Malcolm Butler Mega Thread

neuronet said:

That turnover is partly on him. How is that foolish? Not saying Brady played poorly in general: he had an overall great game, especially second half.

Click to expand...

Usually strip sacks are the fault of the protection, and that failed him here too. But also as others have said he should have checked down quicker to get the first down.

I also don't think that 50 yarder to DA was a very good throw, though Brady probably did the best he could with a pass rush in his face. If Brady hits Amendola in stride... that was as easy an 85 yard TD as you'll ever see. Unfortunately the Pats got zero on that drive with the blown FG and that was the difference in the score.

If your blaming Brady for this loss it’s ridiculous. He’s the reason we have won 5 superbowls without him there is no dynasty. What he has done is ridiculous in this era. I’ve seen some people and reports saying he’s no longer the GOAT. That’s crockshit.

Click to expand...

I've only seen that from Rob Parker. A guy who is 3/4 troll and 1/4 hater when it comes to the Patriots. Not exactly a source of objective Patriots analysis.

PatriotsNumero1Fan said:

Last time i remembered he gave his team the lead in 42 and his defense couldn't get a big stop. He also made a throw to welker who dropped it. Brady carried that team in 2011 with a crappy defense.

Click to expand...

Typical.. Can't remember that Hernandez and Branch had drops on the last Pats drive in 42 and THAT is what cost them the game.. Not the Welker one..

Steve:Section 102 said:

Theory:

Malcolm struggled BADLY with RPO. Made the wrong read better than 50% of the time in practice. Wouldn't this qualify as a football reason? *****ed at the coaches when he screwed it up. Blew off meetings because he was frustrated with his week of practice.

Is this enough to get him benched?

Click to expand...

Theory doesn't hold up. At the point the lines blur between performance and discipline they become a distinction without a difference. Even if Butler wasn't good in practice, wasn't getting the RPO, wasn't.... Once the defense shat the bed if it was mostly about performance BB would have put him in. WTF wouldn't you? This benching clearly wasn't done to win the Super Bowl - anyone who argues otherwise is being willfully obtuse or has an agenda.

PatriotsNumero1Fan said:

Make him inactive! Don't dress him! He said it wasn't discipline as well. What is it then?! BB looks like an arrogant prick the way he handled it. Some players where surprised at the last minute. That throws a team off.

Click to expand...

Yeah.. You're so brilliant. Make Butler inactive and go into the game with only 3 CBs, one of whom is Bademosi.. BRILLIANT..

mb6592 said:

Theory doesn't hold up. At the point the lines blur between performance and discipline they become a distinction without a difference. Even if Butler wasn't good in practice, wasn't getting the RPO, wasn't.... Once the defense shat the bed if it was mostly about performance BB would have put him in. WTF wouldn't you? This benching clearly wasn't done to win the Super Bowl - anyone who argues otherwise is being willfully obtuse or has an agenda.

Click to expand...

yes, I agree that if it was a simple case of not being able to read the RPO, then you'd give him a shot once they are getting lit up. I feel there's more to it. I am just trying to wrap my head around it and figure it out.

Kargetina said:

No, that is not a double standard
Belichick didn't make a single mistake in the heat of the moment.

Click to expand...

When one person is judged for the same mistake as someone else but treated differently, that is a double standard.

BB is being accused of making a mistake which cost the team the game and he is being killed for it.. If we are saying BB cost the team the game, and also TB12 and Shaq also made mistakes which cost them the game and should not be killed, that is a double standard.

Kargetina said:

Brady had 460+ yards and 3 TD's before the fumble. A double standard would have been had Brady threw 4 picks and had 150 yards with zero TD's and yet we're only blaming Belichick for the loss.

Click to expand...

You are adding nuances to it. We are talking about a singular mistake leading to the loss.

TB12 fumble is on the table.

Not playing Malcolm is on the table.

Kargetina said:

Bill and Patricia created a horrendous game plan, mostly due to Butler's benching and never fixed it during a 4 hour game.

Click to expand...

