This is now: BB and the direction of the Patriots

[4 6 3 DP]

Still feel like you can remove all of the emotion from the conversation and break it down to a fairly simple question, which is that 17 years ago Bill went into an offseason with poor personnel on offense that cost them a season of the prime of a 28 YO Goat and a still excellent defense (though without the illness in Indy, it might not have). That offseason, offense gets torn down to the studs, we get a rookie RB and three big WR acquisitions that set the team up for years (Welker in particular serving as the glue to transition to Gronk/Hernandez/Edelman).

This team needs that again, except without the QB to actually gel all the new pieces. A wildly successful implementation of this plan next year would be something like what Houston is doing, with Stroud and Dell and Brown leading a team that will win 7-8 games and feel like it has its young core. And of course the GM that put that team together happened to learn from the guy picking our groceries.

I'm looking at a model like Detroit, and they have an excellent offensive mind running things there, along with a massive hit on Sun God, but past that don't have skill position investments with top 10 picks (i.e. every guy on their skill position offense was obtainable either for reasonable money (Monty) or a pick- Gibbs being a high pick, but gettable).

I don't see the 1993 Patriot model happening here, with a 4 year runway for the players to get good, unless you bring in a new coach, because I don't think Bill has that kind of time.

Put a different way, he has screwed up the rebuild, but thats mostly because trying to do it without the QB and without tanking is almost impossible. May have been arrogance that he tried, but if I had his resume, I probably would have tried too.

 

[BaseballJones]

Right. Sit with BB in 2019. The Pats are looking at a soon-to-be 43-year old Tom Brady, who, despite his obvious success and greatness, had seen statistical decline over the previous couple of years.

2017: 66.3%, 4,577 yds, 7.9 y/a, 32 td, 8 int, 102.8 rating, obviously went to the SB that year and was awesome
2018: 65.8%, 4,355 yds, 7.6 y/a, 29 td, 11 int, 97.7 rating, obviously won the SB. Brady gets signed to a 1-year, $23m contract for 2019.
2019: 60.8%, 4,057 yds, 6.6 y/a, 24 td, 8 int, 88.0 rating, lost in the WC round of the playoffs, ending his season with a pick-six

Now you're there and you're thinking, this guy is going to be 43 years old. Nobody in the history of the sport has ever played great at this age. He's got to decline and "fall off the cliff" at SOME point, right? His stats had declined since 2017, and at times in 2019 looked nothing like the guy who had won the Super Bowl the year before. Let's be objective here. And Brady had made it clear he wanted at least a 2-year deal, that would have cost NE about $25m a season - so a slight increase in AAV from his 2019 deal, but on the hook for two seasons.

If you're Belichick, it's not an easy decision at all from the perspective of building the next great Pats team. But it's more than that. Various reports said that Brady was looking for a new opportunity and maybe BB would have had to pay him more than $25m a season to keep him. Brady saw that the roster wasn't as good as some others, and he understood the situation too. Signing Brady to a bigger, longer contract would have kept some money from being put into the rest of the roster. So you tell Brady, look, we'd like you back but I can't sign you to a 2-year, $50-60m deal ($25-30m AAV); instead, I can sign you to a 1-year deal like you just had or a 2-year deal at less money per year. But Brady is like, nah man, no thanks.

And BB figures, ok, time to move on.

I don't think it was crazy at that time for this to be how it played out.

 

[BaseballJones]

Some elite QBs that moved on to another team:

Peyton Manning
Aaron Rodgers
Joe Montana
Warren Moon
Brett Favre
Tom Brady
Russell Wilson (yes he used to be elite)
Drew Brees (might not count as he was let go earlier in his career but still, they let him go)
Philip Rivers (probably will be a HOFer)
Matt Ryan (former MVP)

So by almost anyone's all-time ranking, the number 1, number 2, and number 3 guys on that list (Brady, Montana, Peyton) all moved to other teams late in their careers.

 

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

Some elite QBs that moved on to another team:

Peyton Manning
Aaron Rodgers
Joe Montana
Warren Moon
Brett Favre
Tom Brady
Russell Wilson (yes he used to be elite)
Drew Brees (might not count as he was let go earlier in his career but still, they let him go)
Philip Rivers (probably will be a HOFer)
Matt Ryan (former MVP)

So by almost anyone's all-time ranking, the number 1, number 2, and number 3 guys on that list (Brady, Montana, Peyton) all moved to other teams late in their careers.

