Malcolm Butler Mega Thread

Soul_Survivor88 said:

What makes you think Malcolm was "f'ed up in the head?"

Click to expand...

What makes you think he wasn't?

QuantumMechanic said:

I think that's the most likely turn of events. We'll probably never know if it's true, but it is at least consistent with everything that happened.

Click to expand...

That may very well be, but doesn't that imply the coaches handled Butler badly, notifying him at the last minute so Butler did not have a chance to process and absorb the new reality?

Nehalem said:

If Butler plays the 2nd half he would be the most motivated player possible.

Click to expand...

Motivation doesn't guarantee good results - if a player tries too hard it can be just the opposite.

In fact, I think Butler's motivations are why his play was so much worse this year. He wanted to do things that he felt would goose his contract numbers even if they were contradictory to the gameplan.

Folks listen...Malcolm Butler wasn’t going to make an iota of difference in that game. We could have had Ty Law in his prime opposite Gilmore and still lost. Why? Our front 7 was absolutely horrible. We couldn’t generate any pressure, and our LB couldn’t cover at all. That’s the reason we lost. Can’t give an NFL corner endless time to through, and can’t have the second level basically wide open at all times because the best coverage guy you can put there is Richardson for Pete’s sake. If we upgrade our LB core, we will be fine.

QuantumMechanic said:

What makes you think he wasn't?

Click to expand...

why is the burden on me? I'm not the one who make the insinuation! lol

robertweathers said:

If the "If we played Malcolm we would have won and BB is an idiot" crowd wants to do that then great.

Click to expand...

That crowd exists in every city with a team.

We would have won if Antonio Brown didn’t get hurt.

We would have won if Bell didn’t get hurt.

We would have won if the refs didn’t screw us

We would have won if the Patriots weren’t using illegal formations ( that were actually legal)


We would have won if the ideal gas law hadn’t taken effect......


And now. We would have won if Malcolm Butler played.


Blah blah blah blah blah


We would have won if........the motto of losers.

AndyJohnson said:

When has belichick ever made a football decision based upon ego?
Having team rules isn’t ego.
Making a tough possibly unpopular decision because you believe it’s the right thing when your job is to make the decision isn’t ego.
Having a different philosophy than the crowd isn’t ego.

Click to expand...

This is ego.
For one, stealing Rowe from the Eagles and having him play great was way too juicy. But pretend I didn't say that.
We've seen him bench a player for something so relatively harmless (Welker/Rex/playoffs) that it shows Belichick's inflexibility even when there is hardly any offense.
When the so-called "tough" decision damages the team's chances at Super Bowl victory.
I don't care if it was big nickel or big pickle! I want Butler out there with our best players, and Bademosi and Richards are not them.

Butler was a bit undersized to matchup against Philly’s tall receivers. The only big physical corner they had was Rowe, and Philly knew that he was a liability having played there before. The matchups favored the Eagles just about everywhere except TE and QB.

Nothing was working and he couldn't even put butler for a series or two? This move will live with BB and i am sure you have players saying what if butler had played.

robertweathers said:

Sure if you want to base it on speculation. Saying the D would have been better with a ****ed in the head Malcolm out there is speculative.

Click to expand...

That's the maddening thing. We could have, but never got a chance to find out. Now we'll never know and this debate will live on in infamy.

TommyBrady12 said:

Butler was a bit undersized to matchup against Philly’s tall receivers. The only big physical corner they had was Rowe, and Philly knew that he was a liability having played there before. The matchups favored the Eagles just about everywhere except TE and QB.

Click to expand...

OK, then why not play him in the slot?

upstater1 said:

This is ego.
For one, stealing Rowe from the Eagles and having him play great was way too juicy. But pretend I didn't say that.
We've seen him bench a player for something so relatively harmless (Welker/Rex/playoffs) that it shows Belichick's inflexibility even when there is hardly any offense.
When the so-called "tough" decision damages the team's chances at Super Bowl victory.
I don't care if it was big nickel or big pickle! I want Butler out there with our best players, and Bademosi and Richards are not them.

