Belichick Shouldn't Play "Lady or the Tiger"...

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from CubanPete. Show CubanPete's posts

    Belichick Shouldn't Play "Lady or the Tiger"...

    For the 3rd time as Patriots Head Coach/General Manager/Team Doctor, Bill Belichick opened the wrong door when it comes to drafting between college teammates who also play the same position. I know what some of you will say, "umm everyone whiffs in the draft, yada, yada..." True, but 3 times under these circumstances? Think about it. All players from a particular school will share the same pro days and will show up on the same game films. Moreover, players on the same team playing in similar roles, will go through the same set of drills. Yet 3 times Belichick picks the wrong guy.

    The Lady or the Tiger

    2009

    The Tiger: NE selects Patrick Chung (Oregon) with the 34th (2nd round) pick.

    The Lady: Buffalo selects Jarius Byrd (Oregon) with the 42nd (2nd round) pick.

    If not for Sebastian Vollmer, the 2009 draft would have been a craptastic bumblefudge of a draft. Julian Edelman in the 7th round wouldn't have save such a colossal waste of a dozen-pick draft. Imagine Clay Matthews in a Patriot uniform. Sadly, Belichick traded out of the 1st round. Belichick even had help from his former office assistant Scott Pioli who was willing to take the tagged Matt Cassel in trade for the Chiefs 2nd round pick, which made matters worse since that pick was wasted on Chung. Banking on Cassel was the primary reason Pioli lost his job, but I digress. Chung was a mediocre, underwhelming, injury prone player with no exceptional physical skills - he wasn't big, wasn't fast - but was a "leader" on the Oregon defense.

    According to PFF, Byrd was the #1 graded Safety in coverage (#2 overall) in 2012, ranked 3rd overall in 2011, 20th in 2010, and 41st overall (12th in coverage) in 2009.

    Chung?

    2009 - no ranking, played less than 25% of his D's total snaps

    2010 - 33rd

    2011 - 37th

    2012 - 38th

    2010

    The Tiger: NE selects Jermaine Cunningham (Florida) with the 53rd (2nd round) pick.

    The Lady: Cincinnati selects Carlos Dunlap (Florida) with the 54th (2nd round) pick.

    Bill Belichick likes his DE/OLBs to do everything. He doesn't like DE/OLBs who are only good at one thing. Based on this logic, he picks the guy who wound up bad at every facet of his position: rushing the QB, coverage, stopping the run. Humorous note: Cunningham was suspended 4 games for PED use! You know you're a bust when you're a former #2 pick who gets cut before your rookie contract ends.

    Meanwhile, Dunlap currently ranks 8th in PFF's 4-3 DE grade (#1 in coverage, #16 in pass rush, and #16 against the run - all positive grades. Why can't we get players like that?

    2013

    The Tiger: NE selects Logan Ryan (Rutgers) with the 83rd (3rd round) pick.

    The Tiger: NE selects Duron Harmon (Rutgers) with the 91st (3rd round) pick.

    The Lady: SF selects Marcus Cooper (Rutgers) with the 252nd (second round pick).

    This is so bad, yet I can't help but chortle. Of all the Rutgers players Belichick was obsessed with in the 2013 draft, he passes up the one true gem of that group. Cooper was one of the final cuts from the 49ers, a team overloaded with CBs. He was claimed by the Chiefs on waivers just prior to the start of the regular season. He's now earned the starting LCB job and currently ranks 8th (8th!!!) among all CBs.

    Cooper was featured in PFF's Week 6 Secret Superstars

    Ryan and Harmon haven't gotten many snaps on the regular defense. Ryan currently has a -1.8 PFF coverage grade and Harmon has a 0.3 overall grade on 36 snaps on D. Hey Bill, if you had to reach in the 3rd round on a Rutgers DB, why couldn't it have been Cooper, a 6'2" CB who is currently starting on the #1 ranked defense (#1 overall, #1 in coverage)?

    /facepalm

     

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsLifer. Show PatsLifer's posts

    Re: Belichick Shouldn't Play

    The lady or the tiger? You just opened a stench filled can of worms. Cue Rusty, in 3, 2, 1....

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat. Show TexasPat's posts

    Re: Belichick Shouldn't Play

    In response to CubanPete's comment:

    For the 3rd time as Patriots Head Coach/General Manager/Team Doctor, Bill Belichick opened the wrong door when it comes to drafting between college teammates who also play the same position. I know what some of you will say, "umm everyone whiffs in the draft, yada, yada..." True, but 3 times under these circumstances? Think about it. All players from a particular school will share the same pro days and will show up on the same game films. Moreover, players on the same team playing in similar roles, will go through the same set of drills. Yet 3 times Belichick picks the wrong guy.

