Submitted Dec. 5, 2016. So prior to LI and LIII wins.Someone wrote a 97 pages thesis on Belichick:
https://scholarship.claremont.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=2574&context=cmc_theses
Submitted Dec. 5, 2016. So prior to LI and LIII wins.Someone wrote a 97 pages thesis on Belichick:
https://scholarship.claremont.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=2574&context=cmc_theses
That was well worth the listen.Good Flutie interview with Rich Eisen
I have to take Flutie's comments about the game plan with a grain of salt though. Typically most players will have a Monday interview, but nothing on Tuesday, and the game plan is usually in on Wednesday. As much of a BB fanboy as I am, I find it hard to believe BB was using opponents' players' quotes to formulate game plans.That was well worth the listen.
Flutie's comments at the end about Tom Brady always acknowledging the contributions of everyone around him were interesting though not particularly surprising. And for those who have not clicked on the link, Flutie's major point on BB was that his ability to assimilate all of the information gathered for him from quotes of opposing players and coaches was extraordinary and often directly impacted the game plan.
Not that we need this, but Flutie's comments serve as one more reminder that the annual whining of Boston media members regarding Belichick's bland press conferences are total horseshit.
I don't think it takes being a huge BB fan to believe Flutie on BB's use of player and coach comments. One, I'm not sure what Flutie has to gain by saying it if it isn't true. Two, that BB and his players studiously avoid commenting on anything real suggests that Belichick knows first hand that even the most innocuous seeming information can be used. Three, I've often thought that I was hearing or reading comments that provide a vista into how the other team was preparing; that BB would make use of the same is not surprising. Four, and I hate to even indirectly invoke SpyGate, but using all available information and means of gathering it is something we've seen all along. Belichick leaves no stone unturned.I have to take Flutie's comments about the game plan with a grain of salt though. Typically most players will have a Monday interview, but nothing on Tuesday, and the game plan is usually in on Wednesday. As much of a BB fanboy as I am, I find it hard to believe BB was using opponents' players' quotes to formulate game plans.
He can get quotes from teams throughout the season though, not just the week prior to their gamesI have to take Flutie's comments about the game plan with a grain of salt though. Typically most players will have a Monday interview, but nothing on Tuesday, and the game plan is usually in on Wednesday. As much of a BB fanboy as I am, I find it hard to believe BB was using opponents' players' quotes to formulate game plans.
I don't necessarily disagree with any of this, but I do wonder exactly how much visibility Flutie had. Maybe it's all true.I don't think it takes being a huge BB fan to believe Flutie on BB's use of player and coach comments. One, I'm not sure what Flutie has to gain by saying it if it isn't true. Two, that BB and his players studiously avoid commenting on anything real suggests that Belichick knows first hand that even the most innocuous seeming information can be used. Three, I've often thought that I was hearing or reading comments that provide a vista into how the other team was preparing; that BB would make use of the same is not surprising. Four, and I hate to even indirectly invoke SpyGate, but using all available information and means of gathering it is something we've seen all along. Belichick leaves no stone unturned.
Seems like BB is the kindof guy who would not only use those comments, he’d disseminate the info widely, and he’d also use it as a continuous lesson as to why players shouldn’t talk much.I don't necessarily disagree with any of this, but I do wonder exactly how much visibility Flutie had. Maybe it's all true.
Sorry, I don't see a link...help?That was well worth the listen.
Flutie's comments at the end about Tom Brady always acknowledging the contributions of everyone around him were interesting though not particularly surprising. And for those who have not clicked on the link, Flutie's major point on BB was that his ability to assimilate all of the information gathered for him from quotes of opposing players and coaches was extraordinary and often directly impacted the game plan.
Not that we need this, but Flutie's comments serve as one more reminder that the annual whining of Boston media members regarding Belichick's bland press conferences are total horseshit.
