OTAs - TB absence thread

[RobertWeathers]

I don’t think everyone being at OTAs defines the culture. Sure it’s a piece, but the culture and character of a team manifests itself on the field and in dealing with adversity not at OTAs. Unless you think Brady has lost his teammates this is not a culture or team building issue.

Yes. Showing up to OTAs is an example of the culture.

Personally, I don't think this impacts wins and losses at all.

What I do believe is if you aren't hurt or in a contract holdout, BB has made showing up to these things mandatory thus part of the culture and team building process.

 

[Jackson 2]

Not sure what you are getting at. I was merely saying Guerrero likely had an input into Tom’s decision not to come to OTAs since Guerrerro knows Tom’s body better than anyone. Yoko, to my knowledge, knew nothing about music. Really bad analogy.

I'm guessing Gisele knows Tom's body better than Guerrero...well, maybe not...

 

[SHOWTIME15]

LOL, how the f### would I, or you, know that. JC...

Exactly

 

[Bruins29]

Potentially all the new ones. I mean, it's impossible to quantify it, obviously, and "being screwed" isn't at all the right way to put it. But if these workouts were meaningless and didn't actually contribute to helping the team (in this specific discussion, the passing game) get better, why would they bother having them?

It might not cost them a single game. Then again, who knows. But it's all part of the process and the reason teams have these is to improve the players and the team. So missing out on it is missing out on an opportunity to improve together.

You could also say having a happy content QB who has permission to stay at home and spend more time with his family could make for a more happy and content QB who puts more work in this season, and just overall feels better about things etc etc.

The whole thing just isnt as black and white as some people are making it out to be.

 

[Deus Irae]

Potentially all the new ones. I mean, it's impossible to quantify it, obviously, and "being screwed" isn't at all the right way to put it. But if these workouts were meaningless and didn't actually contribute to helping the team (in this specific discussion, the passing game) get better, why would they bother having them?

Here's the basic problem with what's happening:

People are confusing a theoretical optimum with tangible results. Is it really even remotely likely that the reason a guy like Berrios is going to fail to make the team is because, in May, he took 9 days of passes from Hoyer instead of from Brady, when every player was taking passes from Hoyer instead of Brady?

Of course not.

Is it really even remotely likely that a bad play will happen in September that wouldn't have happened if Brady, instead of Hoyer, was throwing passes to the WRs for 9 OTA practices in May?

Of course not.

It might not cost them a single game. Then again, who knows. But it's all part of the process and the reason teams have these is to improve the players and the team. So missing out on it is missing out on an opportunity to improve together.

There's a difference between being sub-optimal and being bad enough for people to lose their minds.

 

[SammyBlueCat]

*** Vigorously scratching my post ***

 

[Boston Boxer]

normally I would say no big deal, but I would like to see him get in there and start working with our new additions.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

As an aside, this thread is going to be a lot of fun to bump when Brady is firing on all cylinders early on in the season.

Strawman. I don't see anyone here arguing the absence will hurt Brady.

 

[Palm Beach Pats Fan]

*** Vigorously scratching my post ***

Gronk had some chick taking care of his, last I saw.

 

[ivanvamp]

Here's the basic problem with what's happening:

People are confusing a theoretical optimum with tangible results. Is it really even remotely likely that the reason a guy like Berrios is going to fail to make the team is because, in May, he took 9 days of passes from Hoyer instead of from Brady, when every player was taking passes from Hoyer instead of Brady?

Of course not.

Is it really even remotely likely that a bad play will happen in September that wouldn't have happened if Brady, instead of Hoyer, was throwing passes to the WRs for 9 OTA practices in May?

Of course not.



There's a difference between being sub-optimal and being bad enough for people to lose their minds.

Well, I can't speak about people "losing their minds", whatever that means. It's not insignificant or unimportant that Brady isn't there. If these OTAs didn't matter, then teams wouldn't have them. If you asked BB whether these OTAs are important for improving the play of the offense, it's 100% he'd say yes. It's not even a question that he'd say yes. So because you and I can't quantify it doesn't mean that Brady's absence is unimportant or insignificant.

 

[Kontradiction]

Strawman. I don't see anyone here arguing the absence will hurt Brady.

They’re worried about him missing time and building a bond with his new receivers. Of course they’re arguing that it will hurt Brady and, by extension, his receivers. So your attempt to point out a straw man falls flat on its face.

 

[UrbanCowboy]

You have no idea what Brady’s frame of mind is.
You have no idea if the coaches want him there or if they okd his absence.
You are just opining how things are in your mind.

Geez, isn't opining allowed on a discussion forum?

 

[Deus Irae]

WIt's not insignificant or unimportant that Brady isn't there.

Other than it being significant and/or important because people are claiming it's significant and/or important, how is it significant or important?

If these OTAs didn't matter, then teams wouldn't have them.

Of course they would. It's not important that players lift weights all in the same gym, yet teams want them to do that.

