I don't think I disagree with that. But it's the NFL, a couple injuries here or there change the complexion of everything. I think teams will rise and fall, and the Pats will remain in this shitty middle area for a while, unfortunately.
This is now: BB and the direction of the Patriots
- Thread starter DennyDoyle'sBoil
- Start date
- Status
They aren't worse than last year, they'll have a worse record because they won't face backup QBs in 7 games in order to rack up easy wins. I don't take much away from beating Zach Wilson as I don't take all that much away from losing to the Eagles and the Dolphins. We'll know if they're bad or average when they play the Saints/Raiders/Commanders/Colts/Steelers/Giants.
I don't know anyone that had the Pats beating the Eagles, Dolphins or Cowboys a month ago.
If the Pats don't win, or worse, look like complete shit, over the next two weeks, then we've got major, major problems. The 4-week "preseason season" is now over. It's make or break time for a lot of guys on this roster.
I mean, it's kind of academic at this point. Now that they might lose playing time to their 2 best defensive players we start talking about the potential of the team at full strength, etc. It really doesn't matter if they're bad or average if they're not trending upward or showing pieces that can be put together to create a winning team.
The fanbases of every other mediocre team in the league are having these same discussions when you simply know if your team/org has it or it doesn't. Right now, they don't.
I'm wondering how much of the mistakes would go away if the team could get into a rhythm though. Everyone is pressing. It would be a lot easier if you knew the guy next to you could pick you up, or if the QB could calm things down, but that's not happening. Everything looked great during the first half of 2021 when the team was humming and then it fizzled out and everything has been shit since.
They need someone to stabilize the offense and usually that's the QB. I don't agree that this team wouldn't look totally different with a different QB that could actually read the defense, make plays, and set the protection. The defense is injury riddled, but is a top unit, nobody is acknowledging that. They have to continually make up for the offense and get put on the field series after series
after the offense fails to do anything.
Eh---he had to deal with Urban Meyer for his rookie year. They mentioned on the broadcast yesterday that he's essentially 1 season and 4 games into his career with competent NFL coaching around him.
Yeah, I think situational awareness is one of those things that you're able to effectively cultivate when you have the basics locked down. If you know where your receivers are going to be and have diagnosed the defense the first 5 seconds you're at the line, and you can count on your line and your tights ends and running backs whether they go cover zero or rush 4, and know what you're doing in either circumstance, it's much easier to avoid false starts, get the ball snapped, avoid having your linemen in their stance for 15 seconds, etc. I feel as though the last 20 years has made me judge other teams harshly -- you think they are being stupid when really sometimes the hard drive is just full and there is only so much you can do. I do think that given the same personnel and level of preparedness, there are some coaches that put a premium on situational awareness in a way that they would always rise to the top. And Belichick is one of them. But you need the building blocks to be in place. You can't cultivate situational awareness and make it a point of advantage until your foundation is securely built. It's like trying to do calculus before you have mastered algebra.
Sobering af:
This reset did not work. No sense continuing to force it. Trade anyone you can find takers for (I know that doesn't really happen in the NFL much), play the kids like White, Mapu, Boutte, Douglas, etc. as much as you can.
In their last 11 games, they've won 3 times, all against backup QBs.
This reset did not work. No sense continuing to force it. Trade anyone you can find takers for (I know that doesn't really happen in the NFL much), play the kids like White, Mapu, Boutte, Douglas, etc. as much as you can.
Lawrence has been really good this year, their WRs are struggling. Going into London I think they had something like twice as many estimated points lost to drops as the next highest team, also a bunch of brutal fumbles by passcatchers in opponent territory. Lawrence is on the no doubt star trajectory and the few Jags fans I know are thrilled.
I don’t really buy that. Basically Lazar is saying that guys are trying too hard. We watched players like Troy Brown, Weller, Edelman, Blount, Gronk, go balls out for their entire Pats career. They were always trying to “make plays”. But they didn’t make a lot of mistakes because they were exceptional football players. Very few guys on the current Pats meet that criteria.
Exactly. The problem isn't that they are trying to make plays, it's that they lack talent, and thus can't make any plays, so when they try bad stuff usually follows. It's why they can't come back in games, it's why they are useless on offense unless they get up on teams with early leads, it's why they win about 30% of their games when allowing more than 10 points. The issue is talent. They lack talent at receiver, at quarterback and at the OL. Scheme can only cover up for so much. I mean, it's that simple. When they need to make a play, they can't. The alternative is just keeping up the 4 yard passes when down 21-3, but those guys are human, they want to make stuff happen, the issue isn't that they are pressing, it's that they suck offensively.
Like, we all can agree to eliminate offensive coaching as the culprit now, right? Last year, okay, I could buy the "players are desperate to make plays because the play calling and coaching are horrific and they are just putting too much on themselves" angle. Now it's done.
I've been in the agnostic-but-optimistic camp vis a vis Mac, but that ship has the anchor up and sails unfurled.
Unfortunately, doubts are creeping in about BB too. I mean, I know every team misses draft picks, but N'keal, Strange and Thornton feel like symptoms of a declining fastball.
My preferred approach going forward would be to:
- Get BB help with offensive talent evaluation and drafting. (This almost certainly won't happen.)
- Prepare for the post-Mac world right away by drafting the best available QB.
- Play the young ones now, such as Douglas and Boutte
- Inject some of Dante into Klemm and give him a few O-line draft picks to work with.
Unfortunately, doubts are creeping in about BB too. I mean, I know every team misses draft picks, but N'keal, Strange and Thornton feel like symptoms of a declining fastball.
My preferred approach going forward would be to:
- Get BB help with offensive talent evaluation and drafting. (This almost certainly won't happen.)
- Prepare for the post-Mac world right away by drafting the best available QB.
