BB THE GOAT

[SHOWTIME15]

When did Belichick say MB not playing was due to performance reasons?

We Now Know Why Malcolm Butler Was Benched In Super Bowl LII

Seth Wickersham's new book on the Patriots not only dives into the toxic relationship between Tom Brady and Bill Belichick, but it also answers a question that New England fans have been asking for years: Why didn't Malcolm Butler play in Super Bowl LII?

www.cbsnews.com

Now we finally know. According to Wickersham, Butler had a heated exchange with then-Patriots defensive coordinator Matt Patricia during practice, leading to Butler's demotion. Patricia was not happy with Butler's effort on the practice field and let the cornerback know it, which led to the blowout between the two.

I'm pretty sure I remember Belichick saying after the game that Butler not playing wasn't because of "disciplinary problems." And I think I remember him saying that he was benched for performance reasons.

If he wasn't prepared why have him active at all?

Injuries happen in a game and the next guy up after Butler may have even worse than Bademosi. Bill has repeatedly stated he will not play a player unless he knows the game plan and knows what he is doing out there. At the end of the day Butler not playing in the game was...Butler's fault.

 

[Ring 6]

My whole thing with that Butler situation is this. If he was truly unprepared, so much so that under NO circumstances (barring injuries to basically every other secondary player) was he going to see the field on defense, why have him active at all? Why not have someone else who was more prepared be active?

If he WAS active, then he would have played in a “break glass in case of emergency” kind of situation.

BUT…. the way the Pats’ D got shredded that game, it kind of WAS a “break glass in case of emergency” situation. The guys you’re all mentioning here were TERRIBLE in that game. They forced one punt and got one turnover at the end of the first half and other than that didn’t stop Philly at all that game. If ever there was a desperate need to try SOMETHING, SOMEONE different, it was then.

But BB didn’t budge at ALL. Which tells me that Butler wasn’t playing defense come hell or high water. So…… why have him active at all? Why not have another player who at least could be put on the field?

It really doesn’t add up.

If BB were to ever write a memoir, the things I’d most want to hear him talk about are Spygate, Deflategate, the end of the 2015 season, and this Butler situation.

There was no one else. They were thin at the position. If they were injuries he would have played.

Belichick decided that Rowe was a better option and on the 11 snaps that he used a nickel corner Bademosi was a better choice, because he deemed Butler a worse option. His view of Butler ON THAT DAY was that he wasn’t capable of playing well enough to be on the field.
During the game when he is trying to coach the defense and get better results, why would prompt him to say “let’s put in the guy who will okay worse”?
You can judge the decision however you want, but you can’t judge it fairly and honestly without knowing the facts that went into it, but the idea that he would say “what the heck throw the guy I think can’t help is today in there and see what happens” is a terrible way to coach
It would have been nice if they made better adjustments to the game plan. It would have been nice if the front 7 played better and didn’t put the secondary in tough down and distance situations all day. It would have been nice if the refs called the catch rule the same way they did all season. But throwing a guy you believe can’t help you out there just because isn’t a reasonable answer.

 

[Ring 6]

The way the defense was playing that day they sure seemed injured everywhere...but whatever it is what it is

The only real option would have been to put Butler in Rowes spot. Rowe didn’t play much, if at all, worse than Butler did most of the season when his head was in it.

 

[ivanvamp]

They were thin at the position so he was active as an injury replacement

I suppose that's the answer. I looked at their inactives for that Super Bowl, and here they are:

• DT Alan Branch
• RB Mike Gillislee
• LB David Harris
• OL Cole Croston
• WR Kenny Britt
• TE Jacob Hollister
• WR Bernard Reedy

So no other DB was inactive. Here's their complete roster of DBs for that season, and their snap counts (there were 75 defensive snaps that game):

CB Malcolm Butler - 0 D, 1 ST
CB Stephon Gilmore - 75 D, 6 ST
CB Eric Rowe - 71 D, 0 ST
CB Jonathan Jones (injured) - 0 D, 0 ST
CB Johnson Bademosi - 11 D, 19 ST
S Devin McCourty - 75 D, 13 ST
S Patrick Chung - 63 D, 8 ST
S Jordan Richards - 16 D, 23 ST
S Duron Harmon - 65 D, 0 ST
DB Brandon King - 0 D, 17 ST
DB Nate Ebner (injured) - 0 D, 0 ST

So 9 were active for the Super Bowl - every DB on the roster. Yeah, I think you're right @Ring 6 - they had to keep Butler active because they were thin at DB.