    The Lady or the Tiger

    2009

    The Tiger: NE selects Patrick Chung (Oregon) with the 34th (2nd round) pick.

    The Lady: Buffalo selects Jarius Byrd (Oregon) with the 42nd (2nd round) pick.

    If not for Sebastian Vollmer, the 2009 draft would have been a craptastic bumblefudge of a draft. Julian Edelman in the 7th round wouldn't have save such a colossal waste of a dozen-pick draft. Imagine Clay Matthews in a Patriot uniform. Sadly, Belichick traded out of the 1st round. Belichick even had help from his former office assistant Scott Pioli who was willing to take the tagged Matt Cassel in trade for the Chiefs 2nd round pick, which made matters worse since that pick was wasted on Chung. Banking on Cassel was the primary reason Pioli lost his job, but I digress. Chung was a mediocre, underwhelming, injury prone player with no exceptional physical skills - he wasn't big, wasn't fast - but was a "leader" on the Oregon defense.

    According to PFF, Byrd was the #1 graded Safety in coverage (#2 overall) in 2012, ranked 3rd overall in 2011, 20th in 2010, and 41st overall (12th in coverage) in 2009.

    Chung?

    2009 - no ranking, played less than 25% of his D's total snaps

    2010 - 33rd

    2011 - 37th

    2012 - 38th

    2010

    The Tiger: NE selects Jermaine Cunningham (Florida) with the 53rd (2nd round) pick.

    The Lady: Cincinnati selects Carlos Dunlap (Florida) with the 54th (2nd round) pick.

    Bill Belichick likes his DE/OLBs to do everything. He doesn't like DE/OLBs who are only good at one thing. Based on this logic, he picks the guy who wound up bad at every facet of his position: rushing the QB, coverage, stopping the run. Humorous note: Cunningham was suspended 4 games for PED use! You know you're a bust when you're a former #2 pick who gets cut before your rookie contract ends.

    Meanwhile, Dunlap currently ranks 8th in PFF's 4-3 DE grade (#1 in coverage, #16 in pass rush, and #16 against the run - all positive grades. Why can't we get players like that?

    2013

    The Tiger: NE selects Logan Ryan (Rutgers) with the 83rd (3rd round) pick.

    The Tiger: NE selects Duron Harmon (Rutgers) with the 91st (3rd round) pick.

    The Lady: SF selects Marcus Cooper (Rutgers) with the 252nd (second round pick).

    This is so bad, yet I can't help but chortle. Of all the Rutgers players Belichick was obsessed with in the 2013 draft, he passes up the one true gem of that group. Cooper was one of the final cuts from the 49ers, a team overloaded with CBs. He was claimed by the Chiefs on waivers just prior to the start of the regular season. He's now earned the starting LCB job and currently ranks 8th (8th!!!) among all CBs.

    Cooper was featured in PFF's Week 6 Secret Superstars

    Ryan and Harmon haven't gotten many snaps on the regular defense. Ryan currently has a -1.8 PFF coverage grade and Harmon has a 0.3 overall grade on 36 snaps on D. Hey Bill, if you had to reach in the 3rd round on a Rutgers DB, why couldn't it have been Cooper, a 6'2" CB who is currently starting on the #1 ranked defense (#1 overall, #1 in coverage)?

    /facepalm

     



         You've just struck a hornets' nest of homers with a bat with this post, oh wily old sage from Havana!! LOL!!!! 

     

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from BostonTS. Show BostonTS's posts

    Re: Belichick Shouldn't Play

    "Chung was a mediocre, underwhelming, injury prone player with no exceptional physical skills - he wasn't big, wasn't fast - but was a "leader" on the Oregon defense."

    I think you've hit on a key issue here...

    Belichick prizes intelligence and leadership to run his complex schemes. The problem is if you prize one attribute you have to devalue another - too often in his case, size and athleticism. 

    One reason our "mini-me" cornerbacks have been exploited by bigger receivers on key postseason possessions is that smaller/shorter dudes in the NFL by definition have to be smarter in order to make up for their lack of height. Same thing with athleticism. 

    I think we've seen that Belichick's approach, while sometimes rigid and frustrating, does work. For example, you make fun of Edelman in the 7th round but that was actually a terrific pick and BB is exceptional at finding value where you woudln't expect and repurposing players. It's unfair to dismiss that as if it doesn't have any value and it weakens your argument by doing so. 

    In reality Belichick has very solid GM credentials but where you lose me is when someones insists his way is the only way (it clearly is not) or that he is the best GM that ever was (or in that conversation). I don't see that yet. Though his GM career is not over, so there is room for some improvements to his legacy. 