- Play the young ones now, such as Douglas and Boutte
- Inject some of Dante into Klemm and give him a few O-line draft picks to work with.
While we’re staring blankly at the tv wondering what can be done about the line, it’s worth pointing out again the insular nature of BBs coaching tree (wreath). I’m not yet ready to blame the guy who may be just turning the crank on the sausage machine but Klemm happens to be first Patriot Bill drafted as a first rounder. Is comfort just too high a priority for Bill now?
Klemm inherited a line where Bill underdrafted and didn't find any FA studs. Then that mediocre-at-best talent pool was beset with injuries. Klemm could be Dante on steroids and we wouldn't know, because no coach in history could have made chicken salad with this situation yet. We won't be able to assess Klemm's coaching until he has a coherent collection of guys, and even then that collection might be bad enough to preclude being a decent OL.
It's a problem with Bill the GM, not Bill the coach.
It depends.
I've watched a similar situation play out for the hoops program at my alma mater. Jim Boeheim's last great run ended around 2016, and the subsequent 6 seasons saw the program slip into abject mediocrity. It became very obvious that in his last few years he prioritized comfort, both with his players and his staff. His entire staff was made up of guys who played for him, and he had both of his sons play for him. On game days he could still coach the hell out of his team, so the floor was around .500. But recruiting fell apart (the GM aspect of the role), his strategies stagnated, and the team was never a title contender.
Now, I don't see the total calcification of approach in BB as I did with Boeheim. It seems like he's still trying to innovate -- it's just that it's not going so well. I'd very surprised if Bill wasn't soliciting frank input from his staff (which Boeheim ignored, by all accounts). I'm not sure if Bill works less than he used to, and that was also a big issue with Boeheim. I'd be curious to hear from insiders what his hours are like now vs. even 5 years ago.
I'm not a fan of the "game has passed him by" concept. I really don't think that's what happens, unless it's a figurehead college football coach like a Bowden or Paterno. But I do think people, naturally, prioritize different things once they've had a lot of success and get into their 70s. I know I sure as hell would! And I think that obsessive fire to win largely goes out. Or more likely, losses don't wreck them like they used to.
Imo, this "would Bill rather lose with his buddies than bring in talented strangers" like of questioning is Felgerian.
Yes, that would be a dumb way of framing it, and that's certainly not what I'm suggesting.
But the guy does have 2 sons on the staff, plus several ex-players and returned staff. And the absurd binky that was Matt Patricia is still fresh in everyone's mind.
Bill has always valued familiarity and trust, back all the way to Pepper Johnson. There's nothing wrong with that. But if that somehow creates a little less urgency within the organization as Bill heads deeper into his 70s it's not great.
That quote Meyer related has always smacked of what Bill said in 2009 about not coaching into his 70s like Marv Levy in that people read quite a lot into it. It isn’t clear how unusual the sentiment is, or how representative the comments are of how he actually feels or operates. People say shit to colleagues when they’re, well, shooting the shit.
I mean, why is Jack Jones here if Bill doesn’t want headaches? That quote was two years before he signed fucking Antonio Brown, for that matter. And what coaches with any influence or even opinions on personnel wouldn’t prefer to coach as few pains in the ass as possible? I don’t look at, like, the Niners or Eagles and see the 2014-18 Steelers in terms of challenging personalities.
I mean, why is Jack Jones here if Bill doesn’t want headaches? That quote was two years before he signed fucking Antonio Brown, for that matter. And what coaches with any influence or even opinions on personnel wouldn’t prefer to coach as few pains in the ass as possible? I don’t look at, like, the Niners or Eagles and see the 2014-18 Steelers in terms of challenging personalities.
I'd say it's time to tank, but the Judon/Gonzalez injuries basically are doing that for us. They are likely the 2 best players on the team.
WIth this QB play, this O-line, and a D missing it's 2 best players.... the Pats are looking at a top 5 pick even if they try their absolute hardest. Please just don't trade any picks for useless upgrades before the deadline.
Who should make that top 5 pick.... that's the big question.
WIth this QB play, this O-line, and a D missing it's 2 best players.... the Pats are looking at a top 5 pick even if they try their absolute hardest. Please just don't trade any picks for useless upgrades before the deadline.
Who should make that top 5 pick.... that's the big question.
Remember the dark years at cornerback between Asante Samuel and Aqib Talib where we got 1 good year from rookie McCourty and Leigh Bodden was hailed as a savior upon arrival? Where they used 2nd round picks on Terrance Wheatley, Ras-I Dowling, and Tavon Wilson? This is hardly the first time in the BB tenure that a position group or even most of a side of the ball has sucked out loud for several seasons in a row with a fair share of bust or reach draft misses. They finally say enough is enough and trade for Talib at the 2012 deadline which kind of works out and more importantly starts a basically 10 year run where they've been very good to exceptional at corner and very good on defense in general.
Obviously the two situations are universes apart - those teams had Brady, made a shitload of AFC Championships and one Super Bowl, a couple were historically great offenses which largely covered for the defense in games not against Mannings. There's infinity reasons to be incredibly more pessimistic about the 2024 and beyond Pats than someone in 2009 or 10 or 11 should have been about the team's future. This isn't a the sky's not actually falling post!! (It very much is, at least right now.)
But I think it's worth pointing out that we've done the Bill can't figure out a certain position, struggle with buying the groceries thing before and made it out successful on the other side - not just because he had the GOAT at QB to paper over his mistakes, but in part because he actually figured out allocating the right resources and putting together a good defense again. And if we're hell bent on his blind spots on offensive roster building, he even did the "oh shit, I've under-prioritized WR, I need to fix this in a single offseason" thing before itself.
The team sucks right now and it's mostly Bill's fault. It might still suck for the rest of his career here if he does get to come back, it might not. I just don't really buy the idea that he's unable or unwilling to adjust or that one of if not the greatest football mind of a generation suddenly can't keep up with where the game's going.
