Update: Curran says Belichick has been on the hot seat since 2019

[1960Pats]

We currently have 110 mill in 2024 and 220 mill in 2025 per overthecap so we can sign our own and bring in anyone we want.
But championships aren’t won at the top end of cap hits they are win in the middle and bottom range.

Someone should tell that to Patrick Mahomes.

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

I think Brady wanted more flexibility because he earned It and his career.value to the franchise. He didn't want to be begging Kraft and BB after after each 1-yr extension add on and wanted to decide when he was done playing, which is when he felt he didn't have it anymore. I also think he wanted full control of his schedule, meaning he could skip some practices, do whatever he wanted with fitness/Guerrero etc. and get the benefit of the doubt at age 42. And I think after watching Gronk unhappy with his contract, AB released, Amendola not re-signed , and the team constantly telling him they'd emphasize skill players, he grew frustrated at the poor results in 2019. I don't think he was asking for anything that most sports players of his caliber are seeking at that juncture of their career. He got all those things in Tampa. Many of you believed The Patriot Way was sacred and no player should be given special treatment. Bill had no secret, special QB replacement plan and cannot simply "develop" a Tom Brady Lite.

 

[1960Pats]

SHOULD BB be on the proverbial hot seat this season? Considering last year, perhaps. That probably sums things up but after 33 pages ...

Leave them alone. The Belichick fans are on a roll and have about 30 pages worth.

 

[Ring 6]

Someone should tell that to Patrick Mahomes.

The Chiefs are the clear example. 47/53 players had cap hits under 5 mill. 41/53 under 3 mill.

 

[Ring 6]

Leave them alone. The Belichick fans are on a roll and have about 30 pages worth.

You spelled Patriots fans wrong.

 

[RodThePat]

If you know the 2020 roster is going to suck royally, then it’s like buying a Lamborghini and parking it in the trailer park.

The 2020 roster didn't have to suck royally, they had ample opportunity to borrow from future years and delay the rebuild while continuing to go all in with Brady. It's defensible they they chose not to go that route but they could have.

 

[Ring 6]

The 2020 roster didn't have to suck royally, they had ample opportunity to borrow from future years and delay the rebuild while continuing to go all in with Brady. It's defensible they they chose not to go that route but they could have.

No they really didn’t. They could barely retain their own players without keeping Brady and had no cap to improve the team. There is no such thing as “borrowing against the future cap”

 

[Bruins29]

Leave them alone. The Belichick fans are on a roll and have about 30 pages worth.

Says the guy who spent years crying about Brady leaving and TBH you haven’t stopped

 

[Wozzy]

The 2020 roster didn't have to suck royally, they had ample opportunity to borrow from future years and delay the rebuild while continuing to go all in with Brady. It's defensible they they chose not to go that route but they could have.

2019 was the last gasp, they spent their wad. Either you take a down year, or you’re average at best until Tom retires and have accrued a lot more debt.

Entering 2020 1/4 of their cap was gone on players no longer with the team and Gilmore’s hit from kicking his cap can down the road in 18’ and 19.’

They had 11 starters or major contributors to re-sign or replace, were near dead last in available cap space and were old. It was over.

 

[IcyPatriot]

Apologies if already posted ...
What have you done for me lately ... ugh

 

[Kdo5]

He actually did improve the O. Went from 6th worst to 6th best. Last year a lot of things went wrong and they ended up mid pack. And that is with a LOT of things blowing up - MP, Smith, Agolor and just a lot of bad energy. And even with all that crap they were one play away from being a playoff team.

So as much as this is all frustrating WRT drafts, coaching choices, bonehead plays and no playoff wins, it seemed to be heading in the right direction.

The roster building is the problem. Smith, Agoholor, Bourne, Parker, the drafted receivers and tight ends. All those situations have shown their flaws. Smith was a highly paid dud. Agholor overpaid and did nothing. Bourne had #2 potential but they benched him all season for ??? reasoning. Parker is not a #1 guy and didn’t produce that much last season, yet they paid him. Harry was a terrible bust, both early TE picks in 2019 did nothing. Thornton is a question mark.

And instead of selecting a direly needed tackle to protect Mac, we never even considered the position as a high priority in the draft. The only thing that has truly worked out for us is a running back. It’s just a pretty terrible track record recently of roster adds and management of certain players.

Give the reigns of that operation to someone who can identify high quality prospects and free agents who will be fits.

 

[Kasmir]

Apologies if already posted ...
What have you done for me lately ... ugh

Given typical fan think, I'd guess that if the proposition was "would you trade your present coach for a 1st round pick" most fans of most teams would likely say yes.