Those are two mistakes. Do you believe they cost the team the game?

Kargetina said:

It should never have come to the point where Brady needed a 4-th straight TD in as many second half drives to win the game. If we add the two Ghost miscues, Brady and the offense gave this team 37 points. And that still wasn't enough.

Click to expand...

Gost made mistakes. Do we think he cost the team the game?

Kargetina said:

As far as being objective in critical assessment, i still have no idea what Brady was looking at during that snap. White was wide open in the flat as soon as the ball was snapped, and Amendola was wide open right in front of Brady in the slant. It was 2nd and 2 so it's not like they needed a long pass. That was a defensive Hail Marry as big as Butler's interception. The Eagles couldn't do anything to Hogan, Gronk and Amendola. Zero chance of stopping a TD drive. That pisses me off even more than Belichick's decision because had Brady scored another TD, it would have gone in history as the greatest performance by any player in any final ever.

Click to expand...

I agree with you.

mb6592 said:

Theory doesn't hold up. At the point the lines blur between performance and discipline they become a distinction without a difference. Even if Butler wasn't good in practice, wasn't getting the RPO, wasn't.... Once the defense shat the bed if it was mostly about performance BB would have put him in. WTF wouldn't you? This benching clearly wasn't done to win the Super Bowl - anyone who argues otherwise is being willfully obtuse or has an agenda.

Click to expand...

Why wouldn't you put in someone who was being sat because he had a bad week of practice and was fighting with the coaches when you'd already made the decision to only play him on the Punt coverage team or if there was an injury? Gee.. Maybe because you don't change your mind and look wishy washy to the other 52+ guys on the roster.

So, because there are logical reasons that you disagree with, everyone who disagrees with you is obtuse or has an agenda.. Got it..

DaBruinz said:

Yeah.. You're so brilliant. Make Butler inactive and go into the game with only 3 CBs, one of whom is Bademosi.. BRILLIANT..

Click to expand...

Why is this so hard to understand? Concussions are running rampant. So, if Gilmore, Bademosi or Rowe go down, BB has no one other than some PS guy who hasn't played all year, yet they wanted Butler Inactive altogether?

I don't think some people think before they post here.

Deus Irae said:

I have no idea where you're trying to go with this but, when the other team scores every time they get the ball, your defense really isn't limiting anything.

Click to expand...

I get what you’re saying and agree, but I also feel as though the halftime adjustment to move Gilmore on Jeffrey seemed to work, and that the defense didn’t look as bad in the second half as it did the first.

DaBruinz said:

Why wouldn't you put in someone who was being sat because he had a bad week of practice and was fighting with the coaches when you'd already made the decision to only play him on the Punt coverage team or if there was an injury? Gee.. Maybe because you don't change your mind and look wishy washy to the other 52+ guys on the roster.

So, because there are logical reasons that you disagree with, everyone who disagrees with you is obtuse or has an agenda.. Got it..

Click to expand...

They also assume Butler SHOULD HAVE PLAYED apparently because of his play in SB 49, which was 3 years ago. As we know, BB doesn't care what you did 3 years ago, and if even half the stuff we've been told, happened, BB made the right move in not being all desperate pretending Butler makes a difference in a shootout like that.

Our fans can be strange at times. They have trouble handling facts and truths, and just go off the rails in the process.

SVN said:

Well..he was dressed and made to stand for the entire game. Dont you want to question that ?

Click to expand...

Of course I do. Why would he do that?

SVN said:

Or you want to blindly believe whatever bill says that it was purely football related. ?

Click to expand...

That would make life easier. It would also make like easier to know Malcolm made it impossible for Bill to play him.

I would also be satisfied to learn BB completely screwed up and had zero justification for not playing Malcolm.

As of this moment, we have neither.

SVN said:

Lets say hypothetically just hypothetically it was just a football decision based on "packages", you will be still okay with what BB did over 4 full quarters of not trying him 1 snap ?.I am just trying to gauge under what circumstance you think its okay to question BB. IF you think never then its fine, all these arguments are moot points.

Click to expand...