Obviously the two situations are universes apart - those teams had Brady, made a shitload of AFC Championships and one Super Bowl, a couple were historically great offenses which largely covered for the defense in games not against Mannings. There's infinity reasons to be incredibly more pessimistic about the 2024 and beyond Pats than someone in 2009 or 10 or 11 should have been about the team's future. This isn't a the sky's not actually falling post!! (It very much is, at least right now.)
But I think it's worth pointing out that we've done the Bill can't figure out a certain position, struggle with buying the groceries thing before and made it out successful on the other side - not just because he had the GOAT at QB to paper over his mistakes, but in part because he actually figured out allocating the right resources and putting together a good defense again. And if we're hell bent on his blind spots on offensive roster building, he even did the "oh shit, I've under-prioritized WR, I need to fix this in a single offseason" thing before itself.
The team sucks right now and it's mostly Bill's fault. It might still suck for the rest of his career here if he does get to come back, it might not. I just don't really buy the idea that he's unable or unwilling to adjust or that one of if not the greatest football mind of a generation suddenly can't keep up with where the game's going.
Last 5 years offensive picks rounds 1-3 NFL Draft:
Cole Strange
Tyquan Thornton
Mac Jones
Devin Asiasi
Dalton Keene
N;Keal Harry
Damien Harris
Yodney Cajuste
Recent offense players in FA (I'm sure leaving some out):
JuJu Smith Shuster
Mike Gesicki
Ezekiel Elliott
Riley Reiff
Calvin Anderson
Ty Mongomery
Trent Brown
Nelson Agholor
Hunter Henry
Jonnu Smith
Kendrick Bourne
I hope Bill brings in someone this offseason to help run the draft/FA. This just isn't going to work and it's been going on for too long now.
Cole Strange
Tyquan Thornton
Mac Jones
Devin Asiasi
Dalton Keene
N;Keal Harry
Damien Harris
Yodney Cajuste
Recent offense players in FA (I'm sure leaving some out):
JuJu Smith Shuster
Mike Gesicki
Ezekiel Elliott
Riley Reiff
Calvin Anderson
Ty Mongomery
Trent Brown
Nelson Agholor
Hunter Henry
Jonnu Smith
Kendrick Bourne
I hope Bill brings in someone this offseason to help run the draft/FA. This just isn't going to work and it's been going on for too long now.
No, but it's not fair to leave out the later round picks either. Also, some of the FA signings listed were for role players or for filling out the roster.
But, as I mentioned in the QB-going-forward thread, BB would be well served by telling Kraft & Kraft this coming offseason how he intends to revamp and overhaul his process for evaluating and scouting offense at both the college and pro level.
Didn't BB do this a few years ago? I thought Kraft demanded some version of what you said.... didnt seem to help, at least on offense. There have been a couple nice finds in the later rounds, but nothing earth shattering.
My post was mainly in the context of the patriots likely having legitimately high picks next season. Is BB the guy we want making those selections at the top of the first 3 rounds?
Why is it not fair?
The goal is to hit on top and bottom of the draft. And the top is where the quality talent lies.
If you are going to engineer a rebuild you cannot afford to have so many misses at the top of the talent pool. And you cannot afford to be ‘average’ either.
There has been a real gap in offensive philosophy and who to target for executing that philosophy.
There is some bad luck mixed in but most of this seems like poor evaluation.
Yup. And if you extend to 4th round, it gets a little better with guys like Rham, Harris, and Mitchell (solid player pre-injury). But 1-3…yuck.
Let's talk about rebuilding for a minute. We've had this conversation before, but it's time to revisit it, I think. How long should we expect a team to rebuild into a team that can legitimately push for at least the conference championship game? Let's look at the teams that are in that mix right now: Buffalo, Miami, Baltimore, Kansas City, Philadelphia, Dallas, Detroit (!!!), San Francisco. That's the list, I think. There are other pretty decent teams in the league, but these are the best teams, the teams with legit championship game hopes.
Buffalo
They went 11-5 in 1999, losing in the WC game. They then went 17 years without making the playoffs, and in no season did they have more than 9 wins. They had 6 or fewer wins in 8 of those 17 seasons. Then in 2017 they went 9-7 and made the playoffs and everything was looking up, until the next year they promptly went 6-10 with a rookie Josh Allen at QB. But from there, they began to climb: 10-6, 13-3, 11-6, 13-3, each time making the playoffs, and making the AFCCG once. During the stretch from 2000-2018, they made the playoffs once and had 9 head coaches and 11 QBs that ended up leading the team in passing. They finally got good once they hit on a stud QB and let him develop, and then they became a juggernaut when they added a stud WR to go with the stud QB. But that was a 19 year rebuild, cycling through a bunch of coaches and QB until they finally found the right one.
Miami
The Dolphins made the playoffs five years in a row from 1997-2001. Then they went six straight years missing the playoffs, including a forgettable 1-15 season in 2007. Amazingly, the next year they went 11-5 and made the playoffs with Chad Pennington as the QB. But that was a small oasis in the middle of a desert, as they proceeded to go 7 more years with zero playoff appearances before once again making the playoffs in 2016 after a 10-6 season under Adam Gase and Ryan Tannehill. Following that season, they went from 6-10, 7-9, and 5-11 before a nice 10-6 season in 2020 that still fell short of the playoffs. Tua was a rookie that year but Fitzpatrick led the team in passing. Then with Tua at the helm, they've put together back to back 9-8 seasons, improving each time though. 2022's 9-8 was different than 2021's 9-8, as they had added Tyreek Hill and Jaylen Waddle, but Tua suffered concussions. When he was in, they were dynamic, and continue to be so today. So I'd put their renaissance's start at 2022. But from 2002-2021, over those 20 years, they made the playoffs twice, and had losing records in 11 of those 20 years.
