And the 1 year they were better like you mentioned, 2003…they got lit up in the Super Bowl and needed a dominant game from their quarterback
Poll: What do you WANT to see happen with BB?
- Thread starter DJnVa
- Start date
Just to be clear, because Patrick Mahomes has never won anything without Andy Reid, he's been a failure as a QB?
That's how fucking stupid this point is.
I guess if DVOA is your only fucking metric, that makes a ton of sense to point out.
Should I now point out how Brady only managed 14 points in the Super Bowl in 2007 and lost 17-14, with the best offense in the history of the NFL to that point? How does DVOA explain that?
I think it's safe to say you're not going to get good faith arguments from someone who registered an account less than a week ago with the name "timetogo" who's posted nothing but hot takes about how Belichick is a fraud. Just use the ignore feature. There are a some people making decent arguments that the Pats should move on from BB, but this isn't one of them.
The only place I've heard of Belichick going is LA to coach the Chargers.
I haven't heard any Commanders rumblings and I don't really see how that makes sense (the Commanders are a bad football team, I would imagine Bill wants to go somewhere where he can win fast, not somewhere that requires a decent amount of building)
I haven't heard any Commanders rumblings and I don't really see how that makes sense (the Commanders are a bad football team, I would imagine Bill wants to go somewhere where he can win fast, not somewhere that requires a decent amount of building)
Whose burner account is that? You can tell us, I promise, though - and this is a future tip - ‘Timetogo’ wasn’t exactly an exercise in subtlety.
And to be clear, I ask out of curiosity, not to suggest this line of inquiry is invalid.
And to be clear, I ask out of curiosity, not to suggest this line of inquiry is invalid.
Or you know, SB 51, where "Tom" had an incredible comeback after going down 28-3 (in which our offense started the game punt, punt, fumble, punt, interception, punt) and he gets all the credit. He deserves a ton of it, but last I checked, they won the game 34-28. What happened to the #1 offense in points scored and #2 offense in yards gained that season? In case that's not clear, the offense was the Atlanta Falcons, and it was the Pats defense that shut them down for basically the entire 2nd half.
The "BB is garbage without TB" stuff is WEEI-level nonsense.
OTOH, I don't understand the "be careful what you wish for, it could be worse" rationale for not getting rid of BB. It could always be worse, but if Kraft has reached the conclusion that BB can't do it anymore (either as coach or GM or both) being afraid to move on from him because it'll be hard to find someone else is a shitty reason not to move on from him.
Personally, I'm ready for a change. This year has been brutal, they are a poorly coached football team with a shitty roster led by an awful QB. Bill put together the roster, oversees the game plans, is responsible for the coaching staff, and is the guy who decided to roll with Jones and Zappe as his only options at the most important position in the game. And they are trending in the wrong direction. Also, they are likely going to have their best draft position in decades and simply cannot fuck that up if they are going to turn this around. All of that leads me to the conclusion that it is time to move on, but I can understand giving BB the benefit of the doubt too. It's an insanely tough call IMO.
OTOH, I don't understand the "be careful what you wish for, it could be worse" rationale for not getting rid of BB. It could always be worse, but if Kraft has reached the conclusion that BB can't do it anymore (either as coach or GM or both) being afraid to move on from him because it'll be hard to find someone else is a shitty reason not to move on from him.
Personally, I'm ready for a change. This year has been brutal, they are a poorly coached football team with a shitty roster led by an awful QB. Bill put together the roster, oversees the game plans, is responsible for the coaching staff, and is the guy who decided to roll with Jones and Zappe as his only options at the most important position in the game. And they are trending in the wrong direction. Also, they are likely going to have their best draft position in decades and simply cannot fuck that up if they are going to turn this around. All of that leads me to the conclusion that it is time to move on, but I can understand giving BB the benefit of the doubt too. It's an insanely tough call IMO.
I guess the question is why these accounts are allowed to constantly troll the forum and pollute it with their WEEI-level nonsense.
Didn't even notice.
Like I said, I'm not even saying BB shouldn't go. I've been pretty clear for years now that he's a fucking disaster as an offensive GM, but the talking point of he can't win without Brady makes me nauseous.
That whole exercise is stupid and not worth any time.
IMO, Belichick is the best coach ever. However, his recent decisions as a GM seem to show someone that is behind the times when it comes to offense and developing offensive players.
I don't think he HAS to go and I don't think he 100% should stay. I understand both sides of the argument.