 

[Boomer B]

Apologies if already posted ...
What have you done for me lately ... ugh

Looking at it realistically, yes of course you’d take multiple number 1’s for BB. He’d probably think you’d be nuts not to. This isn’t a 50 yr old Belichick with 20 yrs left, not even a 60 yr old Belichick with a decade or more left. Belichick’s in his 70’s with likely a few years left. He has a team not ready to contend for a SB. Of course you’d take multiple number 1’s for Belichick, it’s a no brainer.

 

[PScottman]

If you can't see the impact Brady had on the team, then I'm sorry for you

Key word in that sentence..."had".

Tom Brady aint walking through that door as R. Pitino might say. Arguing a past you can't change doesn't seem a worthwhile use of one's time.

We can live in the past or face the present of the NE Patriots. The massive mistakes of the OC debacle have been addressed (to what end...we shall collectively see). Does that eliminate ALL the variables that have contributed to less than stellar recent outcomes? No, and anyone that thinks those mis-steps that have been changed for the upcoming campaign are not at BB's feet are frankly kidding themselves. He will absolutely be evaluated just like any other employee by a business owner. Whether that evaluation will be in season or post-season...likely only RK knows for sure or also has more variables than we can likely fathom.

Expectations of continued excellence without end is just entitlement rearing its ugly head. No coach nor elite player stays that way forever. The only undefeated entity remains Father Time. Maybe he's calling for BB's head for the game passing him by, or maybe not, but my bet remains the same that this remains the year we will definitively find out one way or another.

 

[pazrul72]

No they really didn’t. They could barely retain their own players without keeping Brady and had no cap to improve the team. There is no such thing as “borrowing against the future cap”

I agree with the sentiment they could barely afford to retain their own players, on the salary cap that was left in 2020, and I was onboard with a down year to clear much needed space, but you are fooling yourself if you think borrowing against future cap isn’t a thing. Look at the 2014 Revis deal as an example. I don’t remember the exact numbers but the gist was they paid him 5 million in 2015 when he was on the jets so his 2014 number was lower. Look at the Rams salary cap and how they are already close to the limit in 24, 25, and 26. They absolutely ”borrowed” money from those years to have cheap star veteran players for a small window run. It worked if all you want is ONE Super Bowl season.

That’s what the Brady side is arguing, if Belichick had fully believed in Brady he would have given him a 5 year deal in 2018 with truly hideous amounts of dead money in the 4th and 5th years so you COULD go get a high priced WR weapon with similar amounts of stupid dead money later on. In their minds it was reasonable to not question a 41 year old QB continuing to defy the odds, that 2018 decrease in numbers, and need to rely on the running game wasn’t a sign of things to come. If Belichick had wanted to be grossly irresponsible and have two years of 65+ million of dead money post Brady they could have kept Brady with weapons for 2020, 2021, and possibly 2022. I do not agree with that POV but it could have been done.

Now to continue beating this dead horse to death, I think one year deals for Brady was the right call. No one before has played like he has into their forties. In 2019 his numbers and production was way down, it was fair to say is this injury or the new norm? It was fair in my mind to say you used to be fine being treated like any other guy on the team, yes you are Tom ****ing Brady, but how many other players do you need to hear say, whoa they treat Tom like that I better shape up, to know how important locker room culture is? Basically all of that adds up to I don’t envy BB having to make the call on when it’s time to say goodbye to Brady. With hindsight maybe he should have gone all in for another year or two but at the time, with the information he had? I was 100% ok with the choice he made. What I wished he had done differently was gone all in on the rebuild, dont tender thuney, trade Hightower, mccourty, and Gilmore but that’s an entirely different conversation.

 

[Ring 6]

I agree with the sentiment they could barely afford to retain their own players, on the salary cap that was left in 2020, and I was onboard with a down year to clear much needed space, but you are fooling yourself if you think borrowing against future cap isn’t a thing. Look at the 2014 Revis deal as an example. I don’t remember the exact numbers but the gist was they paid him 5 million in 2015 when he was on the jets so his 2014 number was lower. Look at the Rams salary cap and how they are already close to the limit in 24, 25, and 26. They absolutely ”borrowed” money from those years to have cheap star veteran players for a small window run. It worked if all you want is ONE Super Bowl season.

