Mac Jones last two weeks

[upstater1]

It’s almost as bad as 79-88

Really? The 2001 team wasn’t talented? They didn’t have great players on the 2000 roster? Odd

Odd how they went from 5-13 to 11-3 instantly.

You provided a link of somebody’s opinion, before the season started.

Over 10 years without Brady, Belichick has done less than most. See how easy this is…don’t you love handpicked samples? So you agree both are mediocre coaches at best. Glad we settled this

There's this word in football it's called: rebuilding.

You go to Cleveland, you tear it down and build it up.

You go to the playoffs, you beat Parcells. Your owner guts the team, fires you, it goes to pot.

You go to the Patriots, Groh is demoted, you take over the defense of a team that went 6-10 the previous year, that team goes to the Super Bowl.

You return to New England, you get rid of the old crew that don't fit the plan, and you bring in temporary hold the fort guys, like Anthony Pleasant. The rest of the league evaluates your players as the worst in football. In articles at the time, were people talking about Brady or Belichick? Did you not hear about New England being called the "least talented team in football?" Do you not remember Ron Wolf saying the Patriots were a "waiver wire" team? That team won the Super Bowl, but gave up under 20 points in 13 of their 14 wins.

(Boston.com / Sports / Football / Patriots / Hands down, Belichick the better coach)

But you evidently think Belichick is nothing without Brady--which says it all really. Do I doubt the football knowledge of people who think that? Absolutely I do

 

[Ollie]

What happened?

going back months to find peoples old posts to prove a point tends to do the opposite of what you are trying to achieve. Its not a good look.

I doubt there is a single poster that hasn't been wrong with their takes on many occasions.

 

[Pats2000]

I don't get using his performance in the CHI game to blast him. Sure, he had a pedestrian 67.4 rating. Mac's rating was an abominable 16.7, yet there's no mention of that despite Mac being the only QB to practice that week for the game.

It's something they can hang their hat on

 

[All3Phases]

There's this word in football it's called: rebuilding.

You go to Cleveland, you tear it down and build it up.

You go to the playoffs, you beat Parcells. Your owner guts the team, fires you, it goes to pot.

You go to the Patriots, Groh is demoted, you take over the defense of a team that went 6-10 the previous year, that team goes to the Super Bowl.

You return to New England, you get rid of the old crew that don't fit the plan, and you bring in temporary hold the fort guys, like Anthony Pleasant. The rest of the league evaluates your players as the worst in football. In articles at the time, were people talking about Brady or Belichick? Did you not hear about New England being called the "least talented team in football?" Do you not remember Ron Wolf saying the Patriots were a "waiver wire" team? That team won the Super Bowl, but gave up under 20 points in 13 of their 14 wins.

This is 10 years of excuse making. It’s ok, we know you don’t let this slide for other teams, so I won’t for you

But I do know that Mcvay took over a powerhouse in 2017, he doesn’t get credit from you for rebuilding in 1 year…that’d fly in the face of your argument

(Boston.com / Sports / Football / Patriots / Hands down, Belichick the better coach)

But you evidently think Belichick is nothing without Brady--which says it all really. Do I doubt the football knowledge of people who think that? Absolutely I do

I am using your logic here bud. You nitpicked a sample against Mcvay and I did the same for bill. Are you realizing you don’t like your logic?

 

[venecol]

going back months to find peoples old posts to prove a point tends to do the opposite of what you are trying to achieve. Its not a good look.

I doubt there is a single poster that hasn't been wrong with their takes on many occasions.

That's not what happened. Somebody liked a post of mine in an old thread. When I clicked to see it, I noticed his posts were 180 degrees opposite to what he is now claiming. I found it comical so I posted them here. He's acknowledged he was wrong and owned those terrible takes (that Patricia would make a good OC). I in turn gave my kudos to him for owning them.

Happy?

 

[venecol]

This is 10 years of excuse making. It’s ok, we know you don’t let this slide for other teams, so I won’t for you

I am using your logic here bud. You nitpicked a sample against Mcvay and I did the same for bill. Are you realizing you don’t like your logic?

He'll continue to move goal posts, dodge & weave, lie and make stuff up. He's one of the most dishonest posters here.