He goes on to say that the Browns' problem isn't analytics, but that they don't have anyone capable of interpreting the information properly; they have guys like Paul DePodesta who don't have expert knowledge parsing through information that they don't really understand.Working for Bill Walsh or Bill Belichick, I was never the decision-maker. My role was to feed them the information, to make sure the information was trustworthy and then let them use their vast knowledge of the game as well as their program to make the right decisions. They were the IBM computer, capable of always making great decisions for their respected teams. I honestly believe to this day that Walsh and Belichick could never make a wrong decision, I could only give them bad information. Decisions were comfortable for both men; getting the right information at times proved more challenging. Today in the technology age, acquiring the correct data is harder than ever.
This makes sense to me and I think a great example was the Balt/Tenn game. I don't think Bill would have ever gone for on from his 45 down 7 in Q1 to an inferior opponent.Thanks for sharing, and reinforces the thesis I was putting forward: Belichick is certainly using analytic data as part of what he assesses, but he makes decisions based on a variety of factors (first and foremost, his decades of experience). I think, as Lombardi says, framing the question as whether someone is "Sashi Brown using nothing else" or "not using analytics" is an unhelpful false dichotomy.
Former Patriots running back LeGarrette Blount
We should track this down.I’ve got some good ones, but I don’t know if I want to tell them. There’s a story, but I don’t know if I want to tell it until I officially retire. We were playing a game and were up by 10 or more points. One of our guys – I won’t call out names – caught a pass, and I don’t know if he fumbled the ball out bounds or stepped out of bounds in time. But we watched the film the next day. (Belichick) was like, “Hey, I know it’s all about you. I know this is what you want to do. Everything is about you.” Then he pointed to the football with the (laser) light and was like, “This is a team sport. Think about everyone else on the team besides yourself for once. You’re being a …” I’ll cut it short there. That’s the PG-rated story. That’s the best part I can give you. Bill is my guy.
I'm thinking it's a combo of ball security and if they were leading late in the game, probably a player going out of bounds to avoid the big hit and stopping clock.I don't even get where he's going with that story. That's just Bill preaching ball security? Or there was an incident that was reviewed and he got safely out of bounds before fumbling, but just barely, but not enough for Bill?
Ya think? The guy is hanging out in the rain at Middle Tenn State looking at a red shirt senior who had 3.5 sacks last year.Maybe it's just me, but I really think Belichick loves his job.
On a serious note, it feels like this kind of puts to bed that old saw that gets thrown out there that BB will retire when Brady does. I mean, does this look like a guy REMOTELY interested in retiring?Ya think? The guy is hanging out in the rain at Middle Tenn State looking at a red shirt senior who had 3.5 sacks last year.
Also goes to show you these guys have a crapload of work they have to do. While we're focused on the top 10-20 guys at a certain position leading up to the draft, Bill is out looking at undrafted free agents to scoop up.
Agreed, he's not going anywhere. I think the challenge of winning one without Brady would absolutely be something he'd be willing to take on.On a serious note, it feels like this kind of puts to bed that old saw that gets thrown out there that BB will retire when Brady does. I mean, does this look like a guy REMOTELY interested in retiring?
Correct.Six Super Bowls. What is left for a fan to need?
I don't want to see him on any other team. Another trophy isn't worth seeing him in a Chargers hoodie. As long as he wants to coach, I don't want him on any other team.
So, there is no price.
And I don't feel that way about any other player or coach on any other team. I root for the laundry. But, this is different.
Edit: Except for Papi maybe. I don't think there is any price at which I would have been ok with Papi being a Yankee.
That is awesome. Substitute those 80’s names with your favorite offensive Pats of the last 20 years. Makes you have faith they can keep finding more.Interesting stuff here. I hadn't seen this before.
View: https://twitter.com/MoveTheSticks/status/1245062206296690688?s=19
That QB write up really is Brady down to the letter.That is awesome. Substitute those 80’s names with your favorite offensive Pats of the last 20 years. Makes you have faith they can keep finding more.
It's interesting that he thinks it's essential to have a pass-catching TE, even if the TE can't block, while a blocking TE is a secondary need. That really stood out to me.That QB write up really is Brady down to the letter.