That’s what the Brady side is arguing, if Belichick had fully believed in Brady he would have given him a 5 year deal in 2018 with truly hideous amounts of dead money in the 4th and 5th years so you COULD go get a high priced WR weapon with similar amounts of stupid dead money later on. In their minds it was reasonable to not question a 41 year old QB continuing to defy the odds, that 2018 decrease in numbers, and need to rely on the running game wasn’t a sign of things to come. If Belichick had wanted to be grossly irresponsible and have two years of 65+ million of dead money post Brady they could have kept Brady with weapons for 2020, 2021, and possibly 2022. I do not agree with that POV but it could have been done.

Now to continue beating this dead horse to death, I think one year deals for Brady was the right call. No one before has played like he has into their forties. In 2019 his numbers and production was way down, it was fair to say is this injury or the new norm? It was fair in my mind to say you used to be fine being treated like any other guy on the team, yes you are Tom ****ing Brady, but how many other players do you need to hear say, whoa they treat Tom like that I better shape up, to know how important locker room culture is? Basically all of that adds up to I don’t envy BB having to make the call on when it’s time to say goodbye to Brady. With hindsight maybe he should have gone all in for another year or two but at the time, with the information he had? I was 100% ok with the choice he made. What I wished he had done differently was gone all in on the rebuild, dont tender thuney, trade Hightower, mccourty, and Gilmore but that’s an entirely different conversation.

That isn’t borrowing against the future cap. It’s spreading a new players cost over years. You can add players with a lower current year cost that way but you can’t borrow from the future cap. There is no mechanism at all to say I am going to take future cap money and borrow it to spend now.
Every team structures contacts so the first year hit is low. That’s not borrowing from the future. Borrowing from the future would be having no cap space and signing a guy anyway and designating his cap hit to be borrowed from future years. That does not exist.

Your 2018 example doesn’t make sense. If he signed him to a 5 year contract 60% of the signing bonus would be accounted to year 1-3. You can’t just make up what years it goes to. 65 mill in dead money in year 4 would mean a 162.5 million signing bonus and with only a 1 mill salary each year cap hits of 33.5 the first 3 years and dead money if 65. Of course Brady would play year 2 for 1 mill. The cap doesn’t work how you think it does.

Given what shape the team was in after the incredible run and due to the incredible run, Brady leaving was actually best for the franchise.
Some fans seem to disagree but I would not have given up 2014-2018 success to instead have not gone all in, not win those SBs and gotten 3 more years of Brady.

 

[pazrul72]

That isn’t borrowing against the future cap. It’s spreading a new players cost over years. You can add players with a lower current year cost that way but you can’t borrow from the future cap. There is no mechanism at all to say I am going to take future cap money and borrow it to spend now.
Every team structures contacts so the first year hit is low. That’s not borrowing from the future. Borrowing from the future would be having no cap space and signing a guy anyway and designating his cap hit to be borrowed from future years. That does not exist.

Your 2018 example doesn’t make sense. If he signed him to a 5 year contract 60% of the signing bonus would be accounted to year 1-3. You can’t just make up what years it goes to. 65 mill in dead money in year 4 would mean a 162.5 million signing bonus and with only a 1 mill salary each year cap hits of 33.5 the first 3 years and dead money if 65. Of course Brady would play year 2 for 1 mill. The cap doesn’t work how you think it does.

Given what shape the team was in after the incredible run and due to the incredible run, Brady leaving was actually best for the franchise.
Some fans seem to disagree but I would not have given up 2014-2018 success to instead have not gone all in, not win those SBs and gotten 3 more years of Brady.

Ok then what did they just do with Parker? You give them a higher signing bonus that lowers this years number but raises later years numbers. The player gets more money today and then they get cut before getting the last year of the deals money leaving dead money on the cap. That to me is just a fancy convoluted way of saying “borrowing money from future years” you get more player for less money this year but then have to pay more money then you get player at the end of the deal. The point is there are 1 million ways to get more money this year if you are ok having dead money later.

I didn’t give specific numbers in my hypothetical 2018 Brady contract for a reason, I’m not a capologist and didn’t stay at a holiday inn last night. I was more talking the general feel of the contract and said stupid dead money in year 4 and 5. I know you can add void years and other stupid cap games if you really want to. That’s all the Brady side is arguing that the pats SHOULD have done those things for Brady in 2018. I disagree but to say they arent possible is inaccurate. They think we could have had 2014-2018 AND a decent Brady led team 2019-2021 if we just accepted 2022, and 2023 were going to have half the cap already spent in dead money.

 

[Ring 6]

Ok then what did they just do with Parker? You give them a higher signing bonus that lowers this years number but raises later years numbers. The player gets more money today and then they get cut before getting the last year of the deals money leaving dead money on the cap. That to me is just a fancy convoluted way of saying “borrowing money from future years” you get more player for less money this year but then have to pay more money then you get player at the end of the deal. The point is there are 1 million ways to get more money this year if you are ok having dead money later.