IMO, I would ask him to stay but bring in an outside voice to help him out as a GM. My guess is that that's a complete non-starter for him, hence the mutual parting of ways
what are you talking about? Reid was a really good coach prior to Mahomes,who Was known as a choke, who couldn’t deal with the clock at the end of games…to the coach of a dynasty. Explain to me what changed with him.
You’ve failed miserably at trying to argue against my point
why do you guys consider posting facts in relation to back their opinion on whether or not the coach should be fired as trolling? Odd
Wow I picked by far the least popular answer (BB out Mayo in). I'm surprised. I would like to know, what do people see in Mayo? I made my choice because former NFL players seem to be able to motivate current NFL players.
One of the most atmospheric films ever..:makes a great gifHe went. He won't be around to answer.
I’m not necessarily averse to Mayo. By all accounts, he’s demonstrated smarts and leadership qualities in every endeavor he’s been involved in. But I’d like to see Belichick back for at least another year, though with someone else heavily involved in the draft, ideally with final say on the offensive positions.
For those who’d like Bill either gone or kept as coach but without the final word on the draft and FA, whom do you want to see as GM or President of Football Ops?
For those who’d like Bill either gone or kept as coach but without the final word on the draft and FA, whom do you want to see as GM or President of Football Ops?
We can't know how things are truly run but from interviews of people who've worked for him I think he gets a lot of input from the people around him. In that sense he's been hearing outside voices his whole career.
There's evidence for this too because both the offense and defenses changed many times over the years. They switched to a 4-3 years ago when too many other teams were using the same scheme and it got too hard to acquire personnel that fit. They made some pretty major changes on offense in 2007 and again in 2010. They obviously made some changes with the way they evaluated DB talent in the late 2000's and had a bunch of success in the draft since.
I think they had 2 huge picks they really had to nail in the last 5 years, the N'Keal Harry pick in 2018, which might have been enough to keep Brady around a bit longer, and the Mac Jones pick. I know they haven't had a ton of success besides those either, certainly not enough to make up for them, but Bill doesn't strike me as the kind of guy who won't look at why those didn't work out and use that to try to do better the next time. First round RBs and QBs are risky picks, they bust all the time, it's not necessarily an indication that BB can't ever get a hit there.
The other thing I see a lot is the idea that BB ruined Mac's development, but if a QB's response to some bad pass pro is to habitually bail out of the pocket early and make every throw a fadeaway to avoid getting hit, that guy was likely never going to work out anyways.
I don't know the answer and I'm not sure Bill will turn it around, but I really don't see the urgency with dumping the guy, especially given that he's never been one to mortgage away future assets for short term success. I think he's going to spend most of his resources this offseason attempting to improve the offense and if it still looks awful next year he'll get canned.
I'm not a Pats fan and I have read the whole thread and can totally see both sides of the argument of whether he should stay or go. But I do have an honest question here, why does it seem like a large majority of posters cast aside anyone that mentions BB's coaching record prior NE as irrelevant? Why is it irrelevant? It seems like his coaching record without TB 12 is a perfectly fine stance to take at this point considering there is almost a decade's worth of data there. Just because the record hasn't been very good doesn't mean it should be tossed aside as WEEI-level stuff, considering it is where the team is now (without TB 12). From 2020 until now AND his time in Cleveland is also a fair baseline to look at.
Bill deserves some of the credit for TB12 .. it's not BB versus TB12. From elevating to 2nd string in 2001, starting in place of Bledsoe, all of the way to the number of times that he resigned Brady (though one too few) and number of times Brady RISIGNED WITH HIM FOR A DISCOUNT. 20 years of meetings with BB might have helped also. Anyway I get tired of bringing this shit up. BB rode a good QB he helped build for 20 years and failed twice at replacing him. I'd give him a third chance thus my vote.
A lot of people think he was building a good team in Cleveland before the owner announced the move to Baltimore and it all fell apart.
Because no one player, even as great as TB12 was, can possibly be responsible for a 20 year run like they had. I mean, he was obviously a huge part of it, the single most important part of it from an on-the-field standpoint. But it wasn’t just Brady. They won with defense, special teams, they were primarily a power running offense, then became a high scoring passing juggernaut, and then the last time they won the Super Bowl they changed their offense halfway through the season back into a running offense. They also played smarter than pretty much every other team, and I don’t think any coach ever has done a better job of adapting his own style to maximize the talent he had on his roster.
