BB THE GOAT

[TheRainMaker]

I don't think he will either and I am in the team of thinking that BB has lost his fast ball and isnt what he used to be. There was a time people believed that BB could win with anyone. That is clearly either not the case or he has just lost a step. Could be as simple as him being older and not 100% all in to every detail.

Bill needs a better staff or has to really hit on some draft picks. I'm not a fan of O'Brien, but it's better than nothing. The drafts from 2018 to the present looks pedestrian in terms of impact players compared to the 1st run in the early 2000's and 2010's. The 14th pick needs to be a day one impact player. I don't want to see another trade out and get a mediocre G. That **** isn't going to cut it anymore.

 

[Ring 6]

I'm sure the offense, and Brady specifically, were in part responsible for those losses. I can't break them all down, it's too time consuming, but if individual games come up then I'll be willing to take a closer look.


Butler said after the game that the team "gave up" on him and he felt he "could have changed that game."

Belichick said after the game: "he was active for the game and anybody that is active for the game is ready to go"

My reasons aren't out of thin air either. We've all heard or read the speculation. Maybe we'll find out something more in Butler's book. But Butler was "ready to go" in SB 52 just like Belichick said and he didn't play (coach's decision).


I'll interpret this post: Belichick had a terrible game plan, and as it dramatically blew up in his face, he inexplicably stuck with it when he had other options.

I'll accept that. But it still doesn't excuse the Butler benching.

You also left out Jordan Richards. How could anyone forget that clown. Or his blown coverage and inept tackling on Clement's 55-yard catch and run.

What else?... Chung played (poorly) out of position. Devin McCourty ended up in single coverage with Ertz on the decisive score and literally tripped over his own feet trying to keep up.

Chaos is a good word.

Pick whichever games you want. When the offense averages 17 points in 8 losses, that is much more responsible for losing than an individual personnel decision by a coach.

Butler admitted his head was not in it. Giving up on him because he wasn’t prepared is consistent with what you do when someone isn’t prepared. Speculation is exactly out of thin air. Who “speculated” with anything at all to back it up that BB didn’t play Butler “out of spite” or for a “personally motivated reason”. You are implying, without any shred of evidence that the greatest winner in the history of the sport just doesn’t value winning.

I didn’t leave anything out, it was the defense they employed at the time against the Reid scheme. Right or wrong, good or bad, it isn’t “chaos” because Butler isn’t out there. If Butler played he would have been in Rowes spot and Rowe would have been in Bademosis. Everything else would have been the same. I don’t know if you are ignorant to the facts or just playing with them.
Whether Richards, McCourty or Chung okayed well or not is irrelevant to Butler being out there instead of Rowe.
Remember your treatise is the team belichick built and put on the field easily wins if Butler plays, so trashing Chung, McCourty and Richards hurts your argument.

 

[crawhammer]

In game 1 of 2001, Bledsoe threw for 241 yards, 2 td, and 0 int. Yes, the Pats lost, but everyone knew they were rebuilding. Obviously he struggled vs. the Jets in game 2, then nearly got killed.

Bledsoe struggled so badly in 2000 that on March 8, 2001 - you know, on the heels of that disastrous season by Bledsoe - the Patriots signed him to what was then the richest contract in NFL history (10 years, $103 million).

I almost passed out when I heard about that contract. It was unfathomably stupid. Bledsoe was never great but he sucked royally 1999 and onward.

It was a MAJOR decision for Belichick to pick Brady over Bledsoe once Bledsoe was healthy. He deserves massive credit for that. Virtually no other coach in the NFL would have made that call, given that (a) they just gave Bledsoe that contract, and (b) Bledsoe only lost the starting spot due to injury, and it was generally understood that players didn't lose their starting spots due to injury.

BB gets tons of credit for that call even if to you it seemed like a no-brainer. (I assure you, it wasn't a no-brainer at the time)

I disagree.

My favorite Belichick quote:

"Whatever we did in the past in any area — whether it's play calls, coaches, players, whatever — at that time was whatever we thought was best. We looked at our options and thought we picked the best one. Some were good decisions and some, in retrospect, were maybe not good decisions. But at that time, they were always what we thought was the best in every area. That’s the way it will always be and going forward, we'll always do what is best for the team. That's my commitment. Have I made mistakes? Yeah, sure. Plenty of them."

Replying to your reasons above: (a) Bill doesn't determine starters by their respective salaries, and (b) Bill has the sensitivity and sympathy of a toad. You think he was worried about Drew's feelings?? LOL!

