BB in damage control mode regarding Brady's departure

[crawhammer]

Raiders, SF, Arizona we’re not better. You don’t get to make worse offenses better by saying what if. It’s results not opinions. Indy was not better.
Others that you call better were a coin flip.

LAR = Los Angeles Rams

SF... Jimmy G had a better season than Mac. Deebo Samuel is a maniac. Aiyuk is much better whoever our #2 receiver is. I'll take Kittle over Henry.
Arizona... Murray is much better than Mac at this point in time. I'll take DeAndre Hopkins and whoever over Bourne and whoever. Productive running game.
Indy... I said slightly because Taylor is such a beast. I like Mac over Wentz. Matt Ryan is going to make that offense better for sure.

 

[Ring 6]

Debatable at least.

Look they smoked the Jets and Jaguars with a combined 104 points. They average 24 points against everyone else. They were average, which is much better than they were in 2020. Bourne and Henry were plus signings. Agholor and Smith were not. So all of them were not contributing to the improvement of the offense.


They won the division 16 seasons in a row with Brady. He was impactful enough to win a Super Bowl with a team who hadn't won a playoff game in 18 years. It's hardly unrealistic to think Brady could win a Super Bowl with an otherwise less than stellar team.

But whatever, you're all about the rebuild, which is fine. Whether or not we can agree on the timing being right, a rebuild was inevitable post-Brady. The success or failure of the rebuild is TBD. Next season will tell us a lot about where this team stands in this revamped AFC.

It’s disingenuous to say take way their best games and they are average.
Especially when one of the teams you list as better scored fewer counting all their games.
Take away their worst 2 and they average 29 best in the afc and 3rd in the league. See how that works? And taking away the game they threw 3 passes is probably the most reasonable.

It’s not being all about the rebuild, it’s that this team was not winning another championship without a rebuild and the cap dictated if you kept Brady that rebuild wouldn’t start until he was 45, you would be patching up a team that wasn’t championship caliber until at least then.

 

[Ring 6]

LAR = Los Angeles Rams

SF... Jimmy G had a better season than Mac. Deebo Samuel is a maniac. Aiyuk is much better whoever our #2 receiver is. I'll take Kittle over Henry.
Arizona... Murray is much better than Mac at this point in time. I'll take DeAndre Hopkins and whoever over Bourne and whoever. Productive running game.
Indy... I said slightly because Taylor is such a beast. I like Mac over Wentz. Matt Ryan is going to make that offense better for sure.

This is where things go off the rails. I don’t care who you like better or who you think had a better season, I care about the results they put up.

In other words if you like one team better and the other outperforms them it simply means your evaluation is poor, it does not mean the team who performed worse is better and the results are misleading.

Discussing which players you think are better, and naming 2 players as if they are the entire team, is pointless.
The entire point of this discussion is people are selling the patriots short because they “don’t like the players” and the evaluation is wrong because the results were better. The results are never wrong. The evaluation often is.

 

[PatsWSB47]

Look it. We can throw up a Colts style "we had a good to top 2021 offensive season" banner to go up with the 6 Superbowl banners but the reality is while we took 3 steps forward the first 3/4 of the season, we took 2 steps backwards the last quarter......kinda like killing it in the stock market 3/4 of the year but then losing most of the gain that last quarter.

 

[1960Pats]

BB may be more into damage control mode now that Gronk called him cheap on national tv last night. Gronk made it sound like a joke but I'm not sure that it was. Gronk left here a bitter man after being threatened with a trade to Cleveland (who wouldn't be pissed at that?)

 

[crawhammer]

It was noteworthy and unprecedented WITH A ROOKIE QB.
It was one of the best few offensive seasons in league history with a rookie at qb.

You're overrating it. They finished out the season 1-4 including a total beatdown in the wild card.

There have been plenty of rookie quarterbacks who have had good (or better) seasons over the past 20 years...