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: Belichick Shouldn't Play

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:

    This thread is ridiculous. Logan Ryan has looked quite good so far in limited duty. Confident and collected in a complex D.

    Harmon, for that matter, too.

    Cuban Pete just struggling. 2010-2013, no elite franchise had better drafts or player development in that time and this 2013's draft with early results appears to be showing well so far.

    THe desperation from you trolls as this team sits 5-1 is disturbing.  6-0 if Brady isn't horrendous vs Cincy.

    I am loving it.



    Draft Success Rounds 1-3, 2010-12 (click column header to sort)

     

     

     

    Team Picks in Rds 1-3 Primary Starters Success rate Carolina 8 7 88% Seattle 8 7 88% Dallas 7 6 86% Cleveland 12 10 83% Tampa Bay 10 8 80% Buffalo 9 7 78% Denver 12 9 75% Kansas City 12 9 75% Atlanta 7 5 71% Minnesota 7 5 71% Miami 9 6 67% Tennessee 9 6 67% Washington 6 4 67% New England 14 8 57% Chicago 7 4 57% Oakland 7 4 57% Baltimore 9 5 56% Detroit 9 5 56% St. Louis 11 6 55% Indianapolis 10 5 50% Philadelphia 10 5 50% Arizona 8 4 50% San Francisco 9 4 44% New York Jets 7 3 43% Jacksonville 7 3 43% New Orleans 8 3 38% Cincinnati 12 4 33% Houston 9 3 33% New York Giants 9 3 33% Green Bay 9 3 33% San Diego 10 3 30% Pittsburgh 9 2 22%

     

     

    Note that a success rate of 57% is the average value in this analysis.

     

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: Belichick Shouldn't Play

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:

    ^^Pissdispenser did not successfully counter.^^

    Desperate times call for desperate measures, I guess. lmao




    Oh, I would say 57% starters of 14 picks in the first 3 rounds for 2010-2012, is a pretty good counter.  It's actually called mediocre.  It actually dispels more of your lies.

    Looks like a whole lot of teams had more success., or are they making these 1st thru 3rd round picks for back-ups, for other teams, and dead money?

    In that case, AWESOME!

    You go Bill! LOL

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcherbrook. Show Fletcherbrook's posts

    Re: Belichick Shouldn't Play

    In response to PatsLifer's comment:

    The lady or the tiger? You just opened a stench filled can of worms. Cue Rusty, in 3, 2, 1....



    Haha! Good call on Napoleon. You pegged him.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: Belichick Shouldn't Play

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:

    I had no idea our team was picking in the top 10 every year like those god awful teams with sub .500 records every year, were doing.

    Do you drink moron juice every morning or all throughout the day, Pissdispenser?

    I am thinking it's all day long.

    MORON

    This is what it's embarrassing when PAts Lifer claims you keep me in check with "facts". The facts are, the Bills, Panthers, Browns and other CRAP franchises have far lower expectations and thresholds with player development and players that actually stick to help form a winning formula.

    Only an absolute moron would try to compare the two contexts.

    Atlanta drafted better than us? Really?  Are you watching what is happening to them right now? If they had and had a better cap position they wouldn't be ready to go 1-5, imbecile.

    There is no way you went to college. No way.

     




    Well my college education taught me to count and the 14 picks (the highest amount) the Pats possessed in those fist 3 rounds gave them plenty of ammo to move up.  Instead they moved back in 2/3 years to aquire more worthless busts  (6 of those 14 were not starters) and more dead money, resulting in the need for value picks. ie: quantity over quality.  Moving down has hurt. Talent evaluation has hurt. 

    BB loves to make lemon-aid and paper tigers. LOL

    Primary Starters by round, 2010-2012 Drafts   Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 4 Round 5 Round 6 Round 7 Total No. of Players 96 95 100 107 107 113 146 762 Primary Starters 75 56 36 24 16 12 11 229 In % 78% 59% 36% 22% 15% 11% 8% 30%

     

    Only 78% of the first-round picks over the last three draft classes have become primary starters so far (which means that to date, one out of five first-round picks has failed to become a starter). As is to be expected, the overall percentages decrease the further back in the draft a player is selected. Granted, because we're looking only at a three-year window, these percentages could still improve, but the overall picture won't: The top three rounds are where you can reasonably expect to get your starters; after that it's largely a matter of luck.

    http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2013/3/18/4098882/2010-2012-nfl-drafts-team-by-team-draft-success-in-first-three-rounds

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Muzwell. Show Muzwell's posts

    Re: Belichick Shouldn't Play

    So, do I take from the OP that in 2009 they made a bad pick, and in 2010 they made another bad pick, and in 2013, they didn't draft a guy who went 252nd and was cut by the team that actually drafted him?