 

[Ras-IR Dowling]

That's not what happened. Somebody liked a post of mine in an old thread. When I clicked to see it, I noticed his posts were 180 degrees opposite to what he is now claiming. I found it comical so I posted them here. He's acknowledged he was wrong and owned those terrible takes (that Patricia would make a good OC). I in turn gave my kudos to him for owning them.

Happy?

Did he DM you the nudes?

 

[upstater1]

This is 10 years of excuse making. It’s ok, we know you don’t let this slide for other teams, so I won’t for you

But I do know that Mcvay took over a powerhouse in 2017, he doesn’t get credit from you for rebuilding in 1 year…that’d fly in the face of your argument

I am using your logic here bud. You nitpicked a sample against Mcvay and I did the same for bill. Are you realizing you don’t like your logic?

What 10 years?

It's 1 year.

Team won the Super Bowl in his 2nd year.

1 year.

As for McVay, he didn't win! His team scored 3 points in the SB. This is not the same.

 

[All3Phases]

What 10 years?

You’re all over the place, again…this is your logic, so I chose a sample. 79-88, you’ve now excused all of it.

It's 1 year.

Team won the Super Bowl in his 2nd year.

1 year.

As for McVay, he didn't win! His team scored 3 points in the SB. This is not the

What 10 years?

It's 1 year.

79-88 is almost a full 10 year sample, again. You wanted to use this logic of nitpicking samples

Team won the Super Bowl in his 2nd year.

Right the untalented 2001 roster, which was 0-2 before Brady stepped foot on the field, after being 5-11 with a ton of the same players

1 year.

As for McVay, he didn't win! His team scored 3 points in the SB. This is not the same.

Mcvay is not a great coach because he took a 4-12 team and immediately won 11 games, then went to the Super Bowl the next year but lost! What a loser! You have spun yourself in a circle here. This was fun for me though.

You made fun of Mcvay for 1 poor season, but will roll out the excuses for the coach with a bad record in a huge sample. Unfortunately I had to point out the hypocrisy

 

[venecol]

Did he DM you the nudes?

Still waiting.

 

[upstater1]

You’re all over the place, again…this is your logic, so I chose a sample. 79-88, you’ve now excused all of it.


79-88 is almost a full 10 year sample, again. You wanted to use this logic of nitpicking samples

Right the untalented 2001 roster, which was 0-2 before Brady stepped foot on the field, after being 5-11 with a ton of the same players

Mcvay is not a great coach because he took a 4-12 team and immediately won 11 games, then went to the Super Bowl the next year but lost! What a loser! You have spun yourself in a circle here. This was fun for me though.

You made fun of Mcvay for 1 poor season, but will roll out the excuses for the coach with a bad record in a huge sample. Unfortunately I had to point out the hypocrisy

I'm asking you what is the 10 year sample? I can't read your mind

I provided you links showing what the consensus was at the time about the talent on the 01 team. From executives, from Ron Wolf, from practically anyone. Just wondering if you even watched that team. Doesn't sound like you did.

Personally, I think winning the '01 Super Bowl is a greater accomplishment than losing the '18 one.

But you do you.

Anyway, I can see you didn't counter at all my understanding of your entire argument, which is that Belichick is a mediocre (at best) coach who got lucky with Brady. This is why I don't take you seriously.

 

[All3Phases]

I'm asking you what is the 10 year sample? I can't read your mind

79-88 is 10 years without Brady, honestly thought that was clear

I provided you links showing what the consensus was at the time about the talent on the 01 team. From executives, from Ron Wolf, from practically anyone. Just wondering if you even watched that team. Doesn't sound like you did.

So you’re saying the team that won the Super Bowl and would go on to win multiple with alot of those players wasn’t talented…got ya, tough hill to die on

Personally, I think winning the '01 Super Bowl is a greater accomplishment than losing the '18 one.

But you do you.

Not sure where I argued this…you’re all over the place

Anyway, I can see you didn't counter at all my understanding of your entire argument, which is that Belichick is a mediocre (at best) coach who got lucky with Brady. This is why I don't take you seriously.