Again, the top ranking QB who did not change teams was Marino. He and Roethlesburger are pretty much the only ones.

 

[Jettisoned]

Is it established that Brady left because BB was done with him? The sense I get was that Brady wanted to move on.

 

[BaseballJones]

Again, the top ranking QB who did not change teams was Marino. He and Roethlesburger are pretty much the only ones.

Elway too. And Staubach. And Bradshaw. And Aikman.

All HOFers of course.

Also...I forgot to put Kurt Warner on the list of elite QBs (HOF, 2x MVP) to move to other teams later in their careers.

 

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

Elway too. And Staubach. And Bradshaw. And Aikman.

All HOFers of course.

Also...I forgot to put Kurt Warner on the list of elite QBs (HOF, 2x MVP) to move to other teams later in their careers.

Those guys all ranked lower than 15 in the P-F-Ref top AV list. Marino was top at 12th.

 

[BaseballJones]

Those guys all ranked lower than 15 in the P-F-Ref top AV list. Marino was top at 12th.

Yes fair point. I was just thinking of other great QBs that did - or did NOT - move on to another team.

You and I are both agreeing that it's pretty "normal" in the NFL for even all-time great QBs to go to other teams later in their careers.

 

[BigJimEd]

Marino was pre free agency and played for several coaches. There aren't many coaches and QBs that have co-existed as long as Brady and Belichick did. Roethlisberger is a good comp. He started under Cowher but him and Tomlin were together a long time.

The bolded may have been difficult. The Pats were going to be tight against the cap even without Brady's contract restructure that added the void years (along with the agreement to not use the tag). The Pats could not apply the franchise tag unless they had the free cap space to do so, and they would be tying up that space for a decent amount of time while they worked out a trade. I don't recall the exact cap situation at the time of the Brady restructure, but IIRC they did use some of the space freed up in 2019 to sign Antonio Brown and to bring in Sanu via trade.

And the signing of Brady the void year extension wasn't done by Bill unilaterally; both Krafts were definitely involved in those decisions.

EDIT: I'll add that tagging and trading TOM BRADY may have left a bit of a bad taste among players across the league. Who knows if Tampa had the draft capital or would have been willing to part with it for TB12. So I can see the optics being better by letting Brady leave and pick his future home on his own terms.

Good points. If I remember correctly the Patriots had around $6M or so in cap space when they agreed to the extension with Brady. Not sure the exact number but no immediate need for cap space but they may have utilized with those deals during the season. But that contract was a normal renegotiation and not motivated to get immediate cap relief. These renegotiations were not unusual with Brady. Just the terms of this one made it a sign of things to come. Brady got $8M in new money and the Pats pushed around 4-5M in cap space to future years.
There also reports that the Patriots did try to sign Brady to a true 2 year deal.

Krafts were certainly involved in those negotiations and all Brady negotiations after his rookie deal as they should have been. I would agree the optics of tagging and trading Brady would be bad.

 

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

BJ, yes we are. It's also crazy to think that Brady moved on at age 42 and it was still considered his prime.

 

[BaseballJones]

BJ, yes we are. It's also crazy to think that Brady moved on at age 42 and it was still considered his prime.

Well that's the thing. Clearly he was NOT in his prime. And that had to be part of BB's thinking on letting him go. Statistically he had declined since 2017. It was evident even in his play. So they let him go and suddenly...he was right back in his prime.

The lesson with Brady to me is that it is just more evidence that he is the singularly greatest player in the history of the sport. To decline from 2017-2019, move on, and then suddenly find a new gear and not only win another Super Bowl in 2020, but finish 2nd in the MVP voting in 2021, and lead the league in numerous passing categories at age 44 and 45. It's ridiculous. And let's be honest... who among us could see THAT coming?

Because here's what his last season looked like.

Overall: 60.8%, 4,057 yds, 6.6 y/a, 24 td, 8 int, 88.0 rating

But it's worse if you look at the second half of that season. Last 8 games:

56.9%, 1,806 yds, 5.9 y/a, 11 td, 4 int, 80.8 rating, and the team goes 4-4.