Roethlisberger 2004
Matt Ryan 2008
Cam Newton 2011
Russell Wilson 2012
Luck 2012
RGIII 2012
Winston 2015
Prescott 2016
Mayfield 2018
Herbert 2020

That's 10.

This is where things go off the rails. I don’t care who you like better or who you think had a better season, I care about the results they put up.

In other words if you like one team better and the other outperforms them it simply means your evaluation is poor, it does not mean the team who performed worse is better and the results are misleading.

Discussing which players you think are better, and naming 2 players as if they are the entire team, is pointless.
The entire point of this discussion is people are selling the patriots short because they “don’t like the players” and the evaluation is wrong because the results were better. The results are never wrong. The evaluation often is.

Again, the end result of the Patriots season was 1-4, which is a pretty bad record. 9 of the teams I mentioned had better records and/or went further into the postseason than the Patriots (i.e. they had better results than the Patriots). A 10th beat them head-to-head. So it's not merely what I think.

It’s not being all about the rebuild, it’s that this team was not winning another championship without a rebuild and the cap dictated if you kept Brady that rebuild wouldn’t start until he was 45, you would be patching up a team that wasn’t championship caliber until at least then.

I'm sorry but it's Ludacris to say the quickest path to a championship team was moving on from the best quarterback in the NFL. Brady's first season as a starter in the NFL... Super Bowl title. Brady's first season with a new team... Super Bowl title. Brady for 50% of his career... Super Bowl. He's pretty good.

The Patriots chose a different path... year one was a mess, year two showed some promise but ended disastrously. We'll see what's next. I suspect if they go 8-9 next season there will be plenty of excuses. Belichick has to at least win another division title and/or make it back to a conference championship game before he retires. He can't win 18 of 19 division titles with 9 conference championship appearances with Brady and go 0 for whatever without him (currently 0-9)... it'll be too damaging to his legacy.

 

[amfootball]

BB may be more into damage control mode now that Gronk called him cheap on national tv last night. Gronk made it sound like a joke but I'm not sure that it was. Gronk left here a bitter man after being threatened with a trade to Cleveland (who wouldn't be pissed at that?)

Kraft is going to let him spend. He did that last year. He was pretty adamant - draft well or else ...

 

[Ring 6]

You're overrating it. They finished out the season 1-4 including a total beatdown in the wild card.

There have been plenty of rookie quarterbacks who have had good (or better) seasons over the past 20 years...

Roethlisberger 2004
Matt Ryan 2008
Cam Newton 2011
Russell Wilson 2012
Luck 2012
RGIII 2012
Winston 2015
Prescott 2016
Mayfield 2018
Herbert 2020

That's 10.

The patriots offense scored 462 points. 6th best.
Pitt 2004 372 11th best
Atlanta 2008 391 10th best
Carolina 2011 406 5th best and they were 6-10
Seattle 2012 412 9th best
Indy 2012 357 18th best
Wash 2012 436 4th best
Tampa 2015 342 20th 6-10
Dallas 2016 421 5th best
Cleve 2018 359 20th best 7-8-1
LA 2020 384 18th best

So thank you for proving my point.
Your top 10 going back 20 years includes exactly 1 offense that scored more ppg (27.25 to 27.18) and 2 ranked higher. Your list of the most productive rookie led offenses include 4, fully 40% of them that were below average vs the patriot 6th ranking.
2 are in the argument the other 8 aren’t even debatable.

 

[Ring 6]

I'm sorry but it's Ludacris to say the quickest path to a championship team was moving on from the best quarterback in the NFL. Brady's first season as a starter in the NFL... Super Bowl title. Brady's first season with a new team... Super Bowl title. Brady for 50% of his career... Super Bowl. He's pretty good.

