- Joined
- Oct 10, 2006
- Messages
- 76,878
- Reaction score
- 66,861
Clearly spoken by the self proclaimed lone voice of reason hereabouts...
You keep talking about how this offense has changed. It hasn't, it merely adapted. The playbook has expanded to accommodate different talents and to account for defenses attempting to shut it down. At it's core it remains the same offense. One predicated on disciplined execution across the board and a QB's ability to adapt to it, to read defenses, and adjust to them in a consistent manner that his line and receivers can count on and are expected to replicate, to make good decisions quickly and consistently, remain patient and disciplined under pressure and protect the god damn football.
If Belichick coached here until 2039 Bledsoe could not play for him because he cannot run that fundamental offense. Might he win some more games than the 3 over .500 he won in his first 9 years here if inserted into the 2007 cast as assembled? Probably, but would some of them have ever come here to play for Bill Belichick behind Drew Bledsoe? On a team that hadn't won a Superbowl beyond 2001? I don't think so. Would Branch and Givens have developed without what Brady brought to the mix? Probably not. Would the present "cerebral" OL have played as well in front of a statue as they learned to in front of a cerebral QB with uncanny pocket presence? Probably not. And would BB not bench him as Parcell's did if he became insubordinate? Or when he merely persistently failed to adjust a throw to beat a defense and hit a defender in stride rather than Moss or Welker who had read the defense and made the adjustment?
You admire talent. Including guys who can sling it. Unfortunately that remains the downfall of half the NFL franchises. Bill looks for system fits first and foremost beginning with his QB because if talent can't execute within his system it is of no value to him.
Actually, I admire players who find a way to win despite the supposed lack of athletic talent. I'm much happier with the Bradys of the world than the Bledsoes. It's one of the many things you've gotten wrong in this post, though, so I'm not surprised. The offense is significantly changed, yet you say that it's the same. You claim the only difference is based upon adaptations, yet how can that be if it's the quarterbacks throwing in the exact same system?
That really shows me all I need to know about how you are letting your bias dictate on this subject. There's really no need to go further with it, given that. I will, however, wait anxiously for your dissertation on how BB incorporating elements of the spread offense affected no change change on "the core" though.
Last edited:











