Curious how people feel

[Ian]

If it wasn't for Miami, Welker wouldn't have been who he was, so BB doesn't get any credit for plucking him out of South Beach!

I do completely agree with this. He's been better at plucking away receivers others have developed and hasn't been able to really develop their own here over the years...which has been frustrating. It's bizarre, and it's clearly hurt them.

 

[Ian]

BB couldn't get Cassell + and undefeated 2007 team into the playoffs in 2008. Reid took Cassel and a much lesser team to the playoffs in 2010. End of story when it comes to the Cassell argument.

One thing I will say is that if your premise is just because he did it with Cassel, it doesn't mean he can do it with anyone, then I do sort of agree with you. Although you can look at Garoppolo and Brissett and wonder how good they would have been if someone else and drafted them but then you can go back through previous QBs (Kingsbury, etc.) and cancel those out given how that went. Hopefully, they do have some luck with Stidham and whoever comes along moving forward because time is clearly running out to get that position right for the coming years.

 

[skinnydog]

I’m sorry, but when one of the choices is “Ray Lewis killed a guy” then that is the only possible answer.

 

[Deus Irae]

Hold on - they won 11 games that year and with a sort of frustrating league playoff format that kept the Patriots out and lesser win teams in. 11 games with a back up was still an impressive feat. If they went 9-7 I'd agree with your premise, but 11 games with a back-up is still pretty impressive, especially when you look around the league in recent years where lesser teams/coaches with pretty good rosters finished 8-8 (Pittsburgh would be a one example - because I hate Tomlin) or worse after losing their starting QB.

You're defending something that doesn't need defending, though, Ian. I'm not busting on BB, Cassell, or 2008, outside of the context of BradyKing's claim about being sure that BB can win without Brady. I'm noting that 2008 was a fluke of the schedule. You're really saying the same thing when you talk about the league format (though you talk specifically about the playoffs), because the Patriots were lucky enough to draw the two worst divisions in the NFL that year as the 8 game opponents. But, just to play this out:

Patriots 1-1 versus Dolphins
Patriots 1-1 versus Jets

Patriots versus non-divisional opponents who were .500 or better:

Loss to the Chargers (8-8)
Won against the Broncos (8-8)
Loss to the Colts (12-4)
Loss to the Steelers (12-4)
Won against the Cardinals (I think we all remember the game where the Cardinals quit) (9-7)

So the best team they beat all year, outside the division, was a 9-7 team.


And it's not as if it was really a playoff format issue which was the undoing, beyond the usual "Division winner makes the playoffs". The two wild card teams were

Colts (12-4)
Ravens (11-5)

They had an easy schedule. They just fell short.

 

[Ian]

You're defending something that doesn't need defending, though, Ian. I'm not busting on BB, Cassell, or 2008, outside of the context of BradyKing's claim about being sure that BB can win without Brady. I'm noting that 2008 was a fluke of the schedule. You're really saying the same thing when you talk about the league format (though you talk specifically about the playoffs), because the Patriots were lucky enough to draw the two worst divisions in the NFL that year as the 8 game opponents. But, just to play this out:

Patriots 1-1 versus Dolphins
Patriots 1-1 versus Jets

Patriots versus non-divisional opponents who were .500 or better:

Loss to the Chargers (8-8)
Won against the Broncos (8-8)
Loss to the Colts (12-4)
Loss to the Steelers (12-4)
Won against the Cardinals (I think we all remember the game where the Cardinals quit) (9-7)

So the best team they beat all year, outside the division, was a 9-7 team.


And it's not as if it was really a playoff format issue which was the undoing, beyond the usual "Division winner makes the playoffs". The two wild card teams were

Colts (12-4)
Ravens (11-5)

They had an easy schedule. They just fell short.

Got you, I see what you're saying. But I do sort of feel like Belichick has had a history of making lesser players better, which would lead me to believe he'd be able to have success without Brady. However, when it comes to winning Super Bowls, I do agree, that might be another story. It takes special players to be able to make key plays in key moments and the QB position is obviously the most important. With Brady, he has that, without someone like that, I could see him leading a team to the postseason but beyond that, I do have doubts on whether he could win a title without someone like Brady under center.

Who knows though...maybe he's fine with winning 10-11 games each year over these final years and not winning a title given that he's essentially chasing Shula's all-time win record now.

