mb6592
Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2005
- Messages
- 1,159
- Reaction score
- 167
They were not reasons unrelated to winning the Sb. They were reasons that he felt gave the team the best chance to win.
That’s why this argument is so ridiculous.
People want to believe that belichick didn’t care about winning before accepting that something was going on that led him to believe butler would hurt the team.
And please stop with calling belichicks comments something factual. He will NEVER give reasons. No coach does. Butler could have literally put a poisonous snake in his hoodie or lit Rowe’s room on fire and he would have said it wasn’t disciolinary.
I'm not suggesting Belichick didn't want to win or purposely sabotaged his team. What I'm saying (and I think you are too) is that absent some (disciplinary?) reason, Butler would have had some playing time. That he didn't shows Belichick's reason(s) for not playing him was/were unrelated to the sole purpose of winning this Super Bowl.
The only remaining mystery is what the reason(s) was/were. Maybe we'll find out, maybe we won't. And if we did find out maybe you would agree with the decision, maybe you wouldn't.