Malcolm Butler Mega Thread

Hammer of Thor said:

Yeah, the whole thing is still perplexing. I mean, I understand the unconventional game plan. BB built his entire career and reputation off of that in big games - Super Bowls 25 and 36, and even Super Bowl 39 against the Eagles themselves. This one was unique and I can understand the thought process behind it. But what I will never understand is that it clearly wasn't working, and yet Belichick's adjustment was to bring Bademosi in instead of Butler. I mean, Bademosi did have a decent enough year, but even 80% of Butler had to be better than Bademosi. And after Bademosi's big whiff, and the defense still hurting, he still doesn't bring Butler in.

Sigh........... c'est la vie, I guess.

Click to expand...

Don't forget about that deveststing front 7 the Patriots had last year.

The narrative of claiming Malcolm was the difference maker is conjecture , not fact.

robertweathers said:

Don't forget about that deveststing front 7 the Patriots had last year.

The narrative of claiming Malcolm was the difference maker is conjecture , not fact.

Click to expand...

Oh, I totally agree. That's the reason for the game plan to begin with. And maybe Belichick was completely right and Butler would have been a disaster out there -- either himself directly, or causing adjustments where the Eagles focus on something else (like the running game more) not fearing his ability to bring down their runners (although Butler has generally been a solid tackler). The issue I have is that we just don't know because they never tried it, and it's not like the defense was doing well enough to justify not trying it.

Hammer of Thor said:

Oh, I totally agree. That's the reason for the game plan to begin with. And maybe Belichick was completely right and Butler would have been a disaster out there -- either himself directly, or causing adjustments where the Eagles focus on something else (like the running game more) not fearing his ability to bring down their runners (although Butler has generally been a solid tackler). The issue I have is that we just don't know because they never tried it, and it's not like the defense was doing well enough to justify not trying it.

Click to expand...

It's just one of those things where it'll be a mystery for all time why BB felt Malcolm would not have made a difference. Illness, etc.

robertweathers said:

The loss did nothing to take away from Tom's performance.

Click to expand...

Oh the performance is still an all time great. A win makes it legendary. So yes, the loss took away from it.

KontradictioN said:

Oh the performance is still an all time great. A win makes it legendary. So yes, the loss took away from it.

Click to expand...

Ill say it overshadowed it.

DarrylS said:

This was widely reported last year, when he went on his sales tour to NOLA and walked away when his agent could not make a deal..

Seemed as though at that time that Butler was hindered by his inexperienced agent.. as many agents do, he inflated what Butler should expect in FA, and this year he essentially wound up with what he could have wound up with last year..

Click to expand...

Newsflash: Butler was not a free agent last year. Any team that wanted him would have had to offer the money AND sacrificed a 1st round pick.

They made a ton of money by waiting for free agency. Butler's agent did a great job for his client. For some reason, you're too stubborn to admit this.

the chemistry w Logan added a mill or two . maybe they can share that as well

The Brandon Five said:

Ok, time for the Wonder Twins. Trade for Jason.

Click to expand...

Called it!

Dont get why everyone keeps referring to it all as a mystery. BB said it out loud, Butler repeated it in the last two days at least a dozen times. Butler took himself out of the gameplan thanks to bad practices before the SB. That is on himself and he also knows as much as the tweet shows.

If you cant manage to ****ing focus for your last game with a team in a SB then dont be surprised if your ass gets benched.

robertweathers said:

The loss did nothing to take away from Tom's performance.

Click to expand...

It takes it from a performance that legions of Patriots fans would always cherish and want to watch again and again to one where the memory will instead bring pain. So yeah it kinda does.

robertweathers said:

Don't forget about that deveststing front 7 the Patriots had last year.

The narrative of claiming Malcolm was the difference maker is conjecture , not fact.

Click to expand...

"Conjecture" only in the incredibly limited sense that we can't actually see the game again with Butler in it. But overwhelmingly informed, logical conjecture from what we actually did see, that not playing Butler cost the Patriots a Super Bowl. And it's asinine to suggest otherwise.

aluminum seats said:

It takes it from a performance that legions of Patriots fans would always cherish and want to watch again and again to one where the memory will instead bring pain. So yeah it kinda does.

Click to expand...