    Is that all you got? It took like 1,000 words and all this Tiger-Lady blather to tell us they made two bad picks since 2009 and missed on another guy that every other team in the NFL also missed on?

    It amazes me the lengths some will go to prove a point and in the end, prove nothing.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from BosoxJoe5. Show BosoxJoe5's posts

    Re: Belichick Shouldn't Play

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:

    This thread is ridiculous. Logan Ryan has looked quite good so far in limited duty. Confident and collected in a complex D.

    Harmon, for that matter, too.

    Cuban Pete just struggling. 2010-2013, no elite franchise had better drafts or player development in that time and this 2013's draft with early results appears to be showing well so far.

    THe desperation from you trolls as this team sits 5-1 is disturbing.  6-0 if Brady isn't horrendous vs Cincy.

    I am loving it.



    By Brady being horrendous you mean actually had receivers?

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Low-FB-IQ. Show Low-FB-IQ's posts

    Re: Belichick Shouldn't Play

    Oh brother.

    using PFF to make an argument? You do realise they admittedly have no clue about what call is being made on either side of the ball or what anyones actual responsibilities are on any given play right? ..and I am not saying they are doing something wrong. They have no way of knowing.

    How exactly do you evalute anything accurately when you have no clue of that information? You can't.

    So if BB or Patricia make a call that involves a controlled rush with an emphasis on containment, PFF will actually mark the DL's, or linebackers involved, down because they did not get a sack or a perceived pressure.

    They also have no true and positive idea who screwed up on an interception play necessarily.

    Those are just a couple quick examples, there are so many.

    Even if they wanted to make a best guess Sam had told me shortly after starting it up they do not take any context into any of their ratings. The players they are rating do not obviously all play against the same opposing players. So do they do any weighting or scale based on who each player is opposing? Nope, not unless they changed it from the early days. I doubt it.

    They had also started with the slogan somehting similar to evaluating every play of every player in every game or somehting like that. A few things that flew in the face of that. I believe when they started the All-22's were not publically available. So they were not even seeing the entirety of every player on every play in every game. Then even if they were trying to, that means watching every single play of a game a minimum of 22 times each. If a game is 3 hrs and you watch every play 22 times to focus on each player for each play individually and are going through 15 games that is basically about 990 hours of watching. There is only 168 hours in a week. At the time Sam had a full time job so I asked him about it and he simply laughed with a ;-) 

    Bottom line I appreciate the entertainment value of PFF but that's about it.

    To further the lunacy...

    The OP wants to compare a safety drafted to play strong safety to a cornerback drafted to play CB but immediatley moved to play free safety in the 3rd game of his career after being a backup CB. Chung also, to the best of my knowledge, even though no longer a Patriot, is still a starting safety in the NFL.

    Next he wants to do the FLorida flamingo dance and admittedly I have a harder time defending the Cunningham pick as I was not a fan of it. I do however understand not taking Dunlop at that spot since he was super young, had a lot of red flags including being arrested before the draft. In fact the arrest was worse because he was arrested for drunk driving and suspended from the SEC championship game. That is selfish behavior putting yourself before your teammates. Seemed football was not so important to him at the time. If you are a Pats fan then you know how the Pats opperate and should accept the fact, whether we fans like it or not, that they simply are not going to take those kinds of guys early.

    The last one is really the funniest.  So the Patriots are the only ones who, possibly, missed on a kid that was taken 3rd to last in the whole draft. Every other team in the league had 7 rounds to send in a card with the kids name on it but didn't till the very end. Then on top of it the team that did take him did not keep him. Then, even if the Patriots were interested in putting a waiver claim on him they would have lost out to the Chiefs anyway. Why is that? Oh yeah, because the teams BB builds have been finishing higher than most, year in and year out. But wait there is more, the Cooper kid has only started one game I believe so let's wait and see how he does once teams build a book on him. Still more, Cooper is currently playing on a good overall team defense. A defense giving up the fewest ppg so far in the NFL this season. Do you think it is easier for a weaker link to fit in and appear to play well based on scheme with a strong supporting cast or a weak one? The chiefs also had depth problems at CB which is why they claimed Cooper. Cooper was the backup CB, FLowers hurt his knee which is what allowed him to start against the Raiders. Not that he just took the job away from a healthy starter. 