 

[supafly]

I don’t know. I might want 6 years of guaranteed competitiveness with a decent chance to go to the playoffs every year over shooting one wad in SB55, then fizzling out as a miserable team for 5 years straight.

 

[Ring 6]

I don’t know. I might want 6 years of guaranteed competitiveness with a decent chance to go to the playoffs every year over shooting one wad in SB55, then fizzling out as a miserable team for 5 years straight.

I’m sure many fans feel that way.

 

[Wiluven]

I don’t like either of the options. I want us to be competitive every year. Yes I’m proud and thankful for the multi decade success but I’m not giving this 2019 team a pass or any team in the future a pass because of past success.

This team, specifically the offense, sucked and I want better in 2020.

 

[borg]

Andy traded himself for a kinder, gentler, more agreeable (kind of) Ring6.

I thought it was because he lost internet privileges at county

 

[Deus Irae]

Got you, I see what you're saying. But I do sort of feel like Belichick has had a history of making lesser players better, which would lead me to believe he'd be able to have success without Brady. However, when it comes to winning Super Bowls, I do agree, that might be another story. It takes special players to be able to make key plays in key moments and the QB position is obviously the most important. With Brady, he has that, without someone like that, I could see him leading a team to the postseason but beyond that, I do have doubts on whether he could win a title without someone like Brady under center.

Who knows though...maybe he's fine with winning 10-11 games each year over these final years and not winning a title given that he's essentially chasing Shula's all-time win record now.

BB's been excellent at taking one trick ponies and finding a way to use that one trick. He's also (generally) been excellent at targeting guys specifically for special teams. Those are definite strengths. I'm not sure that he's all that much better than normal at taking longshots and getting them to hit beyond that.

 

[supafly]

I’m sure many fans feel that way.

Well, not according to the poll, at least so far. Right now, it’s me and one other person.

 

[Patstastic]

Um...Reid didn't become Chiefs coach until 2013. Cassell was gone by that point. Just an FYI.

 

[Doctor DDS]

I would prefer to be competitive every year with a chance to win than win it once then blow. I would have rather been a Steelers fan in the last decade than the Giants despite being down 1-0 in Super Bowl titles. Won a bunch of divisions, playoffs most years and the few down years were .500. Giants went 70-90 and were basically out of it by Thanksgiving most years.

Am a UCONN basketball fan and the 2010's have been brutal and that includes winning 2 titles. Team currently appears hopeless. Not saying I would give the titles back but I enjoyed the 1990's decade much more than this one and they did not win any back then (some of that was due to the program ascending vs descending)

This next decade will be a challenging one for Patriot fans. If they end up being very competitive like the Chiefs of the last 5 or so years but always fall a little short I am not sure how much the fan base will appreciate it. Like everyone I want them to win it all but I also love a win in weeks 5 and 6 and if they go 11- 5 and lose in divisional round in 2024 that may prove to be highly enjoyable.

 

[Hyped]

Put me on the win SB 55 with Brady bandwagon.....all the way to the bitter end!

 

[brdmaverick]

I've been consistent in my approach that we give Brady all the tools he needs to win and that I'm completely comfortable with the premise that when Brady is gone this team will be bad.

 

[Ring 6]

I've been consistent in my approach that we give Brady all the tools he needs to win and that I'm completely comfortable with the premise that when Brady is gone this team will be bad.

Agree but i will add that for the majority of his career the tools Brady needed were not players that made his job easier, it was players that made the areas he could not impact better.
In other words you have a better team if you give Brady less talent and ask him to elevate it and still get his job done and plow your resources into the parts of the team he cannot overcome (Defense, ol) than your give Brady a bunch of toys to make it easy for him while neglecting the areas he cannot impact.
As an example all things equal if I can add a stud wr or a stud defensive player I know I can with Brady without the stud wr so I’ll put that on his shoulders and improve the defense.
At 43 I think that has changed somewhat.

 

[goheels22002]

BB hasn't won anything without Brady, so let's stop pretending that we can be sure he'd do it this time. He had an undefeated team with Brady, and he couldn't even get that team to the playoffs the following season, without Brady.

Does that mean that he absolutely can't win without Brady? No, but it sure as hell doesn't indicate that he can.

