If we draft Williams or Maye and a hotshot OC does well enough with him to get a HC job I'm 100% good with that.
This is now: BB and the direction of the Patriots
- Thread starter DennyDoyle'sBoil
- Start date
- Status
Mayo was given the blessing of being the successor or whatever under the assumption that Bill would ride out the last years of his career with success and then retire. Now that the wheels have apparently come off and there's legitimate question over Bill's future with the team, of course that should be revised. Honestly never loved it in the first place, this franchise needs a clean break from the dynasty years, they need to find a new identity, a new culture, I don't want to have Tedy Bruschi and Rodney Harrison on TV talking about how these young guys just don't get it and they're not listening to Coach Belichick or whatever, just start over from scratch and let's find a new way towards success.
But wouldn't you feel better if that guy just remained? As long as "offensive coach has success developing the QB" is a given, I'd rather have that piece under contract long term.
Yes, but I'm just saying, if he does well enough to leave, I would be okay with that. In a perfect world they find the next big thing for HC, he's in his early 40s, and wants to stay a long time.
Are there any good recent examples of QB picked high, QB has success, OC moves on, QB regressed? Other than Mac ha. Not saying you are right or wrong, genuinely curious. It may be too small a sample. Did it happen with Wentz? Josh Allen comes to mind - Daboll left, Allen remains very good. My gut says once you’re good you’re good. Like Weis leaving NE and TB12 leveling up again.
Yes, it might very well be the case that after the QB is "developed" in his 2, 3 first years he doesn't really need that guy around him to maintain a high level of performance.
Mayo likely also is in the succession plan with the idea that either Bill or one of his handpicked subordinates (Groh?) would be the GM. If you're happy with the current structure... why are you firing Bill? If you are firing Bill... why in the world are you playing next man up. On top of that, how hard is recruiting the top candidates for GM while saying... 'hey you have to come in to a franchise with all-time expectations, following a legend, oh and we're going to handcuff you to a guy who has never been a coach before, that you didn't pick, and (likely) have no relationship with) and if he's not good you're already on the hot seat"
It's a bad way to recruit, and a bad way to run things.
The only reason I may go ahead with Mayo is who are you hiring from outside the organization that wants to be the immediate successor to Belichick as the HC of the NEP? If I were the Krafts and haven't made a major football ops hire in god knows how many years, I'd take a phased approach. So while they hire the next Head of Football Ops/GM, they let Mayo ride it out as coach - maybe not titled "interim" but that is the reality of his situation. The GM gets a year or two to get their philosophy in place without the pressure of needing to bring a new coach on board. Then after year 1 or year 2, the Krafts are comfortable with the new GM and give the green light for that person to select their own coach outside the organization. Or conversely Mayo is his own man and wows the crap out of the Krafts and the new GM with his coaching job, and is extended.
Belichick’s coaching tree looks sadder than the giving tree by the end of the book. If he goes out on a low night, I think I’d rather clean house and bring in new blood.
Yeah, super grim. There’s only one person in the organization I still believe in unequivocally: Kraft.
From Parcells to Pete to Bill - we can debate the Pats years but Pete has been a high performer. If Kraft thinks that Mayo is the exception to the rule then I do too.
Breer just flat out makes shit up. Nothing sourced, " I think" and talking to Cowherd who is all too happy to fill his airtime with crap.
Watching the Jags and Saints last night, I thought ... what if the Pats just played harder and were more disciplined? In other words, sure, our talent is well below average, but goddamn are we poorly coached. We began the Raiders game with scripted plays, plays we've presumably practiced all week, and it's a flag on each of the first two plays! Good lord that's horrendous.
If the players just got after it and eliminated basic mental errors, they'd probably be competitive with all but the top 5-7 teams. This more than anything argues for Bill's firing.
Not that I want him fired -- I'm not there yet. But damn, the on-field product is stunningly unBelichickian.
If the players just got after it and eliminated basic mental errors, they'd probably be competitive with all but the top 5-7 teams. This more than anything argues for Bill's firing.
Not that I want him fired -- I'm not there yet. But damn, the on-field product is stunningly unBelichickian.
Yeah, he takes what he outlines that is clearly framed as long term succession planning and then says "could mean they fire Bill" because that's the clickbaity headline and "major coporation has discussions about what they would do when/if retirement age executive leaves" is not sexy
One thing about stuff like this...... did Bill get bad at coaching after 4 decades... or is it just a case of.... guys just are bad at this.
In terms of the Raiders thing... Lowe is bad, he knows he's bad, so he tried to get a jump on a tough matchup, not sure what the coach can do about a false start... he knew the count, he just tried to beat it, as to the second... guys get downfield on screens all the time.
Those are two penalties that I don't think are really on coaches, they're just the type of things guys do, and also two of the most inconsistently called penalties in the game, refs call it on bad teams more thna good, welcome to being a bad team.