     

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: Belichick Shouldn't Play

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:

    In response to Muzwell's comment:

    So, do I take from the OP that in 2009 they made a bad pick, and in 2010 they made another bad pick, and in 2013, they didn't draft a guy who went 252nd and was cut by the team that actually drafted him?

    Is that all you got? It took like 1,000 words and all this Tiger-Lady blather to tell us they made two bad picks since 2009 and missed on another guy that every other team in the NFL also missed on?

    It amazes me the lengths some will go to prove a point and in the end, prove nothing.



    LOL!

    Muzwell for board moderator and president!  

    They think they have a premise that sticks or a counter.  It's quite comical. Of course, the board mods delete my posts which expose this.

    Babe will be crapping his diapers at Magnolia next year, too.




    Your deleted post that countered NOTHING, is still visible.  Just some blather about where the Pats pick but never realizing they had 14 picks to move up with in that time and that the 6 BUST picks might have been better served as  bargaining chips rather than enormous amounts of dead money that produced no players..

    Oh and then there were your trade mark insults when you can't counter rationally..

    Hey did you see where BB traded down in 2010 giving the cowboys and JJ an 88% starter rate.  That was awesome.  They could have had Sean Lee, too.  Instead he picked his buddies troubled (poor pass coverage) MLB who won't be here next year.

    Of course, they probably wouldn't have kept Lee either as they probably would have had to pay more than $50 to keep him.  All that dead money adds up, you know. Hard to pay guys when you have more dead money than TB12's cap hit every year.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from jimmytantric. Show jimmytantric's posts

    Re: Belichick Shouldn't Play

    I believe BB is one of the Best Coaches to coach--and I also believe BB to be a very bad drafter and GM--I don't care what others have said-- his drafting is very questionable?

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Belichick Shouldn't Play

    The problem with these types of arguments is you can cherrypick the one to two players who were better than the player the GM picked.  A more meaningful analysis is to look at all the players picked in the next 15 or 20 slots after the GM picked and see how they did.  Was the GM's pick above the average for those subsequent picks or below average?  That's a very time-consuming analysis.  I did it once for a small portion of Bill Belichick's second round (or was it third? I don't remember exactly) picks.  What I found in that limited sample was that Belichick was almost always picking guys who performed near the top of the guys picked in the next 15 or 20 slots, though he rarely chose the best guy. I don't think it's legitimate to compare players who were picked far below the guys Belichick picked, because those are guys that every GM felt were not worth picking so high.  Looking at the next 15 or 20 guys is a bit arbitrary, but I wanted a sample that was large enough to be meaningful and also large enough to account for the fact that not all teams have exactly the same needs and therefore some picked players would not be in consideration for every team.  I thought about looking at the next 32 picks (since theoretically that would be the next pick of every GM), but thought that 32 picks later, quality might really be declining, so picks that further down in the draft might not really be comparable.  

    This analysis made me feel pretty good about the picks Belichick makes where he's picking.  The one thing, though, that it also showed me is that a very high percentage of mid round picks turn out to be roster filler and don't really do much in the NFL.  This is true across the whole league.  It did make me wonder about the strategy of trading down so much.  Chances of getting really good players as you get down into the latter part of round 2 and in rounds 3 and 4 are not that high.  Sure, there are some great players picked in those rounds, but they are a small percentage of the total picks, most of whom end up with short and undistinguished careers.  At the same time, unless you're picking at the top of the first round all the time, the draft is very much a crap shoot.  So maybe trading down to get more rolls of the dice isn't a bad idea.  I'm sure this is what Belichick thinks.  

    Belichick's other penchant in the draft is trying to beat the odds by picking guys that slipped because of injury or character.  This seemed to work brilliantly with the Gronk and Hern picks in 2010.  But three years later, the strategy now seems questionable.  Add in guys like Ras-I Dowling and it's another thing you have to wonder about. 

    Overall, though, I think BB does a pretty good job of team building.  He may not always get the absolute best talent, but he does put together competitive teams that work well together and can withstand injuries.  If this defense continues to play well with all the injuries, it will be a tribute to Belichick's ability to put together a highly flexible team that isn't completely dependent on any one or two superstar players to play well. 

     

     

     

     

     

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from newenglanderinexile. Show newenglanderinexile's posts

    Re: Belichick Shouldn't Play

    No wonder Buffalo, Cincinnati, and San Francisco have been so much better than the Patriots in recent years.  

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from carawaydj. Show carawaydj's posts

    Re: Belichick Shouldn't Play

    So much discussion about BB the drafter, BB the GM....