No! I would not be OK with it! He should have f-cking played him!

I conclude Malcolm did things that made it absolutely impossible for him to see the the field on defense.

What those things are I haven't a clue but I do think some are football related but I also think there were off the field things going on.

In other words, I think both BB and Malcolm are full of ****.

I stated what I think would be required for BB to do that earlier this morning and 183 times yesterday. I can't do it again. Sorry.

DaBruinz said:

Yeah.. You're so brilliant. Make Butler inactive and go into the game with only 3 CBs, one of whom is Bademosi.. BRILLIANT..

Click to expand...

That's effectively what BB did. How does this help anyone's argument who is advocating that BB was justified for what he did to the Patriot's defense in the Super Bowl?

neuronet said:

That turnover is partly on him. How is that foolish? Not saying Brady played poorly in general: he had an overall great game, especially second half.

Click to expand...

Agreed. It's just those pesky sluggish starts that keep plaguing our SB chances. The way it comes down to the last possession, is crazy.

Todd Bradley said:

He made a colossal error, and even though he had chance after chance to make amends, never did.

Is he the GOAT coach? Of course. Is he responsible for our success? Of course. But is he completely immune from criticism? Nope.

Sorry, the guy isn't perfect. And he was far from it on Sunday and cost us a title.

Click to expand...

I find this to be a reasonable and accurate post, but it also feels as though some have been taking it a bit too far in their criticism.

Ultimately, he’s a huge part of the team’s success. This time the decision didn’t pay off. It happens.

TB12TheGoat said:

You’re blaming the offense? Lmao

Click to expand...

Not at all.....they did very well at what they had to do .... the problem is having to throw for 500 to have a chance

Did not mean to make it sound like that

LivinLovin&Breathin_Brady said:

Belichick screwed up and one can argue that it was intentional.

Click to expand...

Wait, what?

“Intentional?” I’m not understanding your point.

SVN said:

Thats not true. Pats instead do whatever works. They dont go with some pre conceived plan that running and throwing should be balanced. Served them well over 18 yrs. The irony is that they went in with some pre conceived notion that butler isnt good for 1 snap

Click to expand...

Yes and no.....613 yards but only 25 minutes of possession ... gave the Eagles 35 minutes to work over a defense that could not stop anything. Ball control would have worked better

Chris Stevenson said:

They also assume Butler SHOULD HAVE PLAYED apparently because of his play in SB 49, which was 3 years ago. As we know, BB doesn't care what you did 3 years ago, and if even half the stuff we've been told, happened, BB made the right move in not being all desperate pretending Butler makes a difference in a shootout like that.

Our fans can be strange at times. They have trouble handling facts and truths, and just go off the rails in the process.

Click to expand...

Absolutely, he was playing 98% of the snaps because of that play in SB49. Old merits die hard.
The truth is that Belichick`s actions were borderline sabotage. He is not Pederson, former QB and OC, who had to relinquish the entire defensive plan to Schwartz because the defense is not exactly his area of expertise. Belichick did everything wrong - Butler issue, avoiding to inform Rowe on time that he is actually starting, creating/approving horrendous matchups, playing with only 2 CBs most of the time, waiting too long to make an adjustment, not doing enough of them. As a former DC, he should have known better.

DaBruinz said:

Why wouldn't you put in someone who was being sat because he had a bad week of practice and was fighting with the coaches...Gee.. Maybe because you don't change your mind and look wishy washy to the other 52+ guys on the roster.

Click to expand...

Having a bad week of practice wouldn't have gotten him banned for the whole game. When you put it into the equation it just serves to provide a smokescreen and it weakens your follow up assertion. If he had had an awesome week of practice and fought with the coaches would Belichick have changed his mind? How would that have looked to the 52+ other guys? The problem I have with the whole "he sucked in practice and it was disciplinary" mantra is part A is irrelevant and part B is the only significant component. Part A MAYBE would have got him benched for a quarter or a half at most. Thus my statement that the benching wasn't done to win the Super Bowl. Are you arguing that it was?