The Patriots chose a different path... year one was a mess, year two showed some promise but ended disastrously. We'll see what's next. I suspect if they go 8-9 next season there will be plenty of excuses. Belichick has to at least win another division title and/or make it back to a conference championship game before he retires. He can't win 18 of 19 division titles with 9 conference championship appearances with Brady and go 0 for whatever without him (currently 0-9)... it'll be too damaging to his legacy.

This is quite a strawman you put together here, kudus in creativity.

How good Brady is and how many SBs he has won has nothing to do with the fact that the 2019 team had zero chance to win a SB and the 2020 team was guaranteed to be worse.
Yes emotionally I also felt let’s keep Brady and pray, but the reality is that would just forestall the rebuild.
If you can seriously say the 2019 patriots minus the losses they had which they could do nothing about were going to win a SB in 2020 you are either lying to me of yourself. Or both.

By the time the roster could be rebuilt with Brady, he would be at least 45. Saving 50 million by not paying him allowed the rebuild to happen sooner. It’s really a simple concept that your emotions seem to be blinding you to.

 

[1960Pats]

I think the OP could change the title of this thread to BB, Kraft & Ring6 are in damage control mode.

Trying to defend the ridiculous decision to move on from Brady over a few dollars and without another QB waiting is a monumental task that even Ring6 can't pull off. I'm sure he'll continue to give it a try though.

One of my favorites from Bill's rumpswabs is when some writer spewed out some nonsense that Bill was the only one to draft two WRs that went on to become SB MVPs. Forget for a moment that it isn't even true and ask, did Bill write the article?

 

[Ian]

One of my favorites from Bill's rumpswabs is when some writer spewed out some nonsense that Bill was the only one to draft two WRs that went on to become SB MVPs. Forget for a moment that it isn't even true

It is kind of true - but it's obviously a weak point when you look at their entire body of work and their inability to draft/develop top players at that position. Malcolm Mitchell should have stopped the bleeding because he was a solid receiver in this offense and it's honestly too bad he got hurt. He was a good player and would have ended that drought. But aside from that, it's definitely been a disaster. No way around it.

 

[1960Pats]

It is kind of true - but it's obviously a weak point when you look at their entire body of work and their inability to draft/develop top players at that position. Malcolm Mitchell should have stopped the bleeding because he was a solid receiver in this offense and it's honestly too bad he got hurt. He was a good player and would have ended that drought. But aside from that, it's definitely been a disaster. No way around it.

It's uncanny how many misses they've had at that position. What do you think is the reason for their lack of success? It doesn't make sense.

 

[Ian]

It's uncanny how many misses they've had at that position. What do you think is the reason for their lack of success? It doesn't make sense.

No idea, it's an excellent question. It's so frustrating when you look around the league at the playmakers other teams have found in rounds 2-4 and you see how many missed opportunities they've had, especially when you take into account others they've taken who never turned into starting-caliber players.

You could make the argument that their offense is too complex and that guys have to think too much and that prevents them from playing at the speed/level they did in college, but that sort of goes out the window when you also look at the fact it's not like they became stars - or even regular starters with decent numbers - elsewhere. It's definitely strange and I really don't know what to attribute that to.

 

[sb1]

You're overrating it. They finished out the season 1-4 including a total beatdown in the wild card.

There have been plenty of rookie quarterbacks who have had good (or better) seasons over the past 20 years...

Roethlisberger 2004
Matt Ryan 2008
Cam Newton 2011
Russell Wilson 2012
Luck 2012
RGIII 2012
Winston 2015
Prescott 2016
Mayfield 2018
Herbert 2020

That's 10.


Again, the end result of the Patriots season was 1-4, which is a pretty bad record. 9 of the teams I mentioned had better records and/or went further into the postseason than the Patriots (i.e. they had better results than the Patriots). A 10th beat them head-to-head. So it's not merely what I think.


I'm sorry but it's Ludacris to say the quickest path to a championship team was moving on from the best quarterback in the NFL. Brady's first season as a starter in the NFL... Super Bowl title. Brady's first season with a new team... Super Bowl title. Brady for 50% of his career... Super Bowl. He's pretty good.