    BB has certainly had a few years of whiffing on high round picks.  I tend to think he's done better lately.  However, isn't the bottom line that he puts together winning teams year after year after year?  He might whiff on a 2nd rounder but find an UDFA that performs like a 2nd rounder.  He might find someone we think is just a training camp body (Nink) who ends up being a very good player.  All BB does is put together winning teams.  That to me is an A+.  I really don't care how he does it.  I don't care if he seems to be better signing UDFA's than drafting 2nd rounders.  I don't care if he sometimes makes puzzling moves.  In a nutshell, we might not like the way he mixes some of the ingredients, and might not like some of his ingredients, but the cake that comes out of the oven is damned good each and every time.  I could care less if Buffalo picked a better player later than us.  When was the last time they were in the playoffs?  Clearly them picking a better player after us is the exception and not the norm.  If they were like this on all of their picks we'd be chasing them and they wouldn't have a losing record.  When judged against the bottom line, BB is the best....easily.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: Belichick Shouldn't Play

    In response to carawaydj's comment:

    So much discussion about BB the drafter, BB the GM....

    BB has certainly had a few years of whiffing on high round picks.  I tend to think he's done better lately.  However, isn't the bottom line that he puts together winning teams year after year after year?  He might whiff on a 2nd rounder but find an UDFA that performs like a 2nd rounder.  He might find someone we think is just a training camp body (Nink) who ends up being a very good player.  All BB does is put together winning teams.  That to me is an A+.  I really don't care how he does it.  I don't care if he seems to be better signing UDFA's than drafting 2nd rounders.  I don't care if he sometimes makes puzzling moves.  In a nutshell, we might not like the way he mixes some of the ingredients, and might not like some of his ingredients, but the cake that comes out of the oven is damned good each and every time.  I could care less if Buffalo picked a better player later than us.  When was the last time they were in the playoffs?  Clearly them picking a better player after us is the exception and not the norm.  If they were like this on all of their picks we'd be chasing them and they wouldn't have a losing record.  When judged against the bottom line, BB is the best....easily.




    Great post DJ.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Low-FB-IQ. Show Low-FB-IQ's posts

    Re: Belichick Shouldn't Play

    In response to rameakap's comment:


    ** correction meant to type 'Jake' Ingram at LS

    Anyhow, if the '09 draft was not such a clusterf^ck, here is what the defense looks like in '19/'11, years we we lost a home playoff game to the toucher Jets and a SB to the tougher Giants while fielding one of the worst ranked defenses in the NFL both years:

    Secondary: SS - Byrd  FS - Merriweather (traded not cut after '10 and Goldson signed for '11). CB's were McCourty brothers, Arrington and hopefully a FA veteran upgrade

    'Backers: Matthews - Spikes - Mayo - Nink (one of Anderson as a rush specialist in '11 and we;re assuming already Dunlap is taken over Cunningham in the '10 draft)

    D-line: Shaun Ellis - Wilfork - Melton (Love, Deaderick, Pryor in reserve). I think it would be safe to say with Melton and Dunlap there is no Haynesworth experiment



    I am assuming your last two posts are sarcasm... lol

    Can you call me up and give me the lottery numbers the Day after they are drawn and tell me how I f'd up my picks and what I should have picked to win all the money. Thanks. Wink

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Belichick Shouldn't Play

    Actually, Matthews has turned out to be a very good run defender.  If BB passed on Matthews because he thought he was a poor run defender, BB blew it.  He may have had other reasons for passing on Matthews, but I hope poor run defense wasn't one because if that was the reason Belichick did make a big mistake.

     

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from seawolfxs. Show seawolfxs's posts

    Re: Belichick Shouldn't Play

    Mathews was  a 4.64 and only 240 (compare mayo who was 4.54)

    He is the same size and much slower than Davis on our PS safety.

    Don't remember anyone saying that mathews was going to be great - just a solid playe

    He was not a 3-4 olb

    To me he is way overrated, I would want mayo, Hightower, and spikes and Collins  before him in BBs system

    Ninko wasn't even here then 

    I am interested in the comments concerning other Rutgers players. But one was cut by SF b4 going to kc. I need to see more Of our guys and them b4 I question the drafting decision of any of them

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Muzwell. Show Muzwell's posts

    Re: Belichick Shouldn't Play

    When do we get beyond Clay Matthews envy? They didn't pick him, that was years ago. 80% of the league passed on Matthews. Aaron Rodgers too, by the way.

    Dowling and Brace were busts, you win. Byrd was better than Chung, you win again. You can literally micoranalyze the drafts of every team in the NFL and come up with a dozen cases of drafter's remorse for every last one of them. So what?