Here, maybe I can slow it down for you…you said Mcvay wasn’t a great coach because of his record in 2022. 4-10. I said belichick wasn’t a great coach because in the 10 years without Brady he’s 79-88. You see how nitpicking works? This is literally your logic and you confused yourself.

You eliminated McVays history and focused on 10 games. I can do the same. I can make anybody look like a bad coach just like you can

 

[TheRainMaker]

You go to the Patriots, Groh is demoted, you take over the defense of a team that went 6-10 the previous year, that team goes to the Super Bowl.

Not sure why you keep saying that. Groh was the DC. Bruschi also confirms it below:

 

[captain stone]

Um, the second play, the one receiver who Orlovsky incidentally says is looking back for the ball is WIDE OPEN. He also says this receiver is "2 yards" down the field which is only incorrect by 200%.

Yep; I and others have already and multiple times clowned Orlovsky for that Clueless take of his on the 3rd/4 play as soon as he made it.

 

[captain stone]

Orlovsky has no agenda. Right.

Dan-O should start by being Corky's QB coach first before installing himself as the OC too.

 

[SVN]

Donald, kupp and stafford have all missed a chunk of games. They underachieved, but you also missed the injuries on the offensive line and won’t acknowledge the patriots have a pretty good roster as well. Again, you can lie to yourself to make yourself feel good; but Mcvay has been a great coach for a half decade without an elite quarterback. If one bad season is your standard, then we might need to start looking around the league and maybe at our own staff? You can hang on 4-10, and if we want to use that logic, I will repeat 79-88.

He has been a good coach but their style of building a SB team doesnt work all the time. its a case of things working out inspite of. Now they have heavy contracts and no high draft picks . Lets see how he handles it going forward. Most likely he wiill retire and go to tv as was rumored and leave the mess to someone else. exactly what pats fans need to brace for any new coach. He will mortgage everything to win now and if we dont , he will leave or get fired.

 

[upstater1]

Not sure why you keep saying that. Groh was the DC. Bruschi also confirms it below:

I know Al Groh was nominally the DC and calling the plays still. He was also the linebackers coach. But in one of the books on the Parcells Kraft era and breakup, there was friction, because Belichick was doing all the schemes and design of the defense. Groh had a different defense set up. Groh was upset by the move Parcells made.

Look what happened the very next year. Groh was demoted to ONLY coaching LBs for Parcells, and Parcells made Belichick his DC in NY.

 

[upstater1]

79-88 is 10 years without Brady, honestly thought that was clear

So you’re saying the team that won the Super Bowl and would go on to win multiple with alot of those players wasn’t talented…got ya, tough hill to die on

I'm saying it. Ron Wolf said it. All the personnel guys and executives said it. Everyone said it.

They went 9-7 the very next year and got beat by some bad teams.

On offense, they were not great that year, bottom 3rd of the league.

Like I wrote earlier, 13 out of the 14 wins they kept the opposing Offense to under 20 points.

The whole 10 years argument is specious since he rebuilt the Browns, rebuilt the Patriots, is going through a rebuild now. Brady came in the 1st year of the rebuild. He arrived the year Belichick was hired. That's coincidence.

The other years without Brady are about what you'd expect given the talent level, the transition in a rebuild, etc.

11-5, 3-1, 7-9, 10-7, 7-7. Actually, a 38-29 record with Cassel, Garoppolo, Brisset, Cam Newton, Mac Jones and Zappe as your QB isn't even horrible, especially when the last 3 years the team has transitioned talent-wise by having 14 veteran starters leave or retire.

I don't know how you're coming up with 79-88 anyway. I have him at 79-86. Unless you're counting playoffs. But if you are, he's 2-2, so 81-88.

Belichick actually had a 5-3 record with Cleveland before Modell blew up the team and then told Bill he was not hiring him in Baltimore. They lost the last 8 games, and this was coming off a 11-5 season.

 

[One-If-By-Sea]

If McVay bails outta LA, then the Krafts should fly that bird of theirs straight to his house and hand him a blank check with their names on it.

McVay and his 4 - 10 record has you all excited? He is an offensive genius when Dan Campbell coaches up Goff better than McVay?

 

[One-If-By-Sea]

Still waiting.

Want me to send some? Might disappoint.