The Patriots chose a different path... year one was a mess, year two showed some promise but ended disastrously. We'll see what's next. I suspect if they go 8-9 next season there will be plenty of excuses. Belichick has to at least win another division title and/or make it back to a conference championship game before he retires. He can't win 18 of 19 division titles with 9 conference championship appearances with Brady and go 0 for whatever without him (currently 0-9)... it'll be too damaging to his legacy.

Nah that won’t damage Bill’s legacy (Spygate did though unfortunately and that was all on Bill).

It’s not crazy to think a coach isn’t as successful without their all world QB. Noll’s record without Bradshaw isn’t flattering either. Bill is under .500 without Brady, that’s indisputable and it’s right there in black and white. Truth hurts and is definitely one argument against Bill being GOAT coach. I don’t think that erases his success with Brady….. it does prove though that coaches are only as good as their great players and not the other way around. Great coaches can’t make weak teams and QBs champions by themselves but great QBs can. Peyton Manning took Jim Caldwell to a Super Bowl. Caldwell was not a great or even good coach at the time

 

[RicoG]

No idea, it's an excellent question. It's so frustrating when you look around the league at the playmakers other teams have found in rounds 2-4 and you see how many missed opportunities they've had, especially when you take into account others they've taken who never turned into starting-caliber players.

You could make the argument that their offense is too complex and that guys have to think too much and that prevents them from playing at the speed/level they did in college, but that sort of goes out the window when you also look at the fact it's not like they became stars - or even regular starters with decent numbers - elsewhere. It's definitely strange and I really don't know what to attribute that to.

Part of it is that the Pats don't draft enough WRs. They are a hit and miss positional group even in the first round, so a team who wants to develop good WRs has to keep on drafting them every year.

People comment on how the Steelers keep on churning out good WRs, but they keep on drafting WRs every year. I'm also noticing how the Bucs keep on drafting WRs when it seems like they don't need to.

 

[Ian]

Part of it is that the Pats don't draft enough WRs. They are a hit and miss positional group even in the first round, so a team who wants to develop good WRs has to keep on drafting them every year.

People comment on how the Steelers keep on churning out good WRs, but they keep on drafting WRs every year. I'm also noticing how the Bucs keep on drafting WRs when it seems like they don't need to.

It's tough, they've missed on so many of the ones they've taken. Forget about developing them, even the guys who they parted ways with haven't done much. The only possible exception is Braxton Berrios, who is one of the few who has gone on to be a productive player elsewhere. I agree, they need to take more swings, but not if they're going to whiff on 90%+ of them in lieu of a position they've at least had success with.

 

[SHOWTIME15]

You're overrating it. They finished out the season 1-4 including a total beatdown in the wild card.

There have been plenty of rookie quarterbacks who have had good (or better) seasons over the past 20 years...

Roethlisberger 2004
Matt Ryan 2008
Cam Newton 2011
Russell Wilson 2012
Luck 2012
RGIII 2012
Winston 2015
Prescott 2016
Mayfield 2018
Herbert 2020

That's 10.


Again, the end result of the Patriots season was 1-4, which is a pretty bad record. 9 of the teams I mentioned had better records and/or went further into the postseason than the Patriots (i.e. they had better results than the Patriots). A 10th beat them head-to-head. So it's not merely what I think.


I'm sorry but it's Ludacris to say the quickest path to a championship team was moving on from the best quarterback in the NFL. Brady's first season as a starter in the NFL... Super Bowl title. Brady's first season with a new team... Super Bowl title. Brady for 50% of his career... Super Bowl. He's pretty good.

The Patriots chose a different path... year one was a mess, year two showed some promise but ended disastrously. We'll see what's next. I suspect if they go 8-9 next season there will be plenty of excuses. Belichick has to at least win another division title and/or make it back to a conference championship game before he retires. He can't win 18 of 19 division titles with 9 conference championship appearances with Brady and go 0 for whatever without him (currently 0-9)... it'll be too damaging to his legacy.