Click to expand...

Idk about ego. He might have one but nothing was working in the game. His secondary was getting torched but he never looked at butler's direction once. It's just plain dumb from a guy whose supposed to be a defensive genius. That tag has been overrated for awhile now.

Soul_Survivor88 said:

Then why would Belichick play him in the playoffs against the Titans and Jags.

Click to expand...

Better matchups. Kept his nose clean. Didn't push a coach. Didn't miss a flight. Didn't party. Didn't smoke weed. Didn't miss curfew. Didn't blow off the game plan. Didn't demonstrate he was going to be overly helpful vs Philly.

Soul_Survivor88 said:

Stop creating strawmen.

Click to expand...

Same goes for you.

Soul_Survivor88 said:

Butler made it clear he did nothing ridiculous during Super Bowl week,

Click to expand...

If you want to believe him, great. I don't.

BB made it clear his decision to bench Malclolm was football -related.

You believe Malcolm but do not have confidence in BB to believe him?

What has BB done in the last 18 years to shake your confidence in his decision making? We aren't talking about Pete Carroll here..

Soul_Survivor88 said:

and his teammates stood by him.

Click to expand...

Of course they will.

Soul_Survivor88 said:

Sure, there may have been "minor infractions." And yet, he might have had a bad week of practice. But you are targetting Butler's character in order to absolve Belichick of any wrongdoing.

Click to expand...

...and you are targeting BBs by saying he put a personal matter between he and Butler ahead of the team.

Soul_Survivor88 said:

The fact is, he was dressed for the game. Anything he did to lose Belichick's trust, could not have been severe enough to keep him out of the game.

Click to expand...

Based on what? What if he told the coaches "f this. I'm doing my own thing out there".

That is a dealbreaker my friend.

Soul_Survivor88 said:

I'll grant you, there could have been some performance-related issue, especially with a bad week of practice. But what did Belichick have to gain by keeping him off the field for all four quarters? Does this make any football sense to you?

Click to expand...

He needed a player out there he could trust and carry out his assignments. Malcolm did something to shack BB to the core and make it impossible for him to do so.

Soul_Survivor88 said:

OK, then why not play him in the slot?

Click to expand...

I am not buying that crap about the wrs being tall. Agholor killed this team. I am sure butler would have done a nice job on him. Rowe as your second corner'a asinine! You stick with what got you to this point! I am still pissed about this.

Ivan said:

That crowd exists in every city with a team.

We would have won if Antonio Brown didn’t get hurt.

We would have won if Bell didn’t get hurt.

We would have won if the refs didn’t screw us

We would have won if the Patriots weren’t using illegal formations ( that were actually legal)


We would have won if the ideal gas law hadn’t taken effect......


And now. We would have won if Malcolm Butler played.


Blah blah blah blah blah


We would have won if........the motto of losers.

Click to expand...

I agree in theory with you. Excuses are for losers. But in this case, I just feel that on one of those 3rd downs, JUST ONE, we literally needed just 1 stop in the 2nd half on 3rd down to win, that Butler on Agholor instead of Chung would have given us 1 stop, JUST ONE!!!

I've been watching sports since the mid-80's, and this is the most head-scratching, frustrating thing i've ever seen. WE HAD PATRICK CHUNG COVERING NELSON AGHOLOR WITH MALCOLM BUTLER SITTING ON THE BENCH!!! In what reality is that the right move?

AndyJohnson said:

So belichick shouldn’t have dressed ted Karras? The intention was for him not to pkay any snaps too.

Please explain how you determine that Bill Belichick decided to hurt his team over a “personal motive” and what could possibly be more important to him than winning but yuy refuse to accept butler is at fault in any way?

Click to expand...