Then in the playoff game, he goes 20-37 (54.1%), for 209 yds, 0 td, and 1 int, 59.4 rating, finishing with a dreadful pick-six to end the game (and his time in NE).

We had every reason to believe that Tom Brady was no longer TOM BRADY, but had declined enough to be merely a pretty decent starting QB in the NFL. No shame in that at ALL. But it seemed like Father Time had finally gotten to even Tom Brady, like it does with EVERYONE else.

Seemed like a good time to move on. I still wanted him because he's my favorite player of all time and I want my favorite players playing for my team. But even as I wanted him back, I didn't think he would EVER again put up the kind of seasons he did in Tampa.

But he did.

Because he's the greatest player in NFL history - and one of the absolute greatest athletes ever to play in American team sports.

 

[Commander Shears]

The list of teams who let elite quarterbacks walk without a succession plan already in place is ... let's say short. The Colts had the #1 pick and a supposedly generational talent. The 49ers had Young. The Packers had Rodgers, then they had a guy they used a first round pick on and traded a malcontent Rodgers for a haul of picks. Anyone talking themselves into the idea that the Patriots letting Brady walk out the door is in any way normal, is out of their damn minds.

 

[BaseballJones]

The Falcons had nobody to replace Matt Ryan.
The Oilers had Billy Joe Tolliver (LOL) come in after Warren Moon.
The Seahawks had only veteran castoff Geno Smith (who obviously did great but that shocked everyone) to replace Russell Wilson.
The Chargers had nobody (Tyrod Taylor) when they let Philip Rivers go. They later drafted Justin Herbert but when Rivers was let go they didn't have anyone.

And let's be clear: Nothing about the Tom Brady situation was "normal" really. He's the greatest of all time playing well into his 40s - unprecedented stuff.

 

[rodderick]

Uh...Manning and Rodgers immediately come to mind. Favre as well.

Looking at the top names on Pro Football Ref's AV scale, the top 9 players in NFL history according to AV all played for multiple teams. Ray Lewis at 10 is the highest to spend his career entirely with one team. Marino at 12 is the highest QB to be a one team guy, and even he was strongly considering joining the Vikings or Steelers for one last year before deciding to retire instead.

Manning and Rodgers in their primes when they walked? Ok.

 

[Fishercat]

I also think the word "let" is doing a lot of heavy lifting. Tom Brady was a free agent and Tampa was offering a ton of things he would've wanted at that point - much better offensive weapons, coaching control, a chance to win a SB without Belichick, etc. Brady's bizarre aging curve put the plan of Jimmy G into flux and put the Pats in a bit of an odd spot (even if Jimmy G wasn't that guy in the end). I think in an ideal world the Pats would've loved to keep Brady but at the money he commanded, the roster status as it was, and the other contextual factors it may have been out of their control as they tried to win titles to close out the window.

In the grand scheme, the NFL usually only has like, what, 10-15 QBs at any given time that an NFL team REALLY wants leading them - a team having immediate access to that scarce a resource to make a runway clean isn't common. Even looking at the top QBs by QB Rating (terrible metric), only I think Rivers -> Herbert was reasonable, Flacco -> Jackson for sure, Smith -> Mahomes is another (though Flacco wasn't really in that 10-15 list at the time). The rest of the current ones who look like that though?

• Purdy - they ran a mix of Garoppolo and Mullens between Kaepernick, and Alex Smtih and Kaep were kind of floating in that "maybe" sphere for ages.
• Tua - Minus the fact that people weren't believers in him until the coaching/talent was there - the last real championship caliber QB was Marino in the 90s, and even Tannehill, Fiedler, Henne, and Fitz weren't answers as much as "well, best we can do"
• Prescott - They had a year of Cassel between Romo and Dak (and Dak sure didn't look like a plan nor did Romo), and then a half decade between Aikman and Romo.
• Cousins - A mishmosh of meh and aged between Culpepper from the early 2000s to Cousins in the late 2010s
• Wilson - Leading QBs between Peyton Manning's corpse and Russell Wilson - Siimian, Keenum, Flacco, Lock, Bridgewater
• Stroud - Two years of Davis Mills between Watson and Stroud (which required a top pick), and even Watson never got past the divisional round
• Allen - Maybe Fitz (five season gap between him and Allen_? Maybe Bledsoe (early 2000s) - Jim Kelly was the last no doubter and that was over 20 years prior to Allen being drafted.
• Goff - Stafford to Goff was a ramp, but it required Stafford still in a SB caliber status to do , prior to Stafford it was probably like...Scott Mitchell?)
• Jackson - Flacco was ramped to Jackson

I'd argue that if you're going from mid-level or lower to elite, it's a lot easier as it gives you the tool to get the pick necessary to get there in many cases - maybe the big mistake was not outright tanking the 2020 season by running Stidham or Hoyer out there as opposed to Cam Newton and using that to and outtank the Jags, or enough to maybe have a shot at Fields (or if they thought they could do better than the Jets have with Wilson).