If/when they’re 1-7 this will only get worse, every personality conflict or organizational issue (as if there are teams bereft of them) will be magnified and framed in the worst possible light (whether explicitly or by innuendo). That goes with the territory when the bottom falls out of a season, but especially in a market like this and with a team that has not had a season like this in decades..
And a team that fans have long waited to take down. NFL fans will enjoy this Patriots season quite a bit. I’m confident the Krafts will do what’s best for the team.
Penalties per game, where NE has ranked:
2003 - #16 (6.5) - won the SB
2004 - #5 (6.0) - won the SB
2005 - #13 (6.8) - lost in the divisional round
2006 - #20 (6.2) - lost in the AFCCG
2007 - #9 (4.8) - lost the SB
2008 - #1 (3.6) - missed the playoffs
2009 - #6 (5.1) - lost in the wild card round
2010 - #8 (5.2) - lost in the divisional round
2011 - #4 (5.0) - lost the SB
2012 - #9 (5.9) - lost in the AFCCG
2013 - #2 (4.2) - lost in the AFCCG
2014 - #27 (7.4) - won the SB
2015 - #5 (6.1) - lost the AFCCG
2016 - #2 (5.5) - won the SB
2017 - #2 (5.3) - lost the SB
2018 - #4 (5.8) - won the SB
2019 - #5 (5.7) - lost in the divisional round
2020 - #1 (3.9) - missed the playoffs
2021 - #10 (5.6) - lost in the WC round
2022 - #25 (6.1) - missed the playoffs
2023 - #18 (6.5) - currently 1-5 and in last place
AVG - #9.1 (5.6)
Years they won the SB: #9.0 (5.2)
Years they lost the SB: #5.0 (5.0)
Years they lost the AFCCG: #9.0 (5.6)
Years they lost elsewhere in the playoffs: #10.3 (5.8)
Years they missed the playoffs: #11.3 (5.0) - I'm counting this year as a year they miss the playoffs
Top 5 most penalized seasons:
2014 - #27 (7.4) - won the SB
2005 - #13 (6.8) - lost in the divisional round
2003 - #16 (6.5) - won the SB
2023 - #18 (6.5) - currently 1-5 and in last place
2015 - #5 (6.1) - lost the AFCCG
2003 - #16 (6.5) - won the SB
2004 - #5 (6.0) - won the SB
2005 - #13 (6.8) - lost in the divisional round
2006 - #20 (6.2) - lost in the AFCCG
2007 - #9 (4.8) - lost the SB
2008 - #1 (3.6) - missed the playoffs
2009 - #6 (5.1) - lost in the wild card round
2010 - #8 (5.2) - lost in the divisional round
2011 - #4 (5.0) - lost the SB
2012 - #9 (5.9) - lost in the AFCCG
2013 - #2 (4.2) - lost in the AFCCG
2014 - #27 (7.4) - won the SB
2015 - #5 (6.1) - lost the AFCCG
2016 - #2 (5.5) - won the SB
2017 - #2 (5.3) - lost the SB
2018 - #4 (5.8) - won the SB
2019 - #5 (5.7) - lost in the divisional round
2020 - #1 (3.9) - missed the playoffs
2021 - #10 (5.6) - lost in the WC round
2022 - #25 (6.1) - missed the playoffs
2023 - #18 (6.5) - currently 1-5 and in last place
AVG - #9.1 (5.6)
Years they won the SB: #9.0 (5.2)
Years they lost the SB: #5.0 (5.0)
Years they lost the AFCCG: #9.0 (5.6)
Years they lost elsewhere in the playoffs: #10.3 (5.8)
Years they missed the playoffs: #11.3 (5.0) - I'm counting this year as a year they miss the playoffs
Top 5 most penalized seasons:
2014 - #27 (7.4) - won the SB
2005 - #13 (6.8) - lost in the divisional round
2003 - #16 (6.5) - won the SB
2023 - #18 (6.5) - currently 1-5 and in last place
2015 - #5 (6.1) - lost the AFCCG
I remember in business school, a professor saying that all companies follow the same arc, from startup to growth to consistent success to obsolescence; the only thing that changes is the timeline. I think it's the same with Head Coaches in all sports. BB lived at the success level for 20 years -- almost unheard of, -- but like so many others, his decline is upon us. It's not that he's forgotten how, it's just that what he did isn't working the way it used to.
Interestingly, their two best penalty seasons - 2008 (#1, 3.6) and 2020 (#1, 3.9) - they missed the playoffs both season.
Yeah, possible, but I don't think (for any coach) that certain penalties usually mean much other than the team is bad. There are some penalties you can coach guys out of (Unsportsmanlike, certain behavior ones of not knowing rules, etc.) but false starts, holding, etc... those are player issues, and often a product of knowing you're worse than the opponent and trying to be aggressive to offset it.