    What you can't do is say they would have won one more game than they did had they selected Matthews, or Byrd or anyone else. They won more games than Green Bay or Buffalo or just about any other team with the players they did pick. At the end of the day, the ONLY thing that matters is their W-L record. By that standard, they're top shelf.

     

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Low-FB-IQ. Show Low-FB-IQ's posts

    Re: Belichick Shouldn't Play

    In response to rameakap's comment:

     


    Everyone who responds this way to that 'hindsight is 20-20' stuff is just being obnoxious. Yes the draft is a gamble where 50% of the picks overall are busts.

    However, can we question what on earth Belichick was thinking back in 2009?

    You can question anything and I don't begrudge you or anyone for doing so. It's part of a fans joy. It is just nice when people have very solid grounds to do it on. I feel you have provided nothing other than trying to find the one or two players per round in a sea of guys you don't follow or know much about and try to say see look how the Patriots messed up. Seriously? That is what you bring to the table? That's it?

    Absolutely!

    I have no idea what was going on in his head of course, but it sure looked like he got so pick happy and so trade happy that he overthought EVERYTHING.

    1. Passing over Matthews for depth when an ELITE outside linebacker was one of the team #1 needs was incredibly dumb then and all the way until today, when the team was forced to switch to a 4-3 b/c of the lack of Matthews like talents available in the league overall, and had to make-up for the '09 werror with #1 and #2 picks in '12 and '13 when solving it in '09 (with a guy who played like recently departed players McGinest and Vrabel) probably would have won them a Super Bowl.

    Stop with the Mathews insanity.

    1) He is OK, a good player.

    2) He would not be used here in the same manner as in GB and not likely to necessarily have the same production here like he does in GB because of the system and what he would be asked to do here. The Pats do not take a guy and typically move him all over the defense to try and get him a free run at the QB. The Pats are far more disciplined in style.  

    3) His overall stats are not even that great or special.

    4) Why on earth would anyone jump all over picking Mathews in the 1st round exactly? Because he was a work out warrior at the combine and had an eye popping 10yd split? What college film would anyone be in awe of exactly? Do you realise he was a walk on at USC and barely played, other than special teams, until his senior season? Then we he got his chance he was part of a unit that included Brian Cushing , Rey Mualuga, Kaluka Maiava. WHen you have other linebackers in the group considered even better, how sure would you be at how good Mathews might be on his own without the other top players drawing attention away from him?

    5) The slotting system and CBA I do not believe was new yet so you had the money issue to compound that unknown and risk of bust failure without tons of film to pour over. I am pretty sure the brain trust down at gillete felt a lot more comfotable giving money to guys after looking at guys who were three or four year starters in college. A lot more material to make the best educated guess on.

    The 'fixes' they tried in '09-'10 playing Matthews role (Tully, Burgess, Cunningham) were simply not acceptable when a rare talent like that was at your fingertips. Imagine the Pats meeting GB in the '10 Super Bowl and instead of Tully/Burgess we had Matthews and spent the extra cash on those veteran FA's elsewhere? Meanwhile GB prob has the still good but less talented Connor Barwin at OLB instead of Matthews (he was selcted right after the 2nd rd pick we picked up from them) and some depth 3rd rounders.

    So the fix they tried in 09 did not work? IN 2009 Banta-cain cost next to nothing and matched or exceeded every Mathews stat for that season. The Patriots both got the same or better production without spending either the hard currency or draft currecy to make that happen. The whole team had issues, specifically chemistry issues but it would not have been any better with Mathews. Mathews would not have helped insubordination from disgruntled verteans with attitudes.

    The craziness of your continued pie in the sky predictions of who would have picked who even after you start changing picks in the 1st round is so over the top it is ridiculous. You have absolutely no idea and it is far more probable that as soon as you change a single pick in the 1st round, the majority of all subsequent picks will also change from that point onward. So you would have zero idea of who would be availbe to whom.

    2. Clearly they chose the wrong defensive lineman to 'leverage' in contract negotiations with a high pick. How could that not see that it would be Vince here long-term and not Seymour when EVERY fan saw it headed that way? Brace.... UGH! Such a waste of THREE draft picks.

    3. If you were looking at the tape and studying Chung vs. Byrd and went with Chung than your scouting and talent eval team were not doing their jobs.

    If your scouting team was looking for a safety to play safety why would they be comparing Chung to Byrd? Byrd was a cornerback not a safety. In fact he was not doing well as a CB for Buffalo and was a backup in his rookie year which is normal. He only got an opportunity to play free safety because both of Buffalos starters went down with injuries and they needed to insert Byrd. Buffalo had a stretch of seasons in a row that they got wiped out with injuries.  While so easy to say now, x number of years later, Byrd is a good free safety, what does that have to do with Chung? They did not even play the same position originally. They were not being evaluated to play the same positions. That is exaclty like me telling you to go to the grocery store and get an orange for me because i need one for my recipe i am making and you coming back with an apple and telling me the apple looked a lil better. Oh that's nice but i needed an orange for what I was making, not an apple. But the single most important thing is that, just like Mathews, just because Byrd is doing well in Buffalo in their system has no definitive proof on what he "might" do here in the Pats system.