Baltimore
This is an interesting case, because they've basically been a good team for a long time. They've been consistently good from 2000-2023, but scattered throughout they've had a bunch of down seasons: 2002 (7-9), 2005 (6-10), 2015 (5-11), 2021 (8-9). And from 2015-2017 they went 5-11, 8-8, and 9-7, missing the playoffs in all three seasons. We might look at that from OUR point of view and say, that's not too bad for "down" years, but, uh, that's basically exactly what the Pats have been going through these last few seasons (7-9, 10-7, 8-9 from 2020-2022). They've been pretty solid, mainly because (a) they've had excellent GM work by Ozzie Newsome and Eric DeCosta, and having two fine head coaches in Brian Billick and John Harbaugh. We don't like the Ravens, but they're well run, and they've had CONSISTENT quality leadership in their organization. That matters. But they have rebounded after those three down years by drafting Lamar Jackson in 2018. He's obviously been tremendous, but the thing is, they completely changed their offense to fit Jackson's strengths. They didn't just expect Jackson to do what Flacco (his predecessor) did. They revamped how they ran the ball, they committed to a completely new style of play. And it's worked for them. Now, to be fair, we've been talking about teams with legit AFCCG or NFCCG hopes/expectations, and under Lamar they haven't even gotten there once. If this was New England, we might be getting super duper frustrated with a team that sure makes the playoffs, but can't even get to the conference championship game, never mind win a Super Bowl. Still, I think we'd all trade New England's 2020-2023 for Baltimore's 2020-2023, yes?
Kansas City
In 2005-2006, KC went 10-6 and 9-7, making the playoffs in 2006, under new HC Herm Edwards. Things were looking up. Then came a disastrous 2007 and 2008, when they went 4-12 and 2-14. Edwards was let go and Todd Haley was brought in, and they promptly went 4-12 again in 2009, but made the playoffs in 2010 with a 10-6 record. Things were looking up, right? Not so fast. 2011 (7-9) led to an even worse 2012 (2-14) under Haley and Romeo Crennel. They once again changed coaches and brought in Andy Reid, who's proven to be a godsend for them. Alex Smith was brought in and together, Reid and Smith were successful from 2013-2017, going 11-5, 9-7, 11-5, 12-4, and 10-6, consistently making the playoffs. HOWEVER, they hadn't made an AFCCG, and even though they had been successful, they realized they needed improvement at the QB position, so in 2017 they traded up to draft Patrick Mahomes. He sat his first year (2017) but then they dealt Smith (who had done very well for them) and started Mahomes, and he promptly became an elite QB. Obviously they've been the best team in the league since 2018, with no signs of letting up. Reid and Mahomes have been incredible together. But their rebuilding process came after years in the wilderness, after finding an elite HC, and after making a BOLD move to acquire a stud QB *while they already had a solid NFL QB who had had legit success*. That was a massive risk they took and it paid off.
Philadelphia
They were very successful under Andy Reid for a long time, a stretch which included four straight trips to the NFCCG (2001-2004) before the Patriots broke them. That led to a 6-10 campaign in 2005 but they'd bounce back and be successful through 2010. Then from 2011-2016 it was a struggle for Philly, with three losing seasons and only one playoff appearance. Then came their crazy 2017 season (yuck) that led to a SB title, but that was immediately followed by four so-so seasons where they went to the playoffs 3 times (yay!) but never won more than 9 games in a season over that stretch, and in 2020 they went 4-11-1. But by then they had drafted Hurts, and he has led them to two straight playoff appearances, including a SB appearance last year following a 14-3 season. Key for them was Hurts' emergence and the arrival of Smith and Brown at WR. Plus having the best OL in the NFL. In any case, following Reid, it's been a ton of ups and downs and mediocrity but now they seem like they'll be good for a while.
Dallas
They went 11-5 in 2009, but then spent four years being totally meh: 6-10, 8-8, 8-8, and 8-8 from 2010-2013. A great 12-4 season in 2014 was followed immediately by a 4-12 season in 2015. But then came Dak Prescott, who led them to a 13-3 year in 2016. The last two years they've won 12 games each, but (a) that followed two seasons where they went 8-8 and 6-10, and (b) they've yet to make an NFCCG since 1995 (!). So again, while we'd love to have had Dallas' last two seasons, the fact is, even THEY haven't even made a conference championship game since Prescott became their star QB (and long before that even). Of course it's a huge step up from where NE is now, but would we be "satisfied" with being a playoff team year-in and year-out (with some bad seasons mixed in) yet not even making it to an AFCCG, never mind a Super Bowl, never mind WINNING a Super Bowl? And also...they've had elite weapons and now they've got an all-world defense as well helping Prescott out.
Detroit
All I'm going to say about Detroit is that they were the worst organization in pro sports (or among them) for a very, very, very long time. They were pretty good last year (9-8 and came on strong at the end) and look to be one of the better teams in the NFC this year. But in the four years prior to last year they went 6-10, 3-12-1, 5-11, and 3-13-1. That's 18 wins over a 4-year stretch. In order for them to get good, they've had to be REALLY FRIGGING BAD first. And they have a QB in Goff that we'd all probably NOT want as the QB for the Patriots, but now he's got some nice pieces to work with, and they seem to be moving in the right direction.
San Francisco
They're a very well run organization. From 2011-2013 they were among the best teams in the league, winning 13, 11, and 12 games and making it to three straight NFCCGs, and one Super Bowl. And they're terrific now. But from 2014-2018, they won 8, 5, 2, 6, and 4 games, which comes to 25 wins over a 5 year period (5 wins per year on average). That's terrible. So in order to get to where they are now, they've had to go through a godawful five year stretch. Not a mediocre five year stretch. A terrible, awful five year stretch. But they've used that to draft well (except the Lance pick) and they've gotten a little lucky, but they've also made some bold moves that have paid off.