UGH. Sucks.

 

[crawhammer]

My whole thing with that Butler situation is this. If he was truly unprepared, so much so that under NO circumstances (barring injuries to basically every other secondary player) was he going to see the field on defense, why have him active at all? Why not have someone else who was more prepared be active?

If he WAS active, then he would have played in a “break glass in case of emergency” kind of situation.

BUT…. the way the Pats’ D got shredded that game, it kind of WAS a “break glass in case of emergency” situation. The guys you’re all mentioning here were TERRIBLE in that game. They forced one punt and got one turnover at the end of the first half and other than that didn’t stop Philly at all that game. If ever there was a desperate need to try SOMETHING, SOMEONE different, it was then.

But BB didn’t budge at ALL. Which tells me that Butler wasn’t playing defense come hell or high water. So…… why have him active at all? Why not have another player who at least could be put on the field?

It really doesn’t add up.

If BB were to ever write a memoir, the things I’d most want to hear him talk about are Spygate, Deflategate, the end of the 2015 season, and this Butler situation.

A+

Pretty much any defense Bill ever offers for benching Butler, it's going to be compromised with the fact that he actually activated Butler for the game and played him on ST.

Regarding Spygate, Bill has already said a surprisingly decent amount about it and I doubt he'll add much more. The lingering controversy about Spygate for me is the hasty destruction of the videotapes by Goodell. That can't be undone. The actual "offense" resulted from a common practice that the NFL had permitted to spiral out of control, and when they tried to clamp down, Bill's arrogance got the best of him. But I don't think the videotaping itself was anything unusual or significantly beneficial to the team. Just Bill being obsessive compulsive about gathering an infinite among of information.

Bill also covered Deflategate in a lengthy press conference after initially tossing the ball in Tom's court (which didn't go over very well in the Brady camp). Dubbed the Mona Lisa Vito press conference, I thought Bill was brilliant and thorough. He even tossed in a few more well-spoken comments on Spygate. Ultimately Deflategate turned into the most overblown nothing story in NFL history. Really an embarrassment for Goodell in his handling of the situation. Mortensen/ESPN lost a lot of credibility too. Mark Brunell gets an honorable mention for crying on air about Brady's balls.

 

[RobertWeathers]

We Now Know Why Malcolm Butler Was Benched In Super Bowl LII

Seth Wickersham's new book on the Patriots not only dives into the toxic relationship between Tom Brady and Bill Belichick, but it also answers a question that New England fans have been asking for years: Why didn't Malcolm Butler play in Super Bowl LII?

www.cbsnews.com

I'm pretty sure I remember Belichick saying after the game that Butler not playing wasn't because of "disciplinary problems." And I think I remember him saying that he was benched for performance reasons.



Injuries happen in a game and the next guy up after Butler may have even worse than Bademosi. Bill has repeatedly stated he will not play a player unless he knows the game plan and knows what he is doing out there. At the end of the day Butler not playing in the game was...Butler's fault.

I don't recall BB saying any of that. All I think he said was his normal, useless "best decision for the team bla bla." crap.

Whatever.

 

[SHOWTIME15]

I don't recall BB saying any of that. All I think he said was his normal, useless "best decision for the team bla bla." crap.

Whatever.

A big part of the controversy came because Butler never owned up to playing poorly after the game. He said things like "they gave up on me, etc." and made it look like it was Bill's fault. I remember him crying during the national anthem.