    It is a simple as that.

    In the highly competitive business of the NFL you cannot blow 1st round picks/trade down from an opportunity for a star or misjudge talent as badly as Brace and Chung vs. Byrd. Even 2nd round picks if they are in the top 40-45 need to be starts 60% of the time and end up as solid rotation guys 90% of the time.



    I'm too tired to even bother addressing every point. You have your opinion and are passionate about it. I can appeciate that. I simply see nothing of substance to make me believe in your premise.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

    Re: Belichick Shouldn't Play

    In response to rameakap's comment:

    In the highly competitive business of the NFL you cannot blow 1st round picks/trade down from an opportunity for a star or misjudge talent as badly as Brace and Chung vs. Byrd.



    And how have the Bills fared over the last decade compared to the Patriots?

    I guess you can blow picks, considering 100% of the teams in the NFL blow picks that's not surprising.  

    But I suppose you could do better, then again you said Shariff Floyd should have been taken with the 4th overall pick and he has 5 tackles for the entire season.  Your expertise is staggering...

     

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: Belichick Shouldn't Play

    I wonder what the Giants could have done to be better this year, or the Steelers, or the Falcons, or the Packers, or the Texans, or the Ravens, or the Jets?

    Seems like all these playoff teams are not very good this year.

    Good thing they didn't hire Belichick, they would be much worse.

    Maybe it isn't so easy to be a playoff team....every year.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat. Show TexasPat's posts

    Re: Belichick Shouldn't Play

    In response to carawaydj's comment:

    So much discussion about BB the drafter, BB the GM....

    BB has certainly had a few years of whiffing on high round picks.  I tend to think he's done better lately.  However, isn't the bottom line that he puts together winning teams year after year after year?

    RESPONSE: WRONGO!! This is the classic homer argument, which excuses BB for his lousy drafts and personnel decisions because, each year, because he "puts together winning teams". It is the job of BB "THE COACH" to take whatever group of players he has at his disposal, and get the most out of them. BB "THE COACH" is the very best in the game at doing this. But...it is the job of BB "THE GM" to provide the players and personnel that BB "THE COACH" has to work with. It is BB "THE GM" who is doing a consistently poor job of providing BB "THE COACH" with the best personnel possible to work with...forcing BB "THE COACH" to improvise with lesser talented players.  

    He might whiff on a 2nd rounder but find an UDFA that performs like a 2nd rounder.  He might find someone we think is just a training camp body (Nink) who ends up being a very good player.  All BB does is put together winning teams.  That to me is an A+.

    RESPONSE: No doubt, BB "THE COACH" gets an "A+" every season. He is the best coach in the game. BUT..."BB THE GM" has consistently failed to provide BB "THE COACH" with top quality talent...forcing BB "THE COACH to scrounge to develop less skilled role players...when BB "THE GM" continuously, not occasionally, whiffs on what has been a bevy of top 100 picks, since 2006.

    I really don't care how he does it.  I don't care if he seems to be better signing UDFA's than drafting 2nd rounders.  I don't care if he sometimes makes puzzling moves.  In a nutshell, we might not like the way he mixes some of the ingredients, and might not like some of his ingredients, but the cake that comes out of the oven is damned good each and every time.

    RESPONSE: Credit BB "THE COACH" for this...not BB "THE GM". Can you imagine how dominant the Patriots would have been since 2006 if only BB "THE GM" had drafted better, and not made those "puzzling moves"? If BB "THE COACH" had a better GM who made better personnel decisions, and provided BB "THE COACH" with more talented players, the Patriots wouln't have failed in their quest to win another championship, since the 2004 season. 

    I could care less if Buffalo picked a better player later than us.  When was the last time they were in the playoffs?  Clearly them picking a better player after us is the exception and not the norm.  If they were like this on all of their picks we'd be chasing them and they wouldn't have a losing record.  When judged against the bottom line, BB is the best....easily.

    RESPONSE: NO!! The difference between Buffalo and the Patriots over the years is that Buffalo didn't have Tom Brady, and BB "THE COACH". If Buffalo had them, they would have dominated the AFC East in the same manner as the Patriots have, over the past decade.




     
Sections
Shortcuts