This is exactly it. Lowe was a backup in MIN and now he's starting and facing Maxx Crosby. Sow is very green. Strange is out so everyone is moved around. It's trying to do too much plus thinking instead of playing instinctually.
Just out of curiosity, where did you get your data? I would be curious how SB opponents (i.e. winners of AFC and NFC championships) ranked in terms of penalties. The Pats won the SB ranked 27th in penalties one year and #2 the next time they won.
To this point, I wonder if it is more about type of penalty incurred vs total penalties.
Agreed. Also, IIRC Browner was extremely aggressive on that 2014 squad and got a number of penalties for being over-zealous, but that aggression also made him a tough defender to play against.
https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/penalties-per-game?date=2014-02-02 - then you can sort by year.
And I did that work for you, and even included the team with the worst record as well for comparison.
To the point @tims4wins made, no this doesn't include type of penalty, or WHEN the penalty occurred. That stuff obviously matters. You're looking at 3rd and 22 in the first quarter and you commit a false start making it 3rd and 27....not really much of a big deal. You commit DPI when the other team has 4th and 17 with two minutes left in the game while you're clinging to a 4-point lead...yeah, that's a really big deal.
So take this data for whatever it's worth.
Attachments
Awesome, thanks @BaseballJones. Also, lol to 2013 - Seahawks (32) over Broncos (28) and 2014 - Pats (27) over Seahawks (32, again). Anecdotally, I recall all of those teams having aggressive defenses so I could imagine some roughing the passer/PI/hits out of bounds/offsides calls with them.
For sure. Some of it is style of play. Carroll wanted his defense to be super aggressive and was willing to live with the penalties because they created so many big plays on defense. That wasn't a sign of poor coaching. It was a coach wanting to maximize the talents he had on his roster and he encouraged a particular way of playing.
I highly doubt Bill Belichick is coaching his offensive line to open the game with false starts and delays and offensive holding penalties.
Indeed. I'm thinking defensive penalties are more likely to be a matter of strategic risk/reward, where offensive penalties almost never are.
Right, on offense I think holding is one example, and the other is offensive PI in terms of picks close to the line of scrimmage. The Pats were definitely called for their fair share of those during the Brady years.
Edit: holding is only a partial example; from my non-professional eye, it seems like most holding calls happen when a guy gets out of position or does something obvious, Hunter Henry penalty last week not withstanding.
This kind of attention is actually not the worst thing because it means people still care. The worst is irrelevance, and boring, unwatchable, listless games. It's the latter that I think keeps owners up at night.
I had thought Bill still had term left as he’s not that stupid to be a lame duck, but this brand new extension is kind of shocking. Really throws a wrench into moving on from him. This was undoubtedly leaked by Bill to answer the Jeff Howe article from a couple weeks ago.
But if the Howe stuff was from the Kraft side this is something the would already know about, so I don't know what it changes.
I was under the impression that Kraft was expecting improvements or would be considering changes. Except after a brief search I can't find any of the quotes from the offseason that gave me that impression. But a lucrative multi-year extension would be surprising to me if true.
Not really. They could still move on from Belichick at any time, at which point it simply becomes the Kraft's money, of which they have plenty.
Sure, but it doesn't square with the message in the offseason from Kraft. (Unless I'm totally misremembering this stuff.) Maybe the stuff from Kraft just about pacifying the fanbase and he's still all in on Belichick?
Yes, that tells us nothing. For example, what if the extension says "Term is 5 years, Coach and G&M and/or, becomes senior advisor, all at Kraft's discretion. And if Kraft invokes option, then Belichik is free to pursue other options."
To ensure a transition plan, which includes a salary for X years and a cushy job as advisor/ambassador, or, if he wants, to continue coaching elsewhere without any prohibition. Hell, maybe they also agree to a buyout payment for Stevie in that event, to sweeten the deal, define ambassador duties, what hat he'll wear at Cooperstown** (I know), roles, say in future events, non-disparagement should he leave, book rights to intellectual property, use of Patriots logos, Patriots rights to use his name, image likeness after he departs, restrictions on sale of partnership interests, if he has received any as comp., lifetime healthcare and dental after retirement, etc.
In other words, "an extension" means nothing without details about outs and options.
In other words, "an extension" means nothing without details about outs and options.
Last edited:
It's called ownerspeak. Last thing Kraft needs is for Belichick to become a lame duck in the final year of his contract (assuming that would have been the case, of course - we really never know much about the inner workings). Doesn't mean Kraft cannot change his mind if the team ends up going 1-16.
Sure, and we don't know any details. But I doubt that Kraft is fond of throwing money away. So if he really did give Belichick a lucrative multi-year deal with no outs short of firing and paying up, that would leave me to believe that he is (or was) still firmly committed to him. But without details we're all guessing at what any of this means.
- Status