So of these 8 teams, which model would we prefer the Patriots adopt? It seems like KC is ideal - being pretty solid for a long time and then adding a HOF level QB to an already good team which now makes them elite. But in order to get there, you have to get good first. Buffalo and Miami were in a wasteland, as was Detroit. Dallas has had some success but have never gotten even to the NFCCG. SF is terrific but they had a horrific five year stretch in order to get there. Is that what we want? Philly has done well but even they had a pretty rough five year stretch. Baltimore has been solid but has also had tons of bumps along the way.
The point is, rebuilding is VERY hard. Getting to a level where you can be a legit contender for your conference championship is REALLY hard, and it's difficult to get there without having some massive down years first. Those down years lead to high draft picks which normally (but not always) turn out better than mid-range or low draft picks like the Patriots always seem to have. So if we want to be great, it would seem like having some awful seasons is a key, but do we really want THAT? I don't know. I'm sure BB doesn't want that. He's trying to rebuild while also remaining highly competitive at the same time. Not easy to do, as these other teams have found out.
Buffalo
They went 11-5 in 1999, losing in the WC game. They then went 17 years without making the playoffs, and in no season did they have more than 9 wins. They had 6 or fewer wins in 8 of those 17 seasons. Then in 2017 they went 9-7 and made the playoffs and everything was looking up, until the next year they promptly went 6-10 with a rookie Josh Allen at QB. But from there, they began to climb: 10-6, 13-3, 11-6, 13-3, each time making the playoffs, and making the AFCCG once. During the stretch from 2000-2018, they made the playoffs once and had 9 head coaches and 11 QBs that ended up leading the team in passing. They finally got good once they hit on a stud QB and let him develop, and then they became a juggernaut when they added a stud WR to go with the stud QB. But that was a 19 year rebuild, cycling through a bunch of coaches and QB until they finally found the right one.
Miami
The Dolphins made the playoffs five years in a row from 1997-2001. Then they went six straight years missing the playoffs, including a forgettable 1-15 season in 2007. Amazingly, the next year they went 11-5 and made the playoffs with Chad Pennington as the QB. But that was a small oasis in the middle of a desert, as they proceeded to go 7 more years with zero playoff appearances before once again making the playoffs in 2016 after a 10-6 season under Adam Gase and Ryan Tannehill. Following that season, they went from 6-10, 7-9, and 5-11 before a nice 10-6 season in 2020 that still fell short of the playoffs. Tua was a rookie that year but Fitzpatrick led the team in passing. Then with Tua at the helm, they've put together back to back 9-8 seasons, improving each time though. 2022's 9-8 was different than 2021's 9-8, as they had added Tyreek Hill and Jaylen Waddle, but Tua suffered concussions. When he was in, they were dynamic, and continue to be so today. So I'd put their renaissance's start at 2022. But from 2002-2021, over those 20 years, they made the playoffs twice, and had losing records in 11 of those 20 years.
Baltimore
This is an interesting case, because they've basically been a good team for a long time. They've been consistently good from 2000-2023, but scattered throughout they've had a bunch of down seasons: 2002 (7-9), 2005 (6-10), 2015 (5-11), 2021 (8-9). And from 2015-2017 they went 5-11, 8-8, and 9-7, missing the playoffs in all three seasons. We might look at that from OUR point of view and say, that's not too bad for "down" years, but, uh, that's basically exactly what the Pats have been going through these last few seasons (7-9, 10-7, 8-9 from 2020-2022). They've been pretty solid, mainly because (a) they've had excellent GM work by Ozzie Newsome and Eric DeCosta, and having two fine head coaches in Brian Billick and John Harbaugh. We don't like the Ravens, but they're well run, and they've had CONSISTENT quality leadership in their organization. That matters. But they have rebounded after those three down years by drafting Lamar Jackson in 2018. He's obviously been tremendous, but the thing is, they completely changed their offense to fit Jackson's strengths. They didn't just expect Jackson to do what Flacco (his predecessor) did. They revamped how they ran the ball, they committed to a completely new style of play. And it's worked for them. Now, to be fair, we've been talking about teams with legit AFCCG or NFCCG hopes/expectations, and under Lamar they haven't even gotten there once. If this was New England, we might be getting super duper frustrated with a team that sure makes the playoffs, but can't even get to the conference championship game, never mind win a Super Bowl. Still, I think we'd all trade New England's 2020-2023 for Baltimore's 2020-2023, yes?
Kansas City
In 2005-2006, KC went 10-6 and 9-7, making the playoffs in 2006, under new HC Herm Edwards. Things were looking up. Then came a disastrous 2007 and 2008, when they went 4-12 and 2-14. Edwards was let go and Todd Haley was brought in, and they promptly went 4-12 again in 2009, but made the playoffs in 2010 with a 10-6 record. Things were looking up, right? Not so fast. 2011 (7-9) led to an even worse 2012 (2-14) under Haley and Romeo Crennel. They once again changed coaches and brought in Andy Reid, who's proven to be a godsend for them. Alex Smith was brought in and together, Reid and Smith were successful from 2013-2017, going 11-5, 9-7, 11-5, 12-4, and 10-6, consistently making the playoffs. HOWEVER, they hadn't made an AFCCG, and even though they had been successful, they realized they needed improvement at the QB position, so in 2017 they traded up to draft Patrick Mahomes. He sat his first year (2017) but then they dealt Smith (who had done very well for them) and started Mahomes, and he promptly became an elite QB. Obviously they've been the best team in the league since 2018, with no signs of letting up. Reid and Mahomes have been incredible together. But their rebuilding process came after years in the wilderness, after finding an elite HC, and after making a BOLD move to acquire a stud QB *while they already had a solid NFL QB who had had legit success*. That was a massive risk they took and it paid off.