Also, as noted above he may have had something going in Cleveland before Modell submarined him.
Obviously the results since Brady left have been bad and that matters, but if he truly is done I think it is more of a reflection of the fact that he’s 71 and the game eventually passes everyone by. Not that he wasn’t a great coach during al of those years. Because Brady or no Brady he was.
I can see how the Baltimore thing impacted things, but IMO a lone 11-5 season doesn't show building something good, anymore than the playoff appearance in 2021 was. It shows the team had a good year. I just think the (nearly) complete dismissiveness of his time in Cleveland is just as unproductive as saying talking about it is WEEI-level. Just b/c one may not agree with another's take (no matter how outlandish some may think it is) doesn't necessarily make it wrong.
Because it lacks all fucking context. He took over an absolute dumpster fire in Cleveland and built them into a playoff team in his fourth year. Then the owner completely fucked everyone and decided to move the team to Cleveland. Then he took over a Pats team that was on the downswing and had them win the super bowl the following year, rolling up 9 wins in a row, with a backup quarterback that threw 3 touchdowns in the final 8 games, and spearheaded the biggest upset in Super Bowl history against the greatest show on turf. He built that defense into a dynasty. He went 11-5 with Matt fucking Cassel.
People literally hold it against him that Tom Brady stuck around here for 20 years, and give literally zero fucking thought to why Tom Brady stayed here for that long. It's myopic, stupid, a waste of breath, and Tom Brady himself has debunked this argument more times than I can count.
And all of that ignores the defense he built with the Giants, resulting in 2 more rings and his defensive game plan literally enshrined in Canton. If it weren't for Bill Belichick, there's as good a chance Tom Brady is selling cars or working as a male supermodel as there is that Brady would have won 7 super bowls. They can't be separated. It's an absurd take. If Brady had left after say, 2011, are people making the argument that their 3 Super Bowls were all because of Brady? I think not.
And again, I dont think they should necessarily keep Bill, but this nonsense that he could only win because of Tom is fucking nonsense.
True transparency when it comes to GOATS in any sport I've always thought players make the coaches more than vice versa (not saying the coaches would be bad without GOAT players, just that GOAT players would be closer to GOAT status no matter the coach than vice versa). Both BB and TB had a ton to do with the run, but I think it's becoming more apparent by the year the higher % should go to TB in my opinion. He's a great coach, but I think given the body of work with and w/out TB, I think it's fair to at least ask the ? which coach is he and people piling on someone who does is a bit unfair.
I agree with most of this, and Belichick has always said that it is a players game. A great coach with shitty players can’t do much of anything (and maybe that’s what we are witnessing now, maybe he’s still a great coach he’s just not a very good GM, at least in terms of building an offense). But even if I agreed that TB12 gets a greater percentage of the credit, it’s splitting hairs and impossible to determine so who cares.
His time in Cleveland was almost 30 years ago, I don’t think it is all that relevant to anything right now.
His time since TB12 left is what the Krafts should be using to make the decision whether to continue to roll with Bill or not. And I‘m OK with moving on based on that, the track record is bad and it is trending worse. I just don’t think it is necessary to besmirch the guy’s entire coaching legacy. He’s a great coach.
198 players were selected before Brady. The Pats kept 4 QBs that year because Bill saw something in him. Bill is the one who went to Brady when his franchise QB went down. Bill is the one who gave Brady the ball in the SB after Bledsoe played great in the AFCCG. Bill is the one responsible for the defense, Bill found Vinatieri who made those kicks in the snow, Bill unceremoniously dumped Lawyer Milloy, Bill picked the groceries for 20 years, getting Randy Moss and Welker and Edelman and Gronk. Bill is the one that coached up Malcolm Butler for one specific moment that would become one of the most iconic moments in SB history.
If folks want to credit Tom more for the 2nd half of the run, after he spent a decade under the tutelage of the greatest football mind any of us will ever see, im fine with it. But it's insane to ignore what Bill actually did and just distill it down to "yeah but Tom Brady."
Bill Belichick very clearly knew how to maximize the prospects of a team that had Tom Brady, to say he was merely along for the ride in those 20 years of success is obviously very foolish. He played a huge part in the dynasty years, hard to argue a bigger part than Brady at this point overall, but similar. To question whether he's the right man to lead a franchise that no longer has Tom Brady is perfectly valid and backed by over a decade of arguments to reasonably doubt his skills in doing so.