The Pats being in a cycle of "choosing a guy and that guy not working out" is what a lot of teams ultimately have to deal with when trying to get their guy in that short list of championship caliber QBs. Mac Jones doesn't look like the guy and even if he is, not in the situation he's in. The next cycle probably begins next year is my guess.

 

[jezza1918]

Manning and Rodgers in their primes when they walked? Ok.

I get what you mean, but Peyton went to Denver and finished 2nd in MVP voting in year 1, and won the MVP in year 2. Rodgers won back to back MVPs in 20/21, dropped off last year...but there's a reason many considered a legit super bowl contender after they signed him. These guys, along with Brady of course, kind of defy typical "primes of their careers."

 

[ManicCompression]

Manning and Rodgers in their primes when they walked? Ok.

Also, the Colts knew that they had Andrew Luck in hand when they released Manning. Jordan Love had been on the bench for years when Rodgers was dealt. They didn't drop these guys to win 6 games with Cam Newton.

The issue with BB is not these individual decisions. Some of them make sense even in hindsight, but he also definitely made some egregious errors that others have pointed out. The issue with BB is that he came into this year thinking that they would be good. His moves in the offseason indicated as much. If he can't tell a 2 win team from an 11 win team, that's an issue. If he's going into this offseason with a plan to just paint over certain parts of the roster instead of a complete renovation on the offensive side of the ball, that's an issue.

I'm deathly scared that he's going to draft like a DT at 3 and then sign Jimmy GQ and DJ Chark or whoever as part of some quixotic attempt to make the playoffs next season.

 

[Petagine in a Bottle]

Brady left because the 2nd Dynasty roster aged out and he was 42. Tom’s window was 2-4 years and he wanted to go to a ready-made roster. Bill knew this, too, and trying to find a QB for the next generation made sense. Everyone did the right thing.

Brady’s situation was always going to be much easier - plugging into an elite roster vs. building a new one from scratch while picking in the 20s and teens.

Sure, but we are four years later and the Pats roster looks just as weak, if not more so, than it was when TB12, doesn’t seem like much if anything has been accomplished.

 

[Kenny F'ing Powers]

"The Pats should have had a better backup" is a revionist take halfway through the season.

It was pretty well established that the only way this team did anything competitive was if Mac took a leap. There seemed to be a near universal agreement that the team owed it to Mac and to itself to give him a full season to see if he was their future or not. Nobody could have predicted he'd be this bad, but even if they did have a better backup, the extra few wins does nothing for us but ruin our draft pick.

It's ok to stay the course. It's ok that things don't work out all the time. We gave our 15th overall, high pedigree QB a chance to prove himself. We should all be ok with that.

 

[rodderick]

I get what you mean, but Peyton went to Denver and finished 2nd in MVP voting in year 1, and won the MVP in year 2. Rodgers won back to back MVPs in 20/21, dropped off last year...but there's a reason many considered a legit super bowl contender after they signed him. These guys, along with Brady of course, kind of defy typical "primes of their careers."

My point is I think keeping a HoF QB during his prime years is something every team that has had one of those has done thus far, so I wouldn't give Bill extra credit for managing that feat. I won't say Brady was in his prime after 2019 either and I've stated countless times that I understand not extending him from Bill's perspective, but not letting Brady walk in, say, 2010 isn't really a feather in his cap.

 

[jezza1918]

My point is I think keeping a HoF QB during his prime years is something every team that has had one of those has done thus far, so I wouldn't give Bill extra credit for managing that feat. I won't say Brady was in his prime after 2019 either and I've stated countless times that I understand not extending him from Bill's perspective, but not letting Brady walk in, say, 2010 isn't really a feather in his cap.

