Patriots Rumor Once and for all... [Malcolm Butler benching revisited]

[TheRainMaker]

Butler SUCKED against big, down the field outside the numbers receivers which is what PHI used. Rowe was genuinely better at it. First half they had Rowe and Gilmore play sides. That did NOT work. Second half I recall they had Gilmore shadow Jeffrey and Rowe on Torrey Smith. That did work. That was their mistake IMO. Not benching Butler, but not going right to shadowing. I think that was a genuinely fine coaching point.

I don't understand how BB saw Richards get abused over and over n the second half though and not at least TRY Butler. It was a pretty obvious adjustment to try.

Butler was solid covering anyone…until the ball was in the air. After his Super Bowl INT, he really struggled making plays at CB. He had the Ellis Hobbs syndrome where they were atrocious when it came to fighting for the ball. Both Hobbs and Butler would routinely be locked onto their man ready to make a play only to trip, ball going right threw their hands or flat out whiffing on breaking up the pass. Then they’d get up after the WR made the big catch and have the confused look of what just happened on their face. The other move I love is when they fake the hammy injury after getting cooked.

 

[gobesmug]

Butler sucked in 2017 and beyond.

LT was the greatest LB in history…

Just silly.

Butler was the starting CB all year, so either Bill was stupid for playing Butler 97% of the snaps that year or was stupidest for benching him the entire superbowl.

Bill made a lot of great decisions in his career, the benching of Butler was not one of them.

Doesn't mean the Pats win the game, but the secondary was getting shredded and we will never know if Butler might have made a key 3rd stop.

 

[Palm Beach Pats Fan]

The thing that makes the most sense is that in part due to an illness that affected his game prep and also due to perceived poor matchups with Philly WRs, he was told that he was going to be demoted to CB3. He didn't take that well and was so broken up about it at kickoff that coaches made a gametime decision to not use him at all. Not saying it was the right decision, just that this makes the most sense, now that most of the other possibilities have been shot down by these remarks from Malcolm. I'm not sure we will ever get 100% clarity, though.

 

[Mcp1982]

Hard to believe that Butler on Agahlor, Gilly on Jeffrey and Rowe on Ertz after Chung got hurt wouldn't have been better than what they rolled out

 

[PP2]

Butler was the starting CB all year, so either Bill was stupid for playing Butler 97% of the snaps that year or was stupidest for benching him the entire superbowl.

Bill made a lot of great decisions in his career, the benching of Butler was not one of them.

Doesn't mean the Pats win the game, but the secondary was getting shredded and we will never know if Butler might have made a key 3rd stop.

I think BB started with the idea of throwing Philly a curveball, something that they had not seen all year long. And that something would be starting the two bigger cornerbacks and moving Malcolm to CB3. Of course, this is just speculation on my part.

But if I had to point the finger at anyone, I would point it at BB for not putting Butler in there after seeing Rowe get torched. Philly went right at Rowe and they were smart to do so.

You wanna make a disciplinary point or you wanna win the superbowl? I'm sure everyone on here would choose the latter.

 

[Gumby]

Funny. All these years and I don’t ever remember hearing a big point being made (or for me remember hearing at all) that he was NOT ON THE TEAM PLANE. If he missed the plane / it wasn’t pre-coordinated, I could see that being a major factor in demotion.

 

[Palm Beach Pats Fan]

Funny. All these years and I don’t ever remember hearing a big point being made (or for me remember hearing at all) that he was NOT ON THE TEAM PLANE. If he missed the plane / it wasn’t pre-coordinated, I could see that being a major factor in demotion.

Well, if he had the flu or even a cold, you might ask him to travel separately and it would make sense and not be disciplinary

 

[StockingAnarchyNumber12]

It is a bit confusing why he wouldn’t try to put Butler in come the 3rd or 4th quarter when it was evident that the defense wasn’t working. Maybe it makes no difference but it doesn’t hurt to try at that point

 

[Gumby]

Well, if he had the flu or even a cold, you might ask him to travel separately and it would make sense and not be disciplinary

Yeah, but that was my point…,if it wasn’t talked about ……was it a team decision, his decision, or his F-up that he wasn’t on the plane? ????

 

[DaBruinz]

Yeah, but that was my point…,if it wasn’t talked about ……was it a team decision, his decision, or his F-up that he wasn’t on the plane? ????