 

[ivanvamp]

Interesting note about the Pats' playoff losses under BB/TB:

Div round at Den: L, 27-13
AFCCG at Ind: L, 38-34
SB vs NYG: L, 17-14
WC vs Bal: L, 33-14
Div vs NYJ: L, 28-21
SB vs NYG: L, 21-17
Div vs Bal: L, 28-13
AFCCG at Den: L, 26-16
AFCCG at Den: L, 20-18
SB vs Phi: L, 41-33
Div vs Ten: L, 20-13

In 3 of those losses, the Pats scored more than 18 points (29.3 avg). In 8 of those losses, the Pats scored 18 or fewer points (14.5 avg).

Of course, look at the defense in those games too. In 7 of those losses, the Pats gave up 26 or more points (31.6 avg). In 4 of those losses, the Pats gave up 21 or fewer points (19.5 avg).

 

[ivanvamp]

I almost passed out when I heard about that contract. It was unfathomably stupid. Bledsoe was never great but he sucked royally 1999 and onward.

Stupid or not, they gave it to him, and it's simply not easy to bench a guy who (a) you just signed to the largest contract in NFL history, and (b) only "lost" his job due to injury.

I disagree.

You're more than welcome to disagree. This is still mostly a free country.

My favorite Belichick quote:

"Whatever we did in the past in any area — whether it's play calls, coaches, players, whatever — at that time was whatever we thought was best. We looked at our options and thought we picked the best one. Some were good decisions and some, in retrospect, were maybe not good decisions. But at that time, they were always what we thought was the best in every area. That’s the way it will always be and going forward, we'll always do what is best for the team. That's my commitment. Have I made mistakes? Yeah, sure. Plenty of them."

Great quote! What's the relevance to this situation though? Him doing what he thinks is best for the team doesn't mean that every decision is some slam dunk no-brainer. He definitely chose Brady because he thought that was the best decision. 100%. But that doesn't mean it was an EASY decision, or a no-brainer decision.

Replying to your reasons above: (a) Bill doesn't determine starters by their respective salaries, and (b) Bill has the sensitivity and sympathy of a toad. You think he was worried about Drew's feelings?? LOL!

I didn't say anything about Drew's feelings. Where did you get that idea?

 

[crawhammer]

Butler admitted his head was not in it. Giving up on him because he wasn’t prepared is consistent with what you do when someone isn’t prepared. Speculation is exactly out of thin air. Who “speculated” with anything at all to back it up that BB didn’t play Butler “out of spite” or for a “personally motivated reason”. You are implying, without any shred of evidence that the greatest winner in the history of the sport just doesn’t value winning.

There's a reason Butler wasn't allowed to play defense in that SB. What was it then? You don't know either. Based on what I saw, and what Belichick, Butler and his teammates said after the game, and what I've read or heard on the situation, at this point in time I believe the benching was personally motivated and out of spite.

And I never said Belichick doesn't value winning. He made a decision to bench Butler and he thought he could win with an alternative plan. He was wrong. And he looks really bad for having made that decision.

I didn’t leave anything out, it was the defense they employed at the time against the Reid scheme. Right or wrong, good or bad, it isn’t “chaos” because Butler isn’t out there. If Butler played he would have been in Rowes spot and Rowe would have been in Bademosis. Everything else would have been the same. I don’t know if you are ignorant to the facts or just playing with them.
Whether Richards, McCourty or Chung okayed well or not is irrelevant to Butler being out there instead of Rowe.

You claim it wasn't chaos and then you indicate 5 things that were different:

1. Rowe started in place of Butler
2. Bademosi assumed Rowe's role
3. Chung played out of position
4. Richards got meaningful snaps
5. McCourty had to cover Ertz in isolation

All 5 of those things went very poorly. So what are we even talking about here?

 

[crawhammer]

Him doing what he thinks is best for the team doesn't mean that every decision is some slam dunk no-brainer. He definitely chose Brady because he thought that was the best decision. 100%. But that doesn't mean it was an EASY decision, or a no-brainer decision.

That's fine.

I didn't say anything about Drew's feelings. Where did you get that idea?

(b) Bledsoe only lost the starting spot due to injury, and it was generally understood that players didn't lose their starting spots due to injury.

This sounds like you're suggesting Bill cared. He didn't. He's made some pretty cold moves and he certainly wasn't going to soften his approach because it was "unfair" to Drew that he originally lost his job due to injury. Bill had a better alternative at QB and the team was winning again with Brady. The choice may have had some complexities to it but it was clear.

 

[Ring 6]

There's a reason Butler wasn't allowed to play defense in that SB. What was it then? You don't know either. Based on what I saw, and what Belichick, Butler and his teammates said after the game, and what I've read or heard on the situation, at this point in time I believe the benching was personally motivated and out of spite.

And I never said Belichick doesn't value winning. He made a decision to bench Butler and he thought he could win with an alternative plan. He was wrong. And he looks really bad for having made that decision.


You claim it wasn't chaos and then you indicate 5 things that were different:

1. Rowe started in place of Butler
2. Bademosi assumed Rowe's role
3. Chung played out of position
4. Richards got meaningful snaps
5. McCourty had to cover Ertz in isolation

All 5 of those things went very poorly. So what are we even talking about here?

The reason was well documented. He was sick showed up late and admitted he wasn’t dialed in to the game plan and practiced poorly. You don’t need to make up spite. What would he be spiteful of? That’s ridiculous. You only create that because it helps you push your agenda, you have not listed a single reason. “What I’ve read or heard”? Please list exactly what you read or heard to draw that conclusion.

If he benched him out of spite then he doesn’t value winning, you can’t have it both ways.

1 and 2 were the uni act of Butler not playing. 3,4,5 had nothing to do with Butler. 3 is wrong Chung okayed the exact same role he played all year. Richards played 16 snaps in the SB, 21%. During the year he played 26% of the snaps. So he played LESS than normal.
Safeties regularly cover TEs in man coverage not sure how you find that unusual.
Facts are not your friend are they?

 

[Ring 6]

I almost passed out when I heard about that contract. It was unfathomably stupid. Bledsoe was never great but he sucked royally 1999 and onward.


I disagree.

My favorite Belichick quote:

"Whatever we did in the past in any area — whether it's play calls, coaches, players, whatever — at that time was whatever we thought was best. We looked at our options and thought we picked the best one. Some were good decisions and some, in retrospect, were maybe not good decisions. But at that time, they were always what we thought was the best in every area. That’s the way it will always be and going forward, we'll always do what is best for the team. That's my commitment. Have I made mistakes? Yeah, sure. Plenty of them."

Replying to your reasons above: (a) Bill doesn't determine starters by their respective salaries, and (b) Bill has the sensitivity and sympathy of a toad. You think he was worried about Drew's feelings?? LOL!

But he benches players in the SB because of spite? I’ll take “Talking out of both sides of your mouth” for 1000 Alex.

 

[crawhammer]

The reason was well documented. He was sick showed up late and admitted he wasn’t dialed in to the game plan and practiced poorly. You don’t need to make up spite. What would he be spiteful of? That’s ridiculous. You only create that because it helps you push your agenda, you have not listed a single reason. “What I’ve read or heard”? Please list exactly what you read or heard to draw that conclusion.

I heard one thing I won't repeat here because I don't necessarily believe it and it's pretty scandalous (so not fair to Malcolm to throw it out here if untrue).

A second thing is Butler had an altercation (perhaps physical) with Matt Patricia or Steve Belichick leading up to the Super Bowl. As a punishment (which may have been revealed to Malcolm just prior to kickoff, hence his tearfulness, but not made public), Bill benched Malcolm. This is probably the most common speculation.

There was also the contract offer from Bill that Malcolm turned down prior to the season. Bill held this against Malcolm, and given the opportunity based on either the second thing, or the reasons you cite, Bill took the opportunity to stick it to Malcolm.

I think the second or third scenarios are possible. I'll go with door #2 (or a combo of 2 & 3) if you put a gun to my head.

 

[crawhammer]

1 and 2 were the uni act of Butler not playing. 3,4,5 had nothing to do with Butler. 3 is wrong Chung okayed the exact same role he played all year. Richards played 16 snaps in the SB, 21%. During the year he played 26% of the snaps. So he played LESS than normal.
Safeties regularly cover TEs in man coverage not sure how you find that unusual.
Facts are not your friend are they?

1 and 2, both Rowe and Bademosi, sucked in the game. So we could just stop right there.

Richards made the worst play of the game in coverage on Clement. It resulted in a 55-yard gain. If Malcolm's on the field there then Richards isn't (and the defense doesn't get burnt for a 55-yard play).

Since when is Devin McCourty in isolation coverage? Especially against a pro bowl TE.

There were multiple situations and plays were Butler's presence could have made a big difference. And really all they needed was one or two more plays on defense because Brady was so damn good against Philly's 4th ranked defense.

 

[ivanvamp]

That's fine.



This sounds like you're suggesting Bill cared. He didn't. He's made some pretty cold moves and he certainly wasn't going to soften his approach because it was "unfair" to Drew that he originally lost his job due to injury. Bill had a better alternative at QB and the team was winning again with Brady. The choice may have had some complexities to it but it was clear.

It wasn't as clear as you claim it was. And the money almost ALWAYS complicates the situation. You've got to explain to your owner, who's the one shelling out that enormous contract, why you're benching the guy you thought so highly of that you gave him that contract in the first place, for a guy who is still pretty unproven. The vast, vast, vast majority of head coaches (I dare say...every other?) would have put Bledsoe back in and at least given him a chance, and then if he bombed, gone back to Brady.

Not BB. He went right to Brady and that was that. That took balls of steel that almost no other head coach ever has had. For that reason (among others), BB gets HUGE credit for that decision.

 

[crawhammer]

It wasn't as clear as you claim it was. And the money almost ALWAYS complicates the situation. You've got to explain to your owner, who's the one shelling out that enormous contract, why you're benching the guy you thought so highly of that you gave him that contract in the first place, for a guy who is still pretty unproven. The vast, vast, vast majority of head coaches (I dare say...every other?) would have put Bledsoe back in and at least given him a chance, and then if he bombed, gone back to Brady.

Not BB. He went right to Brady and that was that. That took balls of steel that almost no other head coach ever has had. For that reason (among others), BB gets HUGE credit for that decision.

That's fair enough. I think you're still overstating some things, but yes, BB made the right decision here and credit where credit is due.

 

[cmasspatsfan]

Ok, so you're saying Belichick is really a moron then. In addition to being a "cheater."

Image Bledsoe bumbling around in those snowy conditions? Patriots would have lost 0-13.

Actually Bledsoe was pretty good in the snow, especially in college.

 

[crawhammer]

Actually Bledsoe was pretty good in the snow, especially in college.

Well, his NFL outdoor / indoor split isn't impressive.

85.1 passer rating indoor
76.3 passer rating outdoor

September is his best month statistically. Then October. He's below a 75 passer rating for November, December and January. <75 is really bad.

I can't find precipitation splits for Bledsoe.

 

[SHOWTIME15]

81 posts in one thread by @crawhammer and the thread was only started last saturday...

 

[patsfanfromoversea]

81 posts in one thread by @crawhammer and the thread was only started last saturday...

why are you not at chiefs planet?

 

[Steve102]

why are you not at chiefs planet?

He trolls them with his pro-Brady chit over there.

 

[Ring 6]

1 and 2, both Rowe and Bademosi, sucked in the game. So we could just stop right there.

Richards made the worst play of the game in coverage on Clement. It resulted in a 55-yard gain. If Malcolm's on the field there then Richards isn't (and the defense doesn't get burnt for a 55-yard play).

Since when is Devin McCourty in isolation coverage? Especially against a pro bowl TE.

There were multiple situations and plays were Butler's presence could have made a big difference. And really all they needed was one or two more plays on defense because Brady was so damn good against Philly's 4th ranked defense.

Bademosi played 11 snaps.
How well Rowe or Bademosi played is irrelevant to your misinformed opinion that everyone played a different role and it was chaos.

Richards 16 snaps had nothing to do with whether Butler played or not. They don’t play the same position. The only role that changes by putting Butler on the field is Rowe.

McCourty covers TEs in man. All safeties do. It’s like you don’t understand football.

So now, finally we are down to “maybe butler could have made a play”. Long way from him not playing was the reason we lost.
You are just the one step away, accepting facts you don’t like, from getting it.

 

[Ring 6]

I heard one thing I won't repeat here because I don't necessarily believe it and it's pretty scandalous (so not fair to Malcolm to throw it out here if untrue).

A second thing is Butler had an altercation (perhaps physical) with Matt Patricia or Steve Belichick leading up to the Super Bowl. As a punishment (which may have been revealed to Malcolm just prior to kickoff, hence his tearfulness, but not made public), Bill benched Malcolm. This is probably the most common speculation.

There was also the contract offer from Bill that Malcolm turned down prior to the season. Bill held this against Malcolm, and given the opportunity based on either the second thing, or the reasons you cite, Bill took the opportunity to stick it to Malcolm.

I think the second or third scenarios are possible. I'll go with door #2 (or a combo of 2 & 3) if you put a gun to my head.

You heard one thing that you don’t believe and THAT is your evidence? Incredible.

There is absolutely nothing to support any altercation beyond your imagination. Might as well say “Belichick clearly benched him out of spite because he learned he is an alien” It has just as much credence.

You think that for the one and only time in his career that a player wanted to pursue free agency, Belichick decided to harm his own chances to win by taking it out on the player in the SB? This not only has no credence it could be the stupidest thing ever said on this board.

Thanks for proving you are nothing but an agenda bent conspiracy theorist who cares nothing about credibility. Why would you waste so much time on this board of reality is meaningless to you?