Oh yeah...agreed. I think I misread the intent behind your post.

 

[shoosh77]

While I doubt he’d leave Baltimore, I wonder if a huge offer to Ozzie Newsome would work and be something Bill would agree to. Long ties, and Ozzie has been great at unearthing talent all over the draft.

 

[joe dokes]

In Mac's rookie year, it seemed as though the team was poised to turn the trend line back upward. Obviously, 2022 and 2023 suggest otherwise. So as things stand now, that's 1+ (or 2) years of abject failure. BB is old, so its possible he just cant do it anymore. I have my doubts about that, but who knows. I haven't done exhaustive research but Cowher, for example, had 3 mediocre mid-career years with PIT then rebounded. If BB wants to keep coaching, I think Kraft would be making a mistake to can him after this season.

 

[Hoya81]

And neither Millen nor Hodson nor Secules nor anyone else you want to name was a first round pick that was supposed to be the next franchise QB for the team.

Given the expectations, role, draft capital spent, and the on field results (Mac is 8-16 as a starter the last two years), I don't think it's even a close question. Mac is the worst. I anxiously await the day he is off this team.

I mean Plunkett was the no.1 overall pick, went 23-38 in 61 starts, had 25 more picks than interceptions and only had 1 season where he passed over 50%.

 

[BaseballJones]

"The Pats should have had a better backup" is a revionist take halfway through the season.

It was pretty well established that the only way this team did anything competitive was if Mac took a leap. There seemed to be a near universal agreement that the team owed it to Mac and to itself to give him a full season to see if he was their future or not. Nobody could have predicted he'd be this bad, but even if they did have a better backup, the extra few wins does nothing for us but ruin our draft pick.

It's ok to stay the course. It's ok that things don't work out all the time. We gave our 15th overall, high pedigree QB a chance to prove himself. We should all be ok with that.

Yep, agreed 100%. Mac was absolutely worth the draft pick, but they've given him three seasons and now they know he isn't the guy, so it's time to move on and try again. No shame in that at all.

 

[Jinhocho]

I wonder if a Fields for Mac swap might make sense in the offseason.

 

[Fishercat]

The Manning -> Luck thing kind of underscores the folly in a lot of this to me though in terms of ascribing blame or praise to front offices on the ability to bridge QBs. The Colts knew they could Draft Andrew Luck, who was absolutely a VERY high end QB prospect, that's a bridge. What they got from Luck was three full seasons of good QB play, a bad half season, and then another good mostly full season, a full season missed due to injury, and one ore very good season until he tried, and the Colts have been running out bridge years ever since (Brissett->Rivers->Wentz->Ryan) until they drafted a Top 5 pick this year...who got hurt.

It's literally the ideal scenario (have a franchise QB, tank for one year on an injury, get the next franchise QB) but Luck didn't work out that way and the franchise has been trying to make it work ever since.

Heck Tampa had Brady and had to know Tom would be retiring within a year or two of getting him and their plan was Kyle Trask and Baker Mayfield.

Anyway, honestly I think if the Patriots want to move forward without Belichick I get it, quite frankly I don't think you can win the championship in the NFL without premier pass catchers and strong O-Line play and that has been a massive failure the past few years despite resources spent. I think there's a very strong argument to insist that Bill gives up some control of the roster or some coaching obligations to others - and he may say no to that and bounce - so I don't want to sound like a reflexively defensive bozo here. I just don't think not having a bridge because Brady defied the age curve and their Plan B moved on is the reason to let him go. We had a bridge year, they drafted a first round QB who looked real in his first year, and in the last two years it really crumbled. A lot of teams deal with that.

 

[tims4wins]

The Manning -> Luck thing kind of underscores the folly in a lot of this to me though in terms of ascribing blame or praise to front offices on the ability to bridge QBs. The Colts knew they could Draft Andrew Luck, who was absolutely a VERY high end QB prospect, that's a bridge. What they got from Luck was three full seasons of good QB play, a bad half season, and then another good mostly full season, a full season missed due to injury, and one ore very good season until he tried, and the Colts have been running out bridge years ever since (Brissett->Rivers->Wentz->Ryan) until they drafted a Top 5 pick this year...who got hurt.

It's literally the ideal scenario (have a franchise QB, tank for one year on an injury, get the next franchise QB) but Luck didn't work out that way and the franchise has been trying to make it work ever since.