I didn’t give specific numbers in my hypothetical 2018 Brady contract for a reason, I’m not a capologist and didn’t stay at a holiday inn last night. I was more talking the general feel of the contract and said stupid dead money in year 4 and 5. I know you can add void years and other stupid cap games if you really want to. That’s all the Brady side is arguing that the pats SHOULD have done those things for Brady in 2018. I disagree but to say they arent possible is inaccurate. They think we could have had 2014-2018 AND a decent Brady led team 2019-2021 if we just accepted 2022, and 2023 were going to have half the cap already spent in dead money.

That is not borrowing from the future. They didn’t take future cap money and borrow it. They extended him. They guaranteed part of his salary as signing bonus which means it gets amortized over the length of the contract. That’s not borrowing. You can’t something what it isn’t and say it’s a fancy way of being what it isn’t.
Feel free to show any examples of how the patriots could have done that in 2020. I assure you there were not a million ways. There were few. They were under water and couldn’t afford to keep their own free agents. Yes they could have finagled a way to keep Brady but it would further degraded the roster than was good enough at the end of 19.

There is zero chance of what you suggest. And it’s simple to see. We had zero cap room to add players to the 2019 roster in 2020 WITHOUT paying Brady. Had we kept him, by definition we would have had to cut players or not resign the few we did, or both. There is no magic way to create space out of thin air. As I explained your dead money plan would not have worked

 

[pazrul72]

That is not borrowing from the future. They didn’t take future cap money and borrow it. They extended him. They guaranteed part of his salary as signing bonus which means it gets amortized over the length of the contract. That’s not borrowing. You can’t something what it isn’t and say it’s a fancy way of being what it isn’t.
Feel free to show any examples of how the patriots could have done that in 2020. I assure you there were not a million ways. There were few. They were under water and couldn’t afford to keep their own free agents. Yes they could have finagled a way to keep Brady but it would further degraded the roster than was good enough at the end of 19.

There is zero chance of what you suggest. And it’s simple to see. We had zero cap room to add players to the 2019 roster in 2020 WITHOUT paying Brady. Had we kept him, by definition we would have had to cut players or not resign the few we did, or both. There is no magic way to create space out of thin air. As I explained your dead money plan would not have worked

It’s not willing to spend or not, it’s whether you wish to spend the same money with lesser or greater risk.
The patriots spend to the cap every year. That means the dollars allocated to a given year are maxed.
If another team spends more cash, they do not have more dollars allocated to this year, they have spent dollars that get allocated to future years.
It’s not a matter of spending less, in the long run if you spend to the cap it’s the same thing, it’s disdain for spending money today that will reduce what you can spend later.

Example: a team is tight against the cap so it converts 15 mill of salary to signing bonus. If the contract has 3 years left, they push 10 mill into the future. Now they can spend 10 mill more now but 10 mill less the next 2 years. Their cash spent this year is higher but it’s just borrowed from the future.

Andy I know you love to argue just to argue so this will be my last post on the topic. I googled 2019 patriot salaries and yeah holy **** was it worse than I thought. There really wasn’t much money at all, though the article I read showed 4 simple cuts like Sanu that freed up another 11 mil on top of the 25 they started with. I’m going to go really extreme and stupid to prove a point though so keep in mind I DO NOT agree with this thinking, and would have done what the patriots did, only more extreme like trading Hightower, McCourty, and Gilmore. Anyway I want to maximize 2020-2022 money so I offer Hightower a 7 year extension with a 28 million dollar signing bonus. With a 1 mil salary in 2020 his hit goes from 12 million to 5. Yeah I’m cutting him before year 4 of that contract and my future cap is messed up but I got my 2 year window so who cares? Do the same with Thuney, McCourty, Gilmore, Mason, etc and you could easily create enough space to sign 2-3 offensive play makers. THAT‘s how you “just borrowed from the future”

 

[StrawHatPatriot]

Brady leaving was the inevidible result of a 5 year, all in run that led to 4 superbowls which led to the roster decline, Brady's age and his family situation. The rest was media drama. Even I have to admit it's much juicier story the way you want to tell it.

But Kraft admitted there was tension between Bill and Brady.

Look Brady doesn't hate Bill of course, and they have a great relationship right now. But Brady was saying coy stuff about "not feeling appreciated".

Even Tom Moore said Belichick was thinking of trading Brady after 2016.

So Brady leaving wasn't solely the result of them having that run.