All those QBs, with the exception of RGIII, had way better weapons in their rookie years than Mac did.

Roethlisberger - Hines Ward, Plaxico Burress, Antwan Randle El

Cam - Steve Smith

Russel Wilson - Golden Tate, Doug Baldwin

Andrew Luck - Reggie Wayne, TY Hilton

Winston - Mke Evans, Vincent Jackson

Prescott - Dez Bryant, Cole Beasley, Jason Witten

Mayfield - Jarvis Landry, Nick Chubb

Herbert - Keenan Allen, Mike Williams, Hunter Henry, Austin Ekelar.

Contrast that with Mac who had Bourne, Henry, Agholar, and Harris. Mac's rookie year was excellent, especially what he was given to work with. Brady's rookie year was on the bench. He couldn't even beat out Drew Bledsoe.

And it's easy to go to another team and win the super bowl when you take Fournette, Brown, and Gronk with you to that team, which is already stacked almost everywhere. This is like Bill taking Josh with him to Kansas City and winning a title his first year there.

Nah that won’t damage Bill’s legacy (Spygate did though unfortunately and that was all on Bill).

It’s not crazy to think a coach isn’t as successful without their all world QB. Noll’s record without Bradshaw isn’t flattering either. Bill is under .500 without Brady, that’s indisputable and it’s right there in black and white. Truth hurts and is definitely one argument against Bill being GOAT coach. I don’t think that erases his success with Brady….. it does prove though that coaches are only as good as their great players and not the other way around. Great coaches can’t make weak teams and QBs champions by themselves but great QBs can. Peyton Manning took Jim Caldwell to a Super Bowl. Caldwell was not a great or even good coach at the time

Spygate may have damaged his legacy, but it also damaged Brady's since Brady was the one getting all the stolen information on his headset. If Bill's first three super bowls are tainted, then so are Brady's. Do you really want to go there?

There are plenty of coaches who won super bowls with weak QBs like Joe Gibbs, Parcells, and Peterson.

 

[RicoG]

It's tough, they've missed on so many of the ones they've taken. Forget about developing them, even the guys who they parted ways with haven't done much. The only possible exception is Braxton Berrios, who is one of the few who has gone on to be a productive player elsewhere. I agree, they need to take more swings, but not if they're going to whiff on 90%+ of them in lieu of a position they've at least had success with.

I just looked it up and surprisingly the Pats haven't done too badly drafting WRs since 2014. They just aren't putting enough draft capital.

Pats. 1 high pick bust. 1 mid pick. 4 late picks. Mitchell and Berrios were very good picks. Berrios seemed like a potential heir apparent to Branch, Welker, and Edelman but someone messed up badly when they cut him.

And to compare to two teams that put a lot of value in WRs. Steelers and Bucs have made more WR picks and made them in earlier rounds since 2014.

Steelers. 3 high picks. 4 mid picks. 1 late pick.
Bucs. 1 high pick. 5 mid picks. 3 late picks.

 

[1960Pats]

Part of it is that the Pats don't draft enough WRs. They are a hit and miss positional group even in the first round, so a team who wants to develop good WRs has to keep on drafting them every year.

People comment on how the Steelers keep on churning out good WRs, but they keep on drafting WRs every year. I'm also noticing how the Bucs keep on drafting WRs when it seems like they don't need to.

Maybe that's the key.

 

[1960Pats]

It's tough, they've missed on so many of the ones they've taken. Forget about developing them, even the guys who they parted ways with haven't done much. The only possible exception is Braxton Berrios, who is one of the few who has gone on to be a productive player elsewhere. I agree, they need to take more swings, but not if they're going to whiff on 90%+ of them in lieu of a position they've at least had success with.

Could be that the salaries of proven WR's is higher and that makes it more important to find them in the draft.