Heck Tampa had Brady and had to know Tom would be retiring within a year or two of getting him and their plan was Kyle Trask and Baker Mayfield.

Anyway, honestly I think if the Patriots want to move forward without Belichick I get it, quite frankly I don't think you can win the championship in the NFL without premier pass catchers and strong O-Line play and that has been a massive failure the past few years despite resources spent. I think there's a very strong argument to insist that Bill gives up some control of the roster or some coaching obligations to others - and he may say no to that and bounce - so I don't want to sound like a reflexively defensive bozo here. I just don't think not having a bridge because Brady defied the age curve and their Plan B moved on is the reason to let him go. We had a bridge year, they drafted a first round QB who looked real in his first year, and in the last two years it really crumbled. A lot of teams deal with that.

This is all well said, and it comes down to the problem of trying to separate out Mac from the rest of the offense. While Mac is the biggest culprit, it’s hard to tell how good or bad a lot of the surrounding parts are. Did Bill build a putrid offense? Or would he have a league average one with better QB? I think your answer to those questions says a lot about whether you are ready to move on.

 

[Frisbetarian]

This will be a controversial take, but I think an argument could be made that BB impeded Brady’s early career by limiting his offensive options. I mean, the guy is almost certainly the greatest QB to ever play the game, and BB treated him like a system QB for the first 3 years he was starting with a passing attack made up of mostly short safe throws.

 

[Van Everyman]

The issue with BB is that he came into this year thinking that they would be good.

What? I don’t think anyone thought they were going to seriously challenge the Dolphins or Bills for the division—with the Jets adding Rodgers—with Mac and our pupu platter of #3 receivers. At best he was hoping to maybe sneak in to the playoffs if things went horrendously wrong for multiple teams in the division. It did for the Jets. It hasn’t for annyone else.

What I think has surprised most people was that almost nobody thought they would be this bad. I saw a tweet from Doug Kyed last week that said while the Pats were below average last year, it was almost hard to believe the wheels came off so badly given that they had basically the same roster and had stabilized their coaching staff. At worst you would have expected them to get a little worse not fall apart.

Regardless, in no scenario did Bill go into this season thinking this team was definitely playoff bound. He may be past his prime but he’s not a moron.

 

[Cellar-Door]

In Mac's rookie year, it seemed as though the team was poised to turn the trend line back upward. Obviously, 2022 and 2023 suggest otherwise. So as things stand now, that's 1+ (or 2) years of abject failure. BB is old, so its possible he just cant do it anymore. I have my doubts about that, but who knows. I haven't done exhaustive research but Cowher, for example, had 3 mediocre mid-career years with PIT then rebounded. If BB wants to keep coaching, I think Kraft would be making a mistake to can him after this season.

One thing I will say. I think people are a bit off on the criticism of the 2021 FA class in retrospect knowing what we do about Mac.

Henry has been solid. Jonnu didn't fit, but he's now playing very well in ATL, so not really a talent miss.
Agholor is what he's always been, and they missed the element he brought last year, maybe an overpay, but he did what they wanted him for (and he probably more than anyone suffered from Mac's long ball issues).
Bourne was a hit except year 2 where he has said off-field stuff became a problem for him.
Judon was a home run.

Looking back, the much maligned 2021 spending spree was.... not bad?

 

[tims4wins]

This will be a controversial take, but I think an argument could be made that BB impeded Brady’s early career by limiting his offensive options. I mean, the guy is almost certainly the greatest QB to ever play the game, and BB treated him like a system QB for the first 3 years he was starting with a passing attack made up of mostly short safe throws.

Disagree, they came out guns blazing in 2002.

 

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

Disagree, they came out guns blazing in 2002.

Yes, Brady led the league in TDs in his second year. The offensive landscape was different, because he led with 28.

BB only had the leash on Brady in his very first season as a starter.

EDIT: Brady was 6th in the league in passing yards in 2002. THIRD in passing attempts. He was lower in AY/A, but they let him throw a ton. Fris is right in that the throws weren't generally long ones downfield, but to let him throw that much shows that the handcuffs were off in his second year.

 

[Frisbetarian]

Disagree, they came out guns blazing in 2002.

FWIW, Brady’s average yards per attempt his first 3 seasons starting with the Patriots was 6.4. For the rest of his Patriots career he was over 7.9.