It makes a lot of sense if you think about his roster construction over the years.It's interesting that he thinks it's essential to have a pass-catching TE, even if the TE can't block, while a blocking TE is a secondary need. That really stood out to me.
Agreed, although I like that you have Gronk as a blocking TE from 2010-2012, a period in which he averaged 70 catches, 991 yards and 14 TDs per 16 games.It makes a lot of sense if you think about his roster construction over the years.
2000-01 receiving Wiggins, blocking Rutledge
2002-04 receiving Fauria, blocking Graham/Cleeland
2004-09 receiving Watson, blocking Graham/Brady/Baker
2010-12 receiving Hernandez, blocking Gronkowski
2013-19 dual-threat GRONK
Gronk became such an amazing once-in-a-generation player that he kind of threw things out of whack for about a decade, but Belichick's preference of having a dedicated receiving TE and a blocking-focused TE is nothing new.
And why we are never going to draft Jordan Love who seems to be a popular mock for us. He's an awful decision maker.That QB write up really is Brady down to the letter.
235 in 91 is probably 250+ in 2000s +.The non-blocking TE #1 surprised me given that Watson was taken in the first as was Graham and both of them offered some blocking and receiving (balanced). I might be misremembering either of them - that's possible. The 235 pound minimum also shocked me given his preference for guys over 250.
It also doesn't vibe with what Mike Lombardi has said about the Pats and tight ends, that Bill likes bigger guys who can block well and didn't like Irv Smith Jr. or Noah Fant. That the key was having a TE who could do both because that is how you exploit mismatches.
And why we are never going to draft Jordan Love who seems to be a popular mock for us. He's an awful decision maker.
Other than Watson and the contract he ultimately handed Hernandez, he didn't invest in any of these receiving guys, though. Wiggins and Fauria were scrapheap pickups, Hernandez was a day three draft pick. And they've totally ignored the idea of a receiving TE since benching Tim Wright down the stretch in 2014 and seemed to have very little interest in the undersized spread-type TEs who don't block.It makes a lot of sense if you think about his roster construction over the years.
2000-01 receiving Wiggins, blocking Rutledge
2002-04 receiving Fauria, blocking Graham/Cleeland
2004-09 receiving Watson, blocking Graham/Brady/Baker
2010-12 receiving Hernandez, blocking Gronkowski
2013-19 dual-threat GRONK
Gronk became such an amazing once-in-a-generation player that he kind of threw things out of whack for about a decade, but Belichick's preference of having a dedicated receiving TE and a blocking-focused TE is nothing new.
That is an interesting observation. If there's one coach where Belichick would defer his preferences to what that coach wanted, it's Scarnecchia.235 in 91 is probably 250+ in 2000s +.
It was interesting that he wanted big OL that could run over people vs smaller technicians. It appears to me that over the years that Scar worked best with smaller guys, Thuney was sub 300 when drafted, Mason & Wynn just over 300, Matt Light wasn't a monster nor was Solder. Seems like he shifted his tune a bit there perhaps to account for more teams switching from 3-4 to 4-3?
The non-blocking TE #1 surprised me given that Watson was taken in the first as was Graham and both of them offered some blocking and receiving (balanced). I might be misremembering either of them - that's possible. The 235 pound minimum also shocked me given his preference for guys over 250.
It also doesn't vibe with what Mike Lombardi has said about the Pats and tight ends, that Bill likes bigger guys who can block well and didn't like Irv Smith Jr. or Noah Fant. That the key was having a TE who could do both because that is how you exploit mismatches.
And why we are never going to draft Jordan Love who seems to be a popular mock for us. He's an awful decision maker.
A lot of that had to do with Gronk's insane YAC abilities playing through contact, but frankly Herbnandez was always a better receiver and more elusive runner... until it came to running from the law.Agreed, although I like that you have Gronk as a blocking TE from 2010-2012, a period in which he averaged 70 catches, 991 yards and 14 TDs per 16 games.