Philadelphia
They were very successful under Andy Reid for a long time, a stretch which included four straight trips to the NFCCG (2001-2004) before the Patriots broke them. That led to a 6-10 campaign in 2005 but they'd bounce back and be successful through 2010. Then from 2011-2016 it was a struggle for Philly, with three losing seasons and only one playoff appearance. Then came their crazy 2017 season (yuck) that led to a SB title, but that was immediately followed by four so-so seasons where they went to the playoffs 3 times (yay!) but never won more than 9 games in a season over that stretch, and in 2020 they went 4-11-1. But by then they had drafted Hurts, and he has led them to two straight playoff appearances, including a SB appearance last year following a 14-3 season. Key for them was Hurts' emergence and the arrival of Smith and Brown at WR. Plus having the best OL in the NFL. In any case, following Reid, it's been a ton of ups and downs and mediocrity but now they seem like they'll be good for a while.
Dallas
They went 11-5 in 2009, but then spent four years being totally meh: 6-10, 8-8, 8-8, and 8-8 from 2010-2013. A great 12-4 season in 2014 was followed immediately by a 4-12 season in 2015. But then came Dak Prescott, who led them to a 13-3 year in 2016. The last two years they've won 12 games each, but (a) that followed two seasons where they went 8-8 and 6-10, and (b) they've yet to make an NFCCG since 1995 (!). So again, while we'd love to have had Dallas' last two seasons, the fact is, even THEY haven't even made a conference championship game since Prescott became their star QB (and long before that even). Of course it's a huge step up from where NE is now, but would we be "satisfied" with being a playoff team year-in and year-out (with some bad seasons mixed in) yet not even making it to an AFCCG, never mind a Super Bowl, never mind WINNING a Super Bowl? And also...they've had elite weapons and now they've got an all-world defense as well helping Prescott out.
Detroit
All I'm going to say about Detroit is that they were the worst organization in pro sports (or among them) for a very, very, very long time. They were pretty good last year (9-8 and came on strong at the end) and look to be one of the better teams in the NFC this year. But in the four years prior to last year they went 6-10, 3-12-1, 5-11, and 3-13-1. That's 18 wins over a 4-year stretch. In order for them to get good, they've had to be REALLY FRIGGING BAD first. And they have a QB in Goff that we'd all probably NOT want as the QB for the Patriots, but now he's got some nice pieces to work with, and they seem to be moving in the right direction.
San Francisco
They're a very well run organization. From 2011-2013 they were among the best teams in the league, winning 13, 11, and 12 games and making it to three straight NFCCGs, and one Super Bowl. And they're terrific now. But from 2014-2018, they won 8, 5, 2, 6, and 4 games, which comes to 25 wins over a 5 year period (5 wins per year on average). That's terrible. So in order to get to where they are now, they've had to go through a godawful five year stretch. Not a mediocre five year stretch. A terrible, awful five year stretch. But they've used that to draft well (except the Lance pick) and they've gotten a little lucky, but they've also made some bold moves that have paid off.
So of these 8 teams, which model would we prefer the Patriots adopt? It seems like KC is ideal - being pretty solid for a long time and then adding a HOF level QB to an already good team which now makes them elite. But in order to get there, you have to get good first. Buffalo and Miami were in a wasteland, as was Detroit. Dallas has had some success but have never gotten even to the NFCCG. SF is terrific but they had a horrific five year stretch in order to get there. Is that what we want? Philly has done well but even they had a pretty rough five year stretch. Baltimore has been solid but has also had tons of bumps along the way.
The point is, rebuilding is VERY hard. Getting to a level where you can be a legit contender for your conference championship is REALLY hard, and it's difficult to get there without having some massive down years first. Those down years lead to high draft picks which normally (but not always) turn out better than mid-range or low draft picks like the Patriots always seem to have. So if we want to be great, it would seem like having some awful seasons is a key, but do we really want THAT? I don't know. I'm sure BB doesn't want that. He's trying to rebuild while also remaining highly competitive at the same time. Not easy to do, as these other teams have found out.
Part of the problem with rebuilds is that there is no guarantee that those picks turn out well. Sometimes you lose and get Peyton Manning, Luck, Trevor Lawrence or even Philip Rivers. Sometimes you lose and get Jamarcus Russell or Mitch Trubisky. It's impossible to say "well be bad for a few year and then in that 4th/5th year, the savior QB will be available". Moreover, throwing a rookie QB or skill player into a bad situation can hurt more than it can help, so even QBs who could be developed (Alex Smith, for instance) get brutalized.