 

[Reggie's Racquet]

Interesting article by Barnwell this morning. https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/38884214/fire-bill-belichick-bench-mac-jones-next-2023-patriots-lost-season

 

[tims4wins]

I would also argue their approach during tve first dynasty allowed Brady to learn how to operate in terms of playing total complementary football. Unsure if we ever have 2007 and beyond if those first few years didn’t go lik they did. I sure as hell wouldn’t want to go back in time and find out!!

 

[ponch73]

Maybe we need to stop drafting QB's with the 15th overall pick ...

 

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

FWIW, Brady’s average yards per attempt his first 3 seasons starting with the Patriots was 6.4. For the rest of his Patriots career he was over 7.9.

I just don't see an argument that somehow BB held the Pats back by not having Brady bomb it downfield early on. They won the SB in 2 out of his first 3 seasons and 3 out of his first four, going 14-2 and 14-2 in consecutive years. In 2002 the defense was the problem, and Brady suffered an elbow injury towards the end of the year as well.

 

[Groovenstein]

Regardless, in no scenario did Bill go into this season thinking this team was definitely playoff bound. He may be past his prime but he’s not a moron.

I get that people are frustrated. And I get that some of BB’s decisions may seem odd or may in fact have been suboptimal. Reasonable discussions may be had on such points.

But two thoughts that are just plain idiotic are (1) that BB doesn’t understand where his team is lacking, and (2) that BB has no plan. You want to speculate on what the plan might be, cool. You want to argue that a particular risk was or wasn’t justified based on the information at the time, or that the plan as a whole was flawed, or whatever, right on. But probably best not to surmise that the man is throwing darts.

 

[Strike4]

Interesting article by Barnwell this morning. https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/38884214/fire-bill-belichick-bench-mac-jones-next-2023-patriots-lost-season

This is a great summation of this entire thread and his conclusions are pretty sound and fleshed out.

 

[joe dokes]

What? I don’t think anyone thought they were going to seriously challenge the Dolphins or Bills for the division—with the Jets adding Rodgers—with Mac and our pupu platter of #3 receivers. At best he was hoping to maybe sneak in to the playoffs if things went horrendously wrong for multiple teams in the division. It did for the Jets. It hasn’t for annyone else.

Buffalo is only 5-4 and Miami 6-3. Even some sort of mediocrity from the Patriots would have kept them within spitting distance of those 2.

 

[Garshaparra]

Interesting article by Barnwell this morning. https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/38884214/fire-bill-belichick-bench-mac-jones-next-2023-patriots-lost-season

Woof, it's everything we've discussed in part and in whole for years now, but pretty stark when you look at the results. 2 bona fide draft hits in 5 seasons (Thuney and Duggar), far too many misses. 1 bona fide FA hit in 5 seasons (Judon), far too many misses. A good draft this year waylaid by injuries and failures elsewhere.

His summation is very important too though:

Should they fire Belichick? I don't believe they should. His work with the defense over the past few seasons suggests he's still an incredible defensive coach. While the Pats have whiffed on a few second-round picks in the secondary, his ability to coax excellent results out of Day 3 picks and undrafted free agents isn't random. The Patriots would suffer on defense if he left, even if they just promoted Mayo to the top job.

While Belichick's star has flickered since Brady's departure, there's still some semblance of a legend here. His name still means a lot in NFL circles, which might help New England attract talent when money is close. If Belichick opens up his staff to fresh voices, coaches should want to work underneath him. As the most important voice in the organization, he still carries more weight than any other coach.

 

[astrozombie]

Interesting article by Barnwell this morning. https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/38884214/fire-bill-belichick-bench-mac-jones-next-2023-patriots-lost-season

This article sums up the situation pretty well, but sadly kind of cops out on the conclusion. BB should *absolutely* be open to a GM taking over the GM duties and also open to hiring some people with new ideas outside the BB circle. The issue, as this board has mentioned, is that BB probably is not open to any of that. So then the question goes back to "what do you do if BB doesn't want to give up GMing or bring on anyone new?" which is the debate this board has been having.

 

[E5 Yaz]

I wonder if a Fields for Mac swap might make sense in the offseason.

