Re: Belichick on running the ball (from today's conference call)
posted at 1/9/2014 11:29 AM EST
In response to BabeParilli's comment:
^ This is about as true as true ever gets around here.
If I were saying BB was the best GM of all-time, but then still saying everything negative that I actually say about his specific decisions on drafting, FAs and the like, I would be doing exactly what these guys do regarding BB's coaching.
Expecting honesty on this is hopeless.
Let's face it, if BB himself came in and slapped some of these characters silly screaming all the while, "WE RUN MORE WHEN IT'S BEING EFFECTIVE, GOT IT?", they would all be here the next day posting the same nonsense.
The only "truth" Babe is that the run is irrelevant people take exactly what they want from Belichick's statement in the original post and warp it to fit their agenda, saying what they wish he meant instead of what he actually said, changing what us "run heavy" group supposedly think to make it seem like he is refuting something we NEVER said in the first place. He couldn't be any clearer, staying balanced keeps the opponent guessing, it's a good thing.
What this crew keeps falling back on is that we think there is some magic number of rushes that wins games, which is BS, we don't. We only ask that the run game be persistent and consistent regardless of success, history has shown that this leads to wins 9 times out of 10.
Have there been anomalies, sure, there were three playoff wins in the past 14 years where the opponent rushed more than us and we still won, and all had extenuating circumstances; a blowout against the Steelers (2004) where we still rushed the ball 32 times, a 3 point nail biter against the Chargers (2006) they turned it over 4 times to keep us alive and when Tebow sucked and had to run because he couldn't pass (2011).
Three games out of twenty-four where we actually passed more than ran, and actually won a playoff game.
As opposed to fourteen games where we ran more and won, which included 3 Super Bowl titles. The rest were losses where we ran less than our opponent... EVERY TIME!
But hey, maybe you guys are right, and running more plays no part in it, maybe the overwhelming statistical data, the landslide of wins vs losses are just coincidence...? Only if you have a narrative you've stuck to for years now and refuse to accept reality because of bull headedness.
Yeah I know the favorite "pass happy" non sequitur argument is coming; "but you're refuting what Bill Belichick himself said" or "Belichick must be wrong and you are right."
We wouldn't be refuting what Belichick had to say if you didn't continue to put words in our mouth we didn't say. Or continue to interpret what Belichick "meant" instead of what he actually said.
The only reality gap that can't be crossed is the one where you guys realize that offensive coaches aren't all built the same, that by criticizing the style of offense or even Bill O'Brien is not the same thing as saying ridiculous blanket statements being thrown around here like "BB forgot how to coach offense."
If anyone is being unrealistic about Belichick being omniscient it is you guys, you seem to think he can coach all three phases of a game simultaneously. It's a laugh riot that now two reporters in the last 24 hours have come out with an article in support of our "pet theory" as Z calls it and we're all wrong but you three or four posters are right.
Truth isn't always easy to digest, especially when you're wrong.