig-headed. 18 years of a consistent approach that leads to double digit wins every year. But one idiot goes rogue and BB is then pig headed for not folding. You've got it backwards saying BB went against his philosophy Butler stopped following his philosophies and BB stuck to his.

You have no idea what this even means.

I've heard rumors & if they are correct theres no way Butler shouldn't have been playing. It's easily the biggest f-up of Bill's tenure.

The collective of that game wasn't going to change. Butler isn't Revis in his prime that would have made that type of impact. That said he's responsible for the biggest play in SB history & we just need a play or 2 from him.

Again I'm not pretending everything changes if he plays but it did have ripple effects in a very close game.