 

[crawhammer]

There was an ESPN piece written a while ago indicating that Butler was benched because he wasn't trying very hard in practice during SB week, and this caught the ire of Patricia. This is consistent with what Belichick said after the game that Butler didn't play for "performance reasons." Butler wasn't prepared and that's that. On top of that the guy got sick during the week. Another example of @crawhammer acting like an authority on a topic he knows nothing about.

Lies.

Butler said, "I never got a reason", and immediately after the game he said, "I could have changed that game." So as far as Butler's concerned, there was no reason why he didn't play (on defense), he was ready to play, and he felt he could have made a difference in the game.

Belichick acknowledged after the game that he understood Butler "felt like he could have helped (in the game)." So obviously there was no mutual agreement that Butler wasn't ready to play (on defense). Belichick also said after the game, "he was active for the game and anybody that is active for the game is ready to go." Even dumbass Patricia said after the game, "He was ready to play..."

Read carefully, both Belichick and Patricia said, Butler was "ready to go" / "ready to play"

So Butler and the coaching staff agreed he was ready to play in the game and he was a DNP (coach's decision).

 

[crawhammer]

They were thin at the position so he was active as an injury replacement

lol no one ever said that! As I've pointed out multiple times now, Belichick said Butler was "ready to go."

 

[Ring 6]

lol no one ever said that! As I've pointed out multiple times now, Belichick said Butler was "ready to go."

It’s kind of obvious.
Butler himself has said he was not focussed.
Ready to play and able to play effectively are very different things.
I’d ask why you think he was active, but you would just make something up, because reality doesn’t matter to you.

 

[Ring 6]

Lies.

Butler said, "I never got a reason", and immediately after the game he said, "I could have changed that game." So as far as Butler's concerned, there was no reason why he didn't play (on defense), he was ready to play, and he felt he could have made a difference in the game.

Belichick acknowledged after the game that he understood Butler "felt like he could have helped (in the game)." So obviously there was no mutual agreement that Butler wasn't ready to play (on defense). Belichick also said after the game, "he was active for the game and anybody that is active for the game is ready to go." Even dumbass Patricia said after the game, "He was ready to play..."

Read carefully, both Belichick and Patricia said, Butler was "ready to go" / "ready to play"

So Butler and the coaching staff agreed he was ready to play in the game and he was a DNP (coach's decision).

How is that so difficult for you to understand?
Belichick made a decision that based upon every factor he takes into consideration Butler was his 4th corner on that day. The reasons are pretty clear since Butler himself admits he was late arriving and not focussed in practice. Playing Rowe ahead of him seems like an obvious possibility considering what happened leading up to the game, as well as Butlers play when focussed during the year not being all that good.
The real surprise was him not getting Bademosis 11 snaps. That tells me his disconnect in the preparation was very severe.

 

[SHOWTIME15]

Lies.

Butler said, "I never got a reason", and immediately after the game he said, "I could have changed that game." So as far as Butler's concerned, there was no reason why he didn't play (on defense), he was ready to play, and he felt he could have made a difference in the game.

Belichick acknowledged after the game that he understood Butler "felt like he could have helped (in the game)." So obviously there was no mutual agreement that Butler wasn't ready to play (on defense). Belichick also said after the game, "he was active for the game and anybody that is active for the game is ready to go." Even dumbass Patricia said after the game, "He was ready to play..."

Read carefully, both Belichick and Patricia said, Butler was "ready to go" / "ready to play"

So Butler and the coaching staff agreed he was ready to play in the game and he was a DNP (coach's decision).

This pretty much tells you how awful Butler was in the AFCCG in 2017...so no, he was not "ready to play."

A Closer Look At One Football Reason Why Malcolm Butler Didn't Play For Patriots In Super Bowl

We might never get the full, honest answer from Belichick, but it turns out that the AFC Championship Game tape against Jacksonville does provide some reason why the Patriots might have lost trust in having Butler on the field.

www.cbsnews.com

We might never get the full, honest answer from Belichick, but it turns out that the AFC Championship Game tape against Jacksonville does provide some reason why the Patriots might have lost trust in having Butler on the field.