Why do you and Robertweathers keep equating the argument that BB is at fault for benching a starter, watching his D tank, and doing nothing about it with "Malcolm did no wrong"? Nobody here has said that Malcolm did no wrong. He obviously did something to get benched for the Super Bowl. However, he was still ready, willing and able, during all 60 minutes of that game, to go in and try to help the team win, just as he had during every game before that during the season. BB had what we call in the legal world "the last clear chance" to avoid the train wreck and he refused to even try it. Your argument that we don't know what BIG thing happened, and therefore the rest of us are wrong and you are right, is so stupid it's maddening given the outcome of the game. His anger/loss of trust/ego (either in sticking to his horrible game plan or in sticking with sticking it to Butler, or both)/whatever you BB-can-do-no-wrong-ists want to fill in here eclipsed his usual clear thinking that usually leads us to a win. In the biggest game of the year, that he preaches is the only one that matters. That's the sad fact.

I'm done now, so please don't break down my response into little pieces and analyze each word to say I said something I didn't say, or ask me a question that I wasn't writing about. That's another maddening habit that you and Robertweathers have. I prefer Quantum's little red Xs. Short and to the point.

TommyBrady12 said:

Butler was a bit undersized to matchup against Philly’s tall receivers. The only big physical corner they had was Rowe, and Philly knew that he was a liability having played there before. The matchups favored the Eagles just about everywhere except TE and QB.

Click to expand...

Rowe was in position on both the big Jeffrey catches, so it wasn't like Jeffrey had the clear advantage. Perfect pass and perfect catch on both throws, even though I, like others, believe Rowe could've made a better attempt on the TD. But, maybe he couldn't. Who knows. Reminded me a lot of his attempt against Julio Jones last Super Bowl. Rowe was in position, but the pass and catch were unstoppable.

upstater1 said:

This is ego.
For one, stealing Rowe from the Eagles and having him play great was way too juicy. But pretend I didn't say that.
We've seen him bench a player for something so relatively harmless (Welker/Rex/playoffs) that it shows Belichick's inflexibility even when there is hardly any offense.
When the so-called "tough" decision damages the team's chances at Super Bowl victory.
I don't care if it was big nickel or big pickle! I want Butler out there with our best players, and Bademosi and Richards are not them.

Click to expand...

This is Skip Bayless’ theory - “I traded for Eric Rowe and will now beat you with him.”

Soul_Survivor88 said:

OK, then why not play him in the slot?

Click to expand...

I wonder if that was their original plan and what set Butler off initially. My speculation is: The defensive coaches put a game plan together that has Butler on Agholor in the slot. Butler balks at being put in the slot because he sees it as a demotion that will cost him money as a free agent. Butler then cops an attitude in meetings and practice. Butler misses practices and practices poorly when he’s there. The coaches inform him a few days before the game that he won’t start, Butler then gets really upset and instead of stepping up to show he should play he goes the other direction. Belichick and the coaches decide he can’t be trusted and rule him out.

Again, that’s just speculation on my part but it’s the most likely scenario I can come up with. I don’t think it’s fair to Butler to throw shade on him with the accusations about weed and fights without real good information supporting them, but I think you can see it happening as I suggested based upon how Butler has conducted himself over the past year.

KDPpatsfan said:

Folks listen...Malcolm Butler wasn’t going to make an iota of difference in that game. We could have had Ty Law in his prime opposite Gilmore and still lost. Why? Our front 7 was absolutely horrible. We couldn’t generate any pressure, and our LB couldn’t cover at all. That’s the reason we lost. Can’t give an NFL corner endless time to through, and can’t have the second level basically wide open at all times because the best coverage guy you can put there is Richardson for Pete’s sake. If we upgrade our LB core, we will be fine.

Click to expand...

Sorry, but he could have made a difference. You are right, our front 7 was horrible, and the Eagles would have got their points, but we had too many guys out of position. Chung on Agholor????!!! We go in with Gilmore on Jeffrey, Chung on Ertz, Butler on Algholor, Rowe on Smith... I think we get at least one stop in the 2nd half. Agholor absolutely killed us, and Belichick put a Strong Safety on him. Just mind boggling.