Brining it back to the Pats - although I am losing faith in him, Mac is someone to me who can be an asset on a good team and sucks on a bad team. If he was on the Eagles or 49ers, he's great; put him on the Texans and he is not dragging that team to a better record. Sadly, the Pats are a crap team now. The offense has been beaten to death (and not just on this board - hey-o) but even the defense has pass rush problems outside of Judon and the occasional Uche game and the secondary is down to their like 5th best guy starting. It's a bad team and Mac isn't going to fix it. I would prefer that the Pats start investing in the lines (O particular, but D as well), build out from there. Layer in a running game. Try drafting a play maker LB. Take a couple seasons to scout and draft a QB you believe in and let them sit for a year to get up to speed and learn the offense. Identify holes and address them in free agency and hopefully those holes are "2nd TE" and not "entire WR corps". Unfortunately, I don't think BB has any interest in this. First off, he's on limited time to beat Shula and think he would rather slog through some 6-11, 7-10 seasons to get that record rather than a couple legit bad seasons building towards the future. Second, I doubt he thinks anything is broken; these are all things he thinks he can coach up even though clearly he can't. To go along with that, it certainly seems like he wants to coach with people he likes being around (former players, his children) rather than bring in some new blood with crazy ideas like "don't sit Douglas after one fumble - teach him where he went wrong and let him figure it out"
Brining it back to the Pats - although I am losing faith in him, Mac is someone to me who can be an asset on a good team and sucks on a bad team. If he was on the Eagles or 49ers, he's great; put him on the Texans and he is not dragging that team to a better record. Sadly, the Pats are a crap team now. The offense has been beaten to death (and not just on this board - hey-o) but even the defense has pass rush problems outside of Judon and the occasional Uche game and the secondary is down to their like 5th best guy starting. It's a bad team and Mac isn't going to fix it. I would prefer that the Pats start investing in the lines (O particular, but D as well), build out from there. Layer in a running game. Try drafting a play maker LB. Take a couple seasons to scout and draft a QB you believe in and let them sit for a year to get up to speed and learn the offense. Identify holes and address them in free agency and hopefully those holes are "2nd TE" and not "entire WR corps". Unfortunately, I don't think BB has any interest in this. First off, he's on limited time to beat Shula and think he would rather slog through some 6-11, 7-10 seasons to get that record rather than a couple legit bad seasons building towards the future. Second, I doubt he thinks anything is broken; these are all things he thinks he can coach up even though clearly he can't. To go along with that, it certainly seems like he wants to coach with people he likes being around (former players, his children) rather than bring in some new blood with crazy ideas like "don't sit Douglas after one fumble - teach him where he went wrong and let him figure it out"
They've changed their front office multiple times in the last few years. Last year was Matt Groh's first year as Director of Player Personnel. Before that he was head of college scouting and he did bring changes to the war room and draft process. I'm ok with last year's draft. Hopefully they can get more improvement in FA though.
I think an issue is that BB is 72. The regime is under .500 over its past 62 games. If a retooling is possible, that could work on BB's time scale. But a full rebuild? I think if that is on the table the Pats need to hire a new guy to run the football operation.
Yes, I feel the "do you want Bill to be the guy to pick the next quarterback?" is the question that looms larger and larger over this franchise.
Last edited:
I get the overall line of thinking even if I disagree with it (for team building). But why would you be against BB picking the next QB?
What QB would you have rather had, that he has not gone out and gotten? The only one I can really think of is Lamar and they did still have Brady then.
And if they drafted Lamar in 2018 who knows if we’d have a 6th Lombardi. Not sure I’d want to go back and risk that even if it would mean a better 2020-2023.
Here are the QBs that BB has picked with the Pats:
2000 - 6th - Tom Brady - that turned out pretty good, yeah?
2002 - 4th - Rohan Davey - zip
2003 - 6th - Kliff Kingsbury - hey he's had a decent career as a coach!
2005 - 7th - Matt Cassel - nice long NFL career, even made a pro bowl, nice nice selection
2008 - 3rd - Kevin O'Connell - another guy who didn't make it as a player but has as a coach
2010 - 7th - Zac Robinson - zip
2011 - 3rd - Ryan Mallett - 6 year NFL career as a backup - not a bad pick for a 3rd rounder
2014 - 2nd - Jimmy Garoppolo - he's had a very nice career, three really good seasons, great pick
2016 - 3rd - Jacoby Brissett - 7 year NFL career mostly as a backup, but a couple years as a starter, excellent pick for a 3rd rounder
2018 - 7th - Danny Etling - zip
2019 - 4th - Jarrett Stidham - 3 year backup...nothing to sneeze at, but also nothing to write home about
2021 - 1st - Mac Jones - 3 year NFL starter, made a pro bowl, led the Pats to a playoff game as a rookie; has limitations but not a bad pick
2022 - 4th - Bailey Zappe - 2 year backup...nothing great but serviceable (?) backup
So out of these 13 picks...
- 1 was the greatest pick in NFL (probably sports) history in Tom Brady
- 3 have been QBs to play in a pro bowl (Brady, Cassel, Jones, and whatever we think about the pro bowl, it's at least a recognition that a guy is pretty good)
- 5 have been starters for at least 2 years in the league (Brady, Cassel, Garoppolo, Brissett, Jones)
- only 3 have been total zippos (Davey, Robinson, Etling)
- 1 first round pick, 1 second round pick, 3 third round picks, 4 fourth round picks, 2 sixth round picks, and 3 seventh round picks - so we're not talking about using tons of high draft capital and yet it's produced good outcomes
So while Mac hasn't turned out to be the next Tom Brady, that's a really good record of drafting QBs.
2000 - 6th - Tom Brady - that turned out pretty good, yeah?
2002 - 4th - Rohan Davey - zip
2003 - 6th - Kliff Kingsbury - hey he's had a decent career as a coach!
2005 - 7th - Matt Cassel - nice long NFL career, even made a pro bowl, nice nice selection
2008 - 3rd - Kevin O'Connell - another guy who didn't make it as a player but has as a coach
2010 - 7th - Zac Robinson - zip
2011 - 3rd - Ryan Mallett - 6 year NFL career as a backup - not a bad pick for a 3rd rounder
2014 - 2nd - Jimmy Garoppolo - he's had a very nice career, three really good seasons, great pick
2016 - 3rd - Jacoby Brissett - 7 year NFL career mostly as a backup, but a couple years as a starter, excellent pick for a 3rd rounder
2018 - 7th - Danny Etling - zip
2019 - 4th - Jarrett Stidham - 3 year backup...nothing to sneeze at, but also nothing to write home about
2021 - 1st - Mac Jones - 3 year NFL starter, made a pro bowl, led the Pats to a playoff game as a rookie; has limitations but not a bad pick
2022 - 4th - Bailey Zappe - 2 year backup...nothing great but serviceable (?) backup
So out of these 13 picks...