For re-watching , sure. For the actual performance itself no way

aluminum seats said:

"Conjecture" only in the incredibly limited sense that we can't actually see the game again with Butler in it. But overwhelmingly informed, logical conjecture from what we actually did see, that not playing Butler cost the Patriots a Super Bowl. And it's asinine to suggest otherwise.

Click to expand...

If to you not playing Malcolm was the only reason they lost helps you cope with the loss then have at it

luuked said:

Dont get why everyone keeps referring to it all as a mystery. BB said it out loud, Butler repeated it in the last two days at least a dozen times. Butler took himself out of the gameplan thanks to bad practices before the SB. That is on himself and he also knows as much as the tweet shows.

If you cant manage to ****ing focus for your last game with a team in a SB then dont be surprised if your ass gets benched.

Click to expand...

So why didn't they give the biggest defensive play maker a chance when our defense was turning in a pathetic performance?

robertweathers said:

If to you not playing Malcolm was the only reason they lost helps you cope with the loss then have at it

Click to expand...

It doesn't help me cope it haunts me that Belichick made a decision that cost a Super Bowl.

And obviously "only reason" is silly. If Brady didn't fumble, etc. But if Butler plays the Pats win.

n6249c said:

Disagreed because he got more guaranteed, and that's all that counts. Rest is smoke and mirrors.

Click to expand...

Thats what I was thinking, guys have to go where the guaranteed money is.

I’ve tried many times to visualize a worse deal with the corners in the bowl. I can’t do it. Richards looked like a lost and confused ******. When butler said he could have changed the game. I believe it without reservation. It is nice to finally know he was just I’ll and not locked in but still. 4th quarter you put him in we win the game

Duplicate post

luuked said:

Dont get why everyone keeps referring to it all as a mystery. BB said it out loud, Butler repeated it in the last two days at least a dozen times. Butler took himself out of the gameplan thanks to bad practices before the SB. That is on himself and he also knows as much as the tweet shows.

If you cant manage to ****ing focus for your last game with a team in a SB then dont be surprised if your ass gets benched.

Click to expand...

good kid, like Lombardi always said. sorry it didn't work out.

its a perfect story though if you think about it: enters unexpectedly in SB49, makes the play for history, goes from noname tryout to probowler, and on the last game for the team that made him, SB52, he is unexpectedly benched..

The movie is made . TEN is afterlife..

KontradictioN said:

Based on everything we've heard from Belichick, Butler, and multiple sources (including players) close to the team, it wasn't anything significant at all. It was for match-up reasons. Which is mind boggling. The GOAT coach cost his team their 6th Super Bowl victory and essentially flushed an all time great game by his quarterback down the crapper.

Click to expand...

you're overselling that quite heavily. Remember, everything was falling the Eagles way LITERALLY ALL GAME. You can't just assume that a substitution of a player who was sick and had been struggling for weeks would flip the script. It's a possibility, but again, if it was about talent, the Patriots win that Superbowl. The Eagles were getting WAY more than their share of bounces and football luck.

I don't even object to the point you're making, so much as the certainty with which you're making it. Claiming that THE PATRIOTS WOULD ABSOLUTELY DEFINITELY WIN THE SUPERBOWL IF BUTLER HAD PLAYED is an overstatement. It's accurate to say that the odds are better, and with the game on a knife's edge, it might have been a difference maker. I honestly think that's the absolute most you can say.

Pretending that the entire difference between victory and defeat is #21 playing isn't necessarily wrong, but it is stating the case with far more certainty than it actually deserves.

As an aside did you SEE the look in Nick Foles' eyes? He had a look in his eyes in that game that I've only seen on one face in my life, and that face stands over a #12 Patriots jersey. I'm not sure the 85 Bears or the '15 Broncos would have stopped Foles that night, he was Brady-level locked in. Not like you'd expect it from Nick Foles, but for some reason, on that night he was the best quarterback in the world.

The Vikings had a far better defense than we did that year. Foles absolutely DESTROYED them. I don't think he was ever at that level before and probably never will be again, but when a guy is dialed in like that, you can't assume that ANYTHING would stop them, even things that normally would. I honestly think we did very well to hang with that team at all, considering. We were the only ones that came close to stopping them.