In the video Bertand says, " You didn't travel with the team. That didn't happen". Butler replies "Yeah" while nodding his head. Then, we here "You got in Wednesday of SB week, Right?" And Butler kind of ignores that.

Then, Butler claims ignorance in regards to whether he "Pi$$ed someone off" and claims that "None of the theories are true" in regards to "being out late", Partying, or getting in a fight with Steve/Brian. His statement and his body languages says to me that he knows EXACTLY why he was benched. That it was something HE did. But that he disagreed with Belichick and that he refuses to accept the reasoning why it occurred or that he has any culpability in the situation.

 

[Hammer of Thor]

This is what? The 10th “once and for all” thread started on this subject?

ONCE AND FOR ALL!

 

[brdmaverick]

BB made a tough decision and did what he thought was best. There are a lot of pelts on the wall that came from him making tough decisions. I don’t know anyone who gets everyone of them right.

This is so true.

I've even thought about it from this perspective...

For arguments sake let's imagine the reason for the benching was 'conduct detrimental to the team' whether it be missing meetings, fight with Steve B., anything like that....now Belichick is faced with this dilemma

-Ok, overlooking the issue and letting Butler play MIGHT get you the WIN, but diminishes 'your policy' for the future of your coaching career. From that point forward, players now know different rules apply for bigger games, and they can get away with more....so you only POSSIBLY get the immediate gain of a Super Bowl win, but lose future creditibility

OR....

-You stick to your guns and say 'rules are rules'. I didn't break them and hurt the team...YOU (BUTLER() did! If you bench your starting corner and STILL win (like they almost did) now you are ABSOLUTELY LEGENDARY for sticking to your rules

 

[Wozzy]

Butler was the starting CB all year, so either Bill was stupid for playing Butler 97% of the snaps that year or was stupidest for benching him the entire superbowl.

Bill made a lot of great decisions in his career, the benching of Butler was not one of them.

Doesn't mean the Pats win the game, but the secondary was getting shredded and we will never know if Butler might have made a key 3rd stop.

Butler sucked. He wouldn’t have changed a thing except to make thing’s worse. The taller, more athletic and mentally invested CB’s who played were better options.

Eric Rowe was injured until late in the season, they didn’t have a lot of options until he got healthy. Also BB was probably hope Butler would turn it around in a contract season. He never did… Butler sucked. The notion that he would have been a savior sucks also.

 

[TB12TheGoat]

ignoring the Butler situation, that SB is one of the most rigged games in NFL history. 3 of the PHI TDs were ********. the trick play TD, the Clement TD, and the Ertz TD. the league was going to do everything it could to make sure the Pats didn’t repeat. and as it turns out, the league ****ing over the Pats that game eventually cost them the first ever 3-peat in NFL history

and I’ve never looked at the play again, but I’ve seen a couple of people say that the Jeffrey TD could have been overturned too because of the ball moving when he landed. not sure how true that is. maybe someone could chime in on that one

 

[Gumby]

This is so true.

I've even thought about it from this perspective...

For arguments sake let's imagine the reason for the benching was 'conduct detrimental to the team' whether it be missing meetings, fight with Steve B., anything like that....now Belichick is faced with this dilemma

-Ok, overlooking the issue and letting Butler play MIGHT get you the WIN, but diminishes 'your policy' for the future of your coaching career. From that point forward, players now know different rules apply for bigger games, and they can get away with more....so you only POSSIBLY get the immediate gain of a Super Bowl win, but lose future creditibility

OR....

-You stick to your guns and say 'rules are rules'. I didn't break them and hurt the team...YOU (BUTLER() did! If you bench your starting corner and STILL win (like they almost did) now you are ABSOLUTELY LEGENDARY for sticking to your rules

Just the ONE FLAW in your theory is…..IF NOONE KNOWS what he did wrong; …..the predictability, demonstrative function of the punishment standard is lost. So why bother?

 

[Ring 6]

This is so true.

I've even thought about it from this perspective...

For arguments sake let's imagine the reason for the benching was 'conduct detrimental to the team' whether it be missing meetings, fight with Steve B., anything like that....now Belichick is faced with this dilemma

-Ok, overlooking the issue and letting Butler play MIGHT get you the WIN, but diminishes 'your policy' for the future of your coaching career. From that point forward, players now know different rules apply for bigger games, and they can get away with more....so you only POSSIBLY get the immediate gain of a Super Bowl win, but lose future creditibility

OR....