I get the passion and that's the way fandom should be. I think part of the issue of people talking past each other in this thread can be seen in your post. It is very true we don't know the woulda/coulda/shouldas while they were both here wrt to how much success there would've been if it was just one of them in terms of super bowls and success. But in your last sentence you say its nonsense to think he could only win bc of TB. Some others look at it and think well, he's 66-88 without TB and 234-72 with him and TB won a Super Bowl in Tampa (with a loaded roster). Sports radio take or not, its perfectly fair to look at those numbers and how much he has won without TB is worth keeping him.
I think it’s pretty lousy that the point is just mocked as WEEI drivel. It really doesn’t matter how the pie breaks out between Brady and BB and it shouldn’t be held against him that Brady stayed a long time. People also mock the coaching tree discussion as well but I think if you look at the results of everyone who has tried to implement the Patriots system (both the off field discipline stuff and the offensive and defensive concepts) in a place that didn’t have Tom Brady you get a really ugly cumulative outcome. For years that was chalked up to those coaches not being BB but now we are seeing the man himself get similar results with his own team. In the end I suspect it’s really just a story of QB play and always has been but if you’re evaluating what the immediate future looks like and you look at any and all recent examples of coaches from here trying to export this to other places (again including the post Brady Patriots) you’re not going to find much that points towards success. To me it’s not about adding up records and assigning particular coaches to a tree or anything, it’s just a question of does this approach to football still work and you’ve basically got a great Matt Cassell season on one side of a ledger and a lot of really scary data points on the other.
In terms of the why, I tend to think that aside from the offensive system maybe being past its sell by date, I wonder if BB just hasn’t been able to adjust to the practice changes. If you want to be a program that coaches guys up, drafts players for whom “football matters”, and try to instill discipline and basically out execute everyone, I wonder if that becomes impossible at some point when the number of practices is limited and the number of hitting days curtailed as well. Maybe it just isn’t possible to win with a really balanced roster anymore because you can’t really elevate a collection of good guys who work hard by practicing them into some well oiled machine that is greater than the sum of its parts. Certainly the Patriots of today are not displaying any of the tenets of what BB is supposed to bring to a football team and haven’t for some time now.
In terms of the why, I tend to think that aside from the offensive system maybe being past its sell by date, I wonder if BB just hasn’t been able to adjust to the practice changes. If you want to be a program that coaches guys up, drafts players for whom “football matters”, and try to instill discipline and basically out execute everyone, I wonder if that becomes impossible at some point when the number of practices is limited and the number of hitting days curtailed as well. Maybe it just isn’t possible to win with a really balanced roster anymore because you can’t really elevate a collection of good guys who work hard by practicing them into some well oiled machine that is greater than the sum of its parts. Certainly the Patriots of today are not displaying any of the tenets of what BB is supposed to bring to a football team and haven’t for some time now.
Ralph I agree with all of this I guess my original point was it's just as unfair to pile on some posters that want to bring up his entire head coaching tenure as evidence as it is for them to just post one liners with no real evidence. I said it in another post but just because someone doesn't agree with a take doesn't mean its wrong and shouldn't be dismissed out of hand.
This last paragraph is a fantastic point. I remember going into the Covid season thinking that the Pats would have a HUGE advantage because BB would be able to maximize everything with minimal practice time. But it was more or less the opposite. In the later Brady years he had his west coast passing camps and such that allowed them to get away with less official practice time. I think there might be a lot of validity to this point.
Franchise quarterbacks win lots of games and division titles, but when it comes to championships, injury luck is a factor and competition tends to even out. So you see guys like Rogers and Peyton with relatively few championships despite their skill and regular season success. However, combine the greatest quarterback with the all time greatest coach and you go to 9 Super Bowls. The fact that it didn’t work with Marino and Shula tells you (1) how hard it is and (2) how much better Brady and Belichick are then Marino and Shula, who were all timers.
I just think it comes down to three things:
1. I don’t know how relevant his record with the Browns is 30 years later. I’m sure he’s a much different coach than he was then.
2. I think it is beyond absurd to hand wave away the impact he had on the 20 year run they had that will never, ever be duplicated. You can argue TB meant more to the whole thing and I’m not going to put up that much of a fight, but the guy in charge of the whole operation had to be doing something right.