By far, Butler's worst play of the afternoon came on the first snap of the second quarter. On a first-and-10 from the New England 28, the Patriots appeared to be in Cover 3, which left Butler responsible for the third of the field on the defense's left. He communicated somewhat frantically with Patrick Chung prior to the snap, indicating some level of miscommunication.

 

[crawhammer]

So 9 were active for the Super Bowl - every DB on the roster. Yeah, I think you're right @Ring 6 - they had to keep Butler active because they were thin at DB.

Belichick and Patricia had a million opportunities to confirm this speculation. Not once did either say, Malcolm was dressed as an emergency injury replacement. Belichick deployed Butler on ST and there was no emergency there. This excuse doesn't hold up.

Belichick had made his mind up that Butler wasn't going to play on defense no matter what. This clearly was the case considering how poorly the secondary played in this game.

Foles finished the game with 373 passing yards and 3 passing TDs (and 1 receiving TD).
Foles was 6-7 for 137 yards on 3rd down when targeting Rowe, Bademosi and Richards.

Foles when targeting Patriots DBs (total passing yards gained):

Rowe = 80
Richards = 74
Chung = 56
KVN = 18
Bademosi = 17
Flowers = 14
DMC = 13
Gilmore = 7
Lee = 1

Gilmore did his job but the rest of the ****ups didn't. Rowe and Richards alone gave up 154. Had Butler gotten his requisite percentage of snaps (98%), then those two clowns at least wouldn't have gotten so incredibly exposed.

The decision by Belichick to bench Butler lost Super Bowl 52.

 

[SHOWTIME15]

The decision by Belichick to bench Butler lost Super Bowl 52.

no, you can’t prove that the situation would have been any different. there was a greater likelihood of the Pats winning had Brady not fumbled with 2 mins left

 

[crawhammer]

It’s kind of obvious.
Butler himself has said he was not focussed.
Ready to play and able to play effectively are very different things.
I’d ask why you think he was active, but you would just make something up, because reality doesn’t matter to you.

I'll give you the same answer that Belichick himself has already given you: "he was active for the game and anybody that is active for the game is ready to go."

Butler was active because he was ready to go. You going to call BB an idiot now?

 

[sb1]

Butler was our best tackling corner. The Eagles scored on every drive but one when they went to a third down. Butler makes one third down stop the Patriots have a great shot to win the game.

 

[crawhammer]

How is that so difficult for you to understand?
Belichick made a decision that based upon every factor he takes into consideration Butler was his 4th corner on that day. The reasons are pretty clear since Butler himself admits he was late arriving and not focussed in practice. Playing Rowe ahead of him seems like an obvious possibility considering what happened leading up to the game, as well as Butlers play when focussed during the year not being all that good.
The real surprise was him not getting Bademosis 11 snaps. That tells me his disconnect in the preparation was very severe.

So "severe" that again according to BELICHICK: "he was active for the game and anybody that is active for the game is ready to go."

I guess your new argument is BB's a liar. A liar and a cheat... at least you're agreeing with @MAC10.

 

[crawhammer]

This pretty much tells you how awful Butler was in the AFCCG in 2017...so no, he was not "ready to play."

Take it up with Belichick. I guess you know more than the GOAT head coach?

 

[SHOWTIME15]

Take it up with Belichick. I guess you know more than the GOAT head coach?

You're kidding, right? You just spent an entire thread bashing Bill's decision to bench Bulter and now you are deferring to him as the "GOAT HC?" So what's it going to be? Deferring to Belichick is EXACTLY what I and others are doing.

 

[crawhammer]

no, you can’t prove that the situation would have been any different. there was a greater likelihood of the Pats winning had Brady not fumbled with 2 mins left

You're right, if Brady had reached 600 yards then they would have won the game.