This is a strange thread in which to have the Belichick without Brady debate. But of all the seasons to put it to the test, next year will be an excellent one. If Brady leaves, he won't be the only high profile player to need to be replaced. It is a rebuilding year given all the older players who looked past their prime, and the 20 or so veterans who are free agents. Belichick the GM will also be without Caserio by the look of things.

Winning the AFC East will be harder with the Bills being a solid team with a good coach and the Dolphins looking like they have turned the corner under Flores. There are so many variables, it will be hard to conclude that Belichick cannot win without Brady. But if he does win the Division, it will be a significant accomplishment.

 

[dannydyn]

Where is the "hope I can get laid everyday for the next 6 years" option?

 

[Deus Irae]

This is a strange thread in which to have the Belichick without Brady debate. But of all the seasons to put it to the test, next year will be an excellent one. If Brady leaves, he won't be the only high profile player to need to be replaced. It is a rebuilding year given all the older players who looked past their prime, and the 20 or so veterans who are free agents. Belichick the GM will also be without Caserio by the look of things.

Winning the AFC East will be harder with the Bills being a solid team with a good coach and the Dolphins looking like they have turned the corner under Flores. There are so many variables, it will be hard to conclude that Belichick cannot win without Brady. But if he does win the Division, it will be a significant accomplishment.

No offense intended on this, but it's way too early to know how much of an accomplishment it might be, IMO. The Dolphins still suck. The Jets still suck. The Bills still have Allen at QB. The Patriots still have the best team in the division. None of that has changed since Saturday.

The rest is all still to develop. And a look at the FA list shows that the potential problem there, outside of Brady, is largely being overblown. If you consider Collins to be gone, it's going to be about

Brady
Thuney
Van Noy

as the bigger ticket players, and then the likes of

Roberts
Slater
Karras
Folk
Shelton
Ebner
Bethel

should mostly be easy re-signings.

• Dorsett is probably gone, given the "I'm done" and very light subsequent snap counts. If he stays, it's going to be for small money.
  
• Watson's off to retirement
• Newhouse is almost certainly either gone or just a low priority swing tackle contract
• Butler's an RFA, so he can be tendered
• Davis is an RFA, so he too can be tendered
• Eluemunor is another RFA who can be kept, or not
  
• Ferentz is probably gone
• Calhoun isn't likely to cost anything to retain

McCourty could be interesting, because that's going to be about the perception of where his game's at. The others are players who will likely be looked at as either lower priorities or guys to move on from. But I don't see anything particularly difficult about this overall group, though the potential loss of 2 starting LBs might make some people nervous.


Finding the right FAs to sign as opposed to keeping the team's own FAs is where the issue's probably going to be, but that's been par for the course around here for a while now.

 

[Ring 6]

No offense intended on this, but it's way too early to know how much of an accomplishment it might be, IMO. The Dolphins still suck. The Jets still suck. The Bills still have Allen at QB. The Patriots still have the best team in the division. None of that has changed since Saturday.

The rest is all still to develop. And a look at the FA list shows that the potential problem there, outside of Brady, is largely being overblown. If you consider Collins to be gone, it's going to be about

Brady
Thuney
Van Noy

as the bigger ticket players, and then the likes of

Roberts
Slater
Karras
Folk
Shelton
Ebner
Bethel

should mostly be easy re-signings.

• Dorsett is probably gone, given the "I'm done" and very light subsequent snap counts. If he stays, it's going to be for small money.
  
• Watson's off to retirement
• Newhouse is almost certainly either gone or just a low priority swing tackle contract
• Butler's an RFA, so he can be tendered
• Davis is an RFA, so he too can be tendered
• Eluemunor is another RFA who can be kept, or not
  
• Ferentz is probably gone
• Calhoun isn't likely to cost anything to retain

McCourty could be interesting, because that's going to be about the perception of where his game's at. The others are players who will likely be looked at as either lower priorities or guys to move on from. But I don't see anything particularly difficult about this overall group, though the potential loss of 2 starting LBs might make some people nervous.


Finding the right FAs to sign as opposed to keeping the team's own FAs is where the issue's probably going to be, but that's been par for the course around here for a while now.

The concern is the potential loss of all of Vannoy Collins McCourty and Chung.
Add in Shelton and that’s half you #1 ranked defense with 4 being integral guys.