3. As I have said over and over, his record post TB12 matters and can be evaluated on its own without somehow getting to the point where you are saying BB isn’t good without TB12. That may in fact be true, but because it is impossible to tease apart the 20 years they spent together, I do think it is WEEI level drivel to hang your hat on that. It is impossible to prove, and really doesn’t matter.
All of that is fair, in regards to the bolded do you think there would be less anger (I know that's probably the wrong word) towards those making the bolded argument if they said "since" instead of "without"?
Yeah of course. I mean, you can’t really argue otherwise. It is the need to throw out his record and accomplishments and pin everything on Brady that to me is absurd. But the record since Brady left has not been good and I can’t blame anyone who doesn’t trust him with a Top 5 pick and constructing a roster that can contend for Super Bowls again. Hell, I might even be one of those people.
10000% yes, to that question.
Nobody on this board has been more critical of BB and his moves on the offensive side of the ball over the past 5 years than I have. You can go into the 2023 draft thread, or any offseason thread, or any thread involving the offense and you'll find me predicting a bottom 5 offense this season, and saying after the draft, "great, now they'll lose games 28-7 instead of 38-7." I've argued for years that Brady didn't leave because Bill pushed him out, or he wasn't paid enough or their relationship soured. Tom Brady left because he wants to play for Super Bowls, and he knew after that 2019 season, the 2020 Pats were not going to be talented enough to compete, and to me, that's all on Bill.
So yes, if folks want to say that Bill hasn't won since Tom Brady left because of mistakes Bill has made, you'll get no pushback from me. But to say Bill couldn't have won without Tom Brady is a bridge so far it may as well burn up in the sun..
He was.
3-13 the year before he took over.
6-10 his first year there.
7-9 the next two years.
11-5 the next year, beating New England in the playoffs.
Then he wheels came off thanks to the move situation, and they went 5-11 that next year. But clearly he had the team moving in the right direction.
That was a very long time ago, but for some crazy reason people look at his Cleveland experience and see the total W-L record (36-44, .450, with 4 losing seasons in 5 years) and think he was a failure there, when in reality it was a very real success story until the owner killed it. He rebuilt that team from nothing into a playoff squad.
This seems like the sanest take possible.
The real pushback has to come to the fiction that BB was an all-knowing football god who could made the impossible possible. He was simply a great football coach with a near-savant level knowledge of football tactics and history who helped his players succeed at a level hitherto impossible over a span of decades. It allows anyone to say Walsh was as great, or Gibbs, or Lombardi (it’s a small list), with the caveat that no one did it as long as BB did.
And being the executive of a football team means handling hundreds of moving pieces, hundreds of steps of delegation and execution. At the very least, he allowed the greatest qb of all time to be his greatest self.
But he was more than that. He coached, he strategize, he encouraged, he made tough decisions, he made mistakes (some terrible ones). He enabled and pushed and blocked the noise and prodded Brady to be himself, even when things looked bleak for TB (let’s not forget those moments).
DotB and others have already detailed his long ongoing blind spots, and his more recent failures. It may be that aging, the wear and grind of the years, the loss of so many core guys from coaching and staff and team have left him shaken and conflicted and unable to right the team. Maybe this is all over, and he is in large part to blame for these recent years and their poor and depressing play. And a change is not the worst thing to happen.
But really, the guy has been successful beyond measure. He and Tom were lucky to have each other, and it’s been magical. I love the memories. Let’s not believe it was based on fraud and malpractice overcome by a cleft-chinned superman.
One of the faults with arguing "Bill's record without Brady" is that it does include years in Cleveland (which was long ago) and a capped out New England team led by a fading Drew Bledsoe in 2020 that needed to be rebuilt. Neither seem at all useful. There is no logical reason for the Cleveland years to matter more than the Matt Cassel year, a season in which Bill bought all the groceries; and in which the team, due to the fluky nature of NFL tiebreakers, became the first and only 11-win team to miss the playoffs since the wild card was invented.
Agree that one can and should look at his record since. I view it as 2 down years after making the playoffs with a rookie QB. Others are less forgiving about those 2 years than I am; others still are less optimistic for the future. But at least that is a topic that is much more worthy of discussion than the season in Cleveland in which Bill was screwed over and undermined by Art Modell.