Depends, I would think, on who the coaches are for the teams involved

 

[ManicCompression]

What? I don’t think anyone thought they were going to seriously challenge the Dolphins or Bills for the division—with the Jets adding Rodgers—with Mac and our pupu platter of #3 receivers. At best he was hoping to maybe sneak in to the playoffs if things went horrendously wrong for multiple teams in the division. It did for the Jets. It hasn’t for annyone else.

I said "good" which is exactly what you describe IMO.

And a lot of posters thought that they would be a 4-5 win team because of how bad Mac looked last year and the deck chair shuffling at the skill positions (they were mocked for it, too!). If Bill is at the stage of lying to himself by believing that they're a Juju Smith Schuster over Jakobi Meyers/Mike Gesicki/Bill O'brien away from a functional offense, then that's a blind spot. I know a bunch of folks here we're riding this optimism boat heading into the season, but this team was always destined to be well below average because of its inability to score.

 

[DennyDoyle'sBoil]

I wonder if maybe Bill is the kind of coach that can make a good team very good and a very good team great, but has the opposite problem with an average team -- his methods make them worse.

To me, maximizing the potential of a good or great team is the single most difficult thing for coaches to do in the NFL. Far too often, we see them fuck up. Belichick's entire M.O. seems to maximize greatness. Getting the last few percent to help will his teams across the finish line.

I used to teach SAT prep. (At the time, the scale was 0 to 800.) For the kids who came in testing around 750-760, the idea was to try to get them another 10 or 20 points. For the kids who came in testing at 400, you could get them to 550 or even higher. The thing was that the company very much segregated the teachers -- some of us were there for the 750s and some for the 400s, and you never tried to do both, because they were extremely different skills. I think the things that makes Bill able to get 770 out of the 750s is counterproductive for the 400s. Negative, even. If that makes sense.

I have many thoughts about why I think this about Bill, but it really doesn't matter. The issue for me, when talking about getting rid of Bill, is that I think he does well the very hardest thing to do in NFL coaching. But, unfortunately, he just doesn't have a team that allows him to do that thing. So, it would feel really tough to get rid of him, because I know that he can coach up good/great. And the value to that is difficult to measure and wins championships. The problem is that he may not be the right guy to get back to good/great, and that sucks.

 

[Ed Hillel]

Woof, it's everything we've discussed in part and in whole for years now, but pretty stark when you look at the results. 2 bona fide draft hits in 5 seasons (Thuney and Duggar), far too many misses. 1 bona fide FA hit in 5 seasons (Judon), far too many misses. A good draft this year waylaid by injuries and failures elsewhere.

His summation is very important too though:

Barmore isn't a draft hit?

This dude is playing near All-Pro level.

Bentley? Stevenson? Marcus Jones?

Not saying the record is amazing, though I think this year's will be pretty damned good when all is said and through, but it's more than 2 hits in 5 years.

 

[genoasalami]

All you need to know is he thought hiring Matt Patricia was a smart move. Lots of Mac Jones problems are self inflicted, but the orginization did him absolutely no favors. None. If they did not take a flyer on Brady in the draft, would he still be here?

 

[Ed Hillel]

All you need to know is he thought hiring Matt Patricia was a smart move. Lots of Mac Jones problems are self inflicted, but the orginization did him absolutely no favors. None. If they did not take a flyer on Brady in the draft, would he still be here?

You can ask the same of any coach who didn't have the benefit of a highly talented QB. Do you mean would he have survived for TWENTY FOUR seasons? Probably not?

What you can't do is deny that BB put Brady in place to succeed where probably zero other NFL coaches would have. How many times have you heard of a coach keeping four QBs in one season? How many made the decision to bench the recently-signed highest paid player in NFL history in favor of a second-year upstart? Hell, when BB took over in 2000, the Pats were like 25% over the salary cap and only had 38 players under contract! Something absolutely ridiculous. What he did was miraculous, Brady or not.

 

[Mystic Merlin]

All you need to know is he thought hiring Matt Patricia was a smart move. Lots of Mac Jones problems are self inflicted, but the orginization did him absolutely no favors. None. If they did not take a flyer on Brady in the draft, would he still be here?

The answer is no. You can count on one hand the number of NFL coaches in the modern era with his kind of tenure with one team (Landry, Shula, Noll), and none of them did it without having a HOF QB for at least a sizable chunk of their tenure with that team.

The answer your question begs