If you asked BB whether these OTAs are important for improving the play of the offense, it's 100% he'd say yes. It's not even a question that he'd say yes.

BB thought it was important to steal signals via recorder. The team has survived quite nicely without doing that.

So because you and I can't quantify it doesn't mean that Brady's absence is unimportant or insignificant.

It doesn't mean the absence is important or significant, either.

What's lost by Brady not being there for OTAs is that Brady's not there for OTAs. That's not doomsday for player closeness. That's not doomsday for young players learning the plays. That's not doomsday for young players getting familiar with Brady over the course of mandatory camps.

Is that something? Sure. Is it anything major that's going to ruin the season, or a receiver's career? Of course not.

 

[goheels22002]

What's the big deal? The Pats are 7-1 in their last 8 games started by a back-up. Belichick ought to bench him for the first four games. It worked out in 2016.

 

[ivanvamp]

You could also say having a happy content QB who has permission to stay at home and spend more time with his family could make for a more happy and content QB who puts more work in this season, and just overall feels better about things etc etc.

The whole thing just isnt as black and white as some people are making it out to be.

Yes you could possibly see that this helps. But if you ask BB if he'd rather have Brady there than not, the answer will 100% be yes. And there's a reason for that.

 

[ivanvamp]

Other than it being significant and/or important because people are claiming it's significant and/or important, how is it significant or important?

Because they actually, you know, work on important things during these sessions.

Of course they would. It's not important that players lift weights all in the same gym, yet teams want them to do that.

This isn't even remotely in the same category. Obviously.

BB thought it was important to steal signals via recorder. The team has survived quite nicely without doing that.

Oh brother. That's the argument?

It doesn't mean the absence is important or significant, either.

I cannot fathom your "logic" here.

What's lost by Brady not being there for OTAs is that Brady's not there for OTAs. That's not doomsday for player closeness. That's not doomsday for young players learning the plays. That's not doomsday for young players getting familiar with Brady over the course of mandatory camps.

Nobody is saying it's "doomsday". That's a straw man and you know it. But it is significant that he's missing these sessions, during which time these guys gain better rapport and timing and understanding.

Is that something? Sure. Is it anything major that's going to ruin the season, or a receiver's career? Of course not.

NOBODY. IS. SAYING. THAT.

 

[SHOWTIME15]

None of us know what exactly goes on at OTAs since none of us are on the team. Therefore, I find it difficult to see how Brady missing it will impact him significantly. I trust Brady’s judgment.

 

[ivanvamp]

None of us know what exactly goes on at OTAs since none of us are on the team. Therefore, I find it difficult to see how Brady missing it will impact him significantly. I trust Brady’s judgment.

Brady knows what goes on. Here's a quote of his from 2013 on OTAs...

"He (Bill Belichick) talks about, you think it's just an OTA in the spring time and it's not that important and all those things that probably could enter your mind. The truth is, this lays the foundation for the start of training camp and if you have a good training camp, it usually means a good start to the season. A good start to the season leads to good position entering the second half of the season. Everything ends up having some significance to it. You're not just out here running plays and going through different things that aren't going to mean anything. We're out here trying to get a lot of things accomplished. I think we have done that, but there's still a lot of work to be done. It's really never ending, especially when you play for Coach Belichick. Especially in practices when the offense goes against the defense, because if the offense makes a play then the defense sucked and if the defense makes a play then the offense sucked so someone is really going to get yelled at on every play. There's always lowlights when we come in on the next day. Even if it was a great offensive play, he's going to yell at someone on the defense. We've become a bit used to that now and that's part of the learning process and also learning how to play for the Patriots and understand the criticism that you're getting and hopefully use it constructively so you can improve as a player."

Belichick also knows a little something about OTAs and in 2015 he said...

""Everything we do out here is important," Belichick said. "Otherwise, we wouldn’t do it, or we should be doing something else. We try to take the things that we feel are most beneficial and put together a practice schedule so that we can get the best utilization of the limited amount of time we have out here. We have a lot of people and we’re just trying to make the most out of it. Everything we do is important, or we should be doing something else.""

So I dunno guys, maybe Brady and Belichick are wrong and random internet posters are right. Maybe this is meaningless and OTAs really aren't that important. Or maybe, just maybe, Belichick and Brady were on to something when they said these things.

 

[Deus Irae]

"It's ok if the team struggles a bit in SEPTEMBER, because everyone knows BB considers the first four games of the season an extension of training camp"


has now morphed into


"OMG! Brady's not going to throw to his receivers for 9 days in MAY! How will those poor new guys survive, and what will become of the team?"

 

[ivanvamp]

"It's ok if the team struggles a bit in SEPTEMBER, because everyone knows BB considers the first four games of the season an extension of training camp"


has now morphed into


"OMG! Brady's not going to throw to his receivers for 9 days in MAY! How will those poor new guys survive, and what will become of the team?"

It's hard to have a serious discussion with you when you're throwing out crap like that. Nobody here is expressing the things you're suggesting. It's only morphed into that in your own mind.