- 1 was the greatest pick in NFL (probably sports) history in Tom Brady
- 3 have been QBs to play in a pro bowl (Brady, Cassel, Jones, and whatever we think about the pro bowl, it's at least a recognition that a guy is pretty good)
- 5 have been starters for at least 2 years in the league (Brady, Cassel, Garoppolo, Brissett, Jones)
- only 3 have been total zippos (Davey, Robinson, Etling)
- 1 first round pick, 1 second round pick, 3 third round picks, 4 fourth round picks, 2 sixth round picks, and 3 seventh round picks - so we're not talking about using tons of high draft capital and yet it's produced good outcomes
So while Mac hasn't turned out to be the next Tom Brady, that's a really good record of drafting QBs.
Yes, it came for Shula, it came for Landry... I'm not sure why Bill Belichick is exempt from age sapping some of the things that made him great. I'm not even talking about mental acuity or energy. Simply just the relationships that he's lost due to age are affecting the team. Ernie Adams, Dante, etc. The brain drain in the FO and coaching staff has been bad for a while because it's not being refilled with the best of the best. Instead we get croneyism and nepotism. Is it any wonder the offense looks like it's stuck in the past?
The organization doesn't seem like it's being stewarded by someone looking out for the Patriots franchise as a whole. They've been desperately grasping at 8-9 wins every year since Brady as if striving for being average is a victory. I know I'm a spoiled Patriots fan (don't care) and the take might be Felgerian (don't give a shit) - this guy is supposed to be the greatest football mind of all time, yet the measuring stick we're using for him gets shorter and shorter. Where's the innovation? Where's the new strategy? If he is still that guy - the one who is so much better than his peers - then we should see some evidence of it when watching the games and it's just not there.
What are you looking for? Because the Defense is still one of the best in the league and is constantly innovating. The issues on offense are endlessly documented in this thread but I think that is an O-line issue (his fault, but not an innovation thing), so I guess you want new innovation on offense.
But again what innovation are you seeing in the league that the Pats are missing? McVay seems to be on the cutting edge on offense so you want the next one of him? McDaniel is from that tree and is doing cool things with very fast very expensive receivers, but they might have a shit defense that will sink them. So do you want fun offense, but potentially season season-limiting flaw on the other side of the ball?
So what do you want to replace BB with and how do you get it?
I think it's important to remember this: If we are going to seriously talk about replacing Belichick, you can't just say "he's got to go". You have to have an idea of who you'd want/expect to replace him. It's kind of like talking about all star game snubs. Sure it's easy to point out who "should" have made the team, but it gets a LOT harder when you are asked, "Ok, so given that there's only so many roster spots, if you want this guy on the team, who are you removing?"
It's easy (for some) to say get rid of BB. It's a hell of a lot harder naming his replacement and explaining how this new guy will be an upgrade over BB.
It's easy (for some) to say get rid of BB. It's a hell of a lot harder naming his replacement and explaining how this new guy will be an upgrade over BB.
I don't want a fun offense, I want a functional offense. I don't see it as just an OLine issue, it's a total organizational blindspot that's been an issue since Brady was here. If receivers could get separation quicker, the line wouldn't need to hold that long. If Mac made decisions faster, the line wouldn't need to hold that long. If the OC ever schemed receivers open instead of relying on precision accuracy and timing, the line wouldn't be as much of an issue.
Because for all that innovation on defense, it does not matter if the offense sucks. 71% of their drives are ending in a punt or a turnover. The best defense in the league is the one playing against the Patriots that week. That "shit" Miami defense held the Patriots to 17 points. I'm not sure why the excuses we make for this team don't apply to other teams. Indianapolis is crafting a better offense with a raw rookie and Gardner Minshew. Arizona is getting better results out of Josh Dobbs and what we thought was the worst roster in the league. If BB is still the best football mind in the league, how is the offense getting worse after 4 years of problems with it?
In terms of replacing him... I don't know. Who's going to replace him in 3 years? Does it matter if the upside for this team is 7 wins over those seasons with him here? I'd rather take a swing on someone new than watch this team lose 23-15 10 times each of the next three seasons and then have the baton get handed off to Steve Belichick.
A contending team, as opposed to a .500 or worse one.
I disagree, because of BB's age. If you think the Pats are set up to contend next year, then you keep BB unless you are strongly convinced there is a better option. If you think the team is mired in mediocrity and needs a full rebuild, then I don't think you can do that with a 72 year old.
He's going to get replaced no matter what at some point due to age. That's just reality.
It's funny that the guy who's probably most known for being dispassionate about players and getting rid of them before they decline is getting the benefit of the doubt as he's declining in performance. Did Belichick have a plan when he got rid of Brady? Did he tell Kraft with a straight face "We'll be better with Cam Newton, that's who we'll be replacing Brady with"?
For those clamoring for BB to be let go, why do you think the Krafts haven't shown similar sentiments? Loyalty? Blindness? My sense is that they really like winning so I imagine they are as unhappy as the fans if not moreso because they are paying for the privilege of watching the Pats suck.
If we are wondering if the game has passed BB by, you would think it might be a consideration for the owners too. Or maybe they start to buy the GOAT QB/LB takes. But that hasn't happened yet, at least that we know about.
This is the more interesting question versus what the fans want. BB has always had detractors amongst the fanbase, even when they were winning. Its easy to understand why more fans are unhappy. Why aren't the Krafts as negative as others here?
If we are wondering if the game has passed BB by, you would think it might be a consideration for the owners too. Or maybe they start to buy the GOAT QB/LB takes. But that hasn't happened yet, at least that we know about.
This is the more interesting question versus what the fans want. BB has always had detractors amongst the fanbase, even when they were winning. Its easy to understand why more fans are unhappy. Why aren't the Krafts as negative as others here?
So you don't think it's reasonable for me to say look if you're going to say BB has to go, you've also got to say who you think would be a good replacement? You are ok with just jettisoning BB (in this scenario) without having any idea who you'd replace him with?
- Status