There are several problems with the coaching tree discussion, which is why it is rightfully dismissed as WEEI drivel:
1.) The tree can be very arbitrary. Often it includes McDaniels (OK), but then excludes Bill O'Brien's record in Texas. Or includes Brian Daboll's 2023 but excludes his 2022 in which he coached a Daniel Jones team to a playoff win. Or excludes Nick Saban for unknown reason, despite him being one of Belichick's closest friends and confidants. Where does one put Mike Vrabel? Or Ozzie Newsome?
2.) Look at the coaching trees of many famous coaches (Shula, Jimmy Johnson, Joe Walsh), and you will find similar. Some successes, many mediocre ones, and lots of ones that had horrible stints (aka, Norv Turner).
Assistants are their own persons, and are fully responsible for figuring out the right lessons to apply from their time with Belichick. Parcells coaching "tree" looked quite bad in 1995. It looks great today.
It’s also such a boring argument. It’s a shame that is occupying so much space in this forum.
I think the “going forward” discussion has a lot more going for it. I’m certainly open to moving on from Belichick, but my guess is that the outcomes are not likely to be great.
I’ll make it easy. Include anyone you want and there’s still no real evidence that anyone who has been actually involved in coaching football in Foxboro can do anything but have an occasional nice season. I don’t really see the conflict you do about arbitrary natures — again to me it is most interesting in the aggregate to try to understand if the things the Patriots value, the players they tend to favor, and the systems they implement tend to lead to above average outcomes. You can include Daboll and anyone else you want and even the most generous interpretation leaves a not very rosy picture of what the next few years might be like. I think it is beyond lazy to just dismiss things as WEEI drivel not worthy of discussion because you don’t happen to agree.
Assistants are, of course, their own persons. But I’m continuing to try to talk about the overall approach and values of an organization. There have been several attempts to try to import the “Patriot way” over the years and pretty much all of them have had the same tragic ending. I don’t think it’s particularly difficult to draw a line from Patricia in Detroit and McDaniels in his stops to the Patriots you see on the field every Sunday. Even O’Briens Texans, you’re welcome to include Sabans short stint in the NFL if you’d like.
It’s probably repetitive to my previous post but the teams that are winning in the NFL right now have a ton of high level talent that requires less coaching. I don’t think many of them are doing a ton of week to week gameplan variation. My hypothesis would be that in an NFL with less practice time and less hitting the league is becoming far more talent driven like the NBA. Yes, a ton of that is the QB, but I think the league has changed a lot and it may be that the defining skills of an NFL coach may become more like a college or NBA coach in that it might be more about attracting stars and keeping them happy. Certainly a coach like Miamis gets a lot of credit for his offense but they didn’t look all that great until they amassed enough talent that seems to like playing for him that he became a genius.
Fwiw, I think the point you raise about Gibbs and other coaching trees is a good one. I’m really not trying to do the exercise of adding up coaches records to prove a point but I’d have been in complete agreement that the other former Pats coaches just didn’t know how to be Bill if we had this discussion 5 years ago. I just think it is increasingly relevant that the BB who is coaching today has his team failing in a lot of the ways the guys who learned from him did. I don’t think you get to completely dismiss that information because it doesn’t really fit the narrative
They've had 2 down years. Two. Show me which teams haven't had 2 down years?
The coaching is not the problem. The roster (which is also on Bill) is 99% of the problem.
Every team that has ever had 5 bad years has started by having 2 bad years. Yes, of course you can wait longer and know for sure but it’s a discussion and a decision for now. It is possible for you and I to disagree over how many bad years is enough but realistically this is why I’m looking at the members of the tree as a proxy expansion of the data set.
And I think it would be easier to conclude that the coaching isn’t the problem if they didn’t consistently look like such a poorly coached team. They’re supposed to be a team that outprepares everyone, has tons of flexibility, is disciplined and does all the little things right. If they were playing tough disciplined football every week but losing that would be one thing but they make an awful lot of really silly mistakes for a team with great coaching.
edit: I’ll probably bow out here as I am also not a Patriots fan but a very interested observer. I find this all fascinating from a leadership and management perspective. But I think this section of the board often reads really groupthink-y and felt compelled to jump in to try to give the idea a little more consideration
Eeeeh. I think this is an increasingly difficult point to argue. Coaching has absolutely been a problem. Not the main problem, but at best it isn't helping overcome the lack of talent.
Since the Pats are a mortal lock for Hard Knocks next year, I am rooting for BB to return so they qualify. Seeing surely Bill deal with the cameras being everywhere will certainly be quality entertainment.