-You stick to your guns and say 'rules are rules'. I didn't break them and hurt the team...YOU (BUTLER() did! If you bench your starting corner and STILL win (like they almost did) now you are ABSOLUTELY LEGENDARY for sticking to your rules

“Rules are rules” decisions are easily critiqued. There is instant gratification in overlooking rules and it’s easy to say things would have gone better if you overlooked it. But football teams and dynasties are built on “rules” and culture selflessness, and doing what is best for the team not the individual. Ignoring the rule for short term potential gratification can affect the entire structure you have built.

 

[Ring 6]

Just the ONE FLAW in your theory is…..IF NOONE KNOWS what he did wrong; …..the predictability, demonstrative function of the punishment standard is lost. So why bother?

If you operate an organization by being grounded in principles, it doesn’t matter who knows. What’s the saying? Character is what you do when no one is there to see it?
Plus there is no way of knowing who knew, especially when we still don’t even know what happened for sure

 

[Ring 6]

ignoring the Butler situation, that SB is one of the most rigged games in NFL history. 3 of the PHI TDs were ********. the trick play TD, the Clement TD, and the Ertz TD. the league was going to do everything it could to make sure the Pats didn’t repeat. and as it turns out, the league ****ing over the Pats that game eventually cost them the first ever 3-peat in NFL history

and I’ve never looked at the play again, but I’ve seen a couple of people say that the Jeffrey TD could have been overturned too because of the ball moving when he landed. not sure how true that is. maybe someone could chime in on that one

They literally changed the way the called the catch rule for that game.

 

[BobDigital]

The most damning thing about this from Butler's side, is to this day he hasn't talked about why he was benched, only why he was not. And the answers for not would have been petty reasons you'd expect from BB in certain cases, but we know it is not those.

Seeing how the league and fanbase have turned on BB at least to some degree, and he STILL is telling us why he was benched means 1 of 2 things.

1 Either Bill didn't give him a reason. or 2 He knows the reason and doesn't want to admit it cause while it may make Bill look bad it would also make him look bad.

Also we know Bill loves to talk about football decisions, but he has been more and more throwing people under the bus these days in retrospect, particularly when it comes to history to protect his narrative. He did so with Kraft (and yes, Kraft also talked crap about Bill) but he has done it with a few other things too. The fact he to this day hasn't really talked about why he sat Butler is probably because somehow it will make him look bad too.

This leaves us 2 options.

Option 1 - Bill just hated the match up and out thought himself in this one. Yes play match ups, but to suggest their 4th CB was better than Butler is kind of crazy. And he never really explained himself, just told him 'I'm doing what I think is best for the team'.

Option 2 - Something happened neither Butler or Bill want publicly known.

 

[gobesmug]

The most damning thing about this from Butler's side, is to this day he hasn't talked about why he was benched, only why he was not. And the answers for not would have been petty reasons you'd expect from BB in certain cases, but we know it is not those.

Seeing how the league and fanbase have turned on BB at least to some degree, and he STILL is telling us why he was benched means 1 of 2 things.

1 Either Bill didn't give him a reason. or 2 He knows the reason and doesn't want to admit it cause while it may make Bill look bad it would also make him look bad.

Also we know Bill loves to talk about football decisions, but he has been more and more throwing people under the bus these days in retrospect, particularly when it comes to history to protect his narrative. He did so with Kraft (and yes, Kraft also talked crap about Bill) but he has done it with a few other things too. The fact he to this day hasn't really talked about why he sat Butler is probably because somehow it will make him look bad too.

This leaves us 2 options.

Option 1 - Bill just hated the match up and out thought himself in this one. Yes play match ups, but to suggest their 4th CB was better than Butler is kind of crazy. And he never really explained himself, just told him 'I'm doing what I think is best for the team'.

Option 2 - Something happened neither Butler or Bill want publicly known.

Or its option 3. Dumb pettiness from both of them and neither one wants to admit it because it makes them both look bad to everyone on the team.

Example. Butler mouthed off learning he would be CB3 privately to Fat Matt and refused to apologize. That would be incredibly lame but its not impossible.

If you were on that team, would you want to hear that you potentially lost the superbowl because Butler refused to apologize or that your coach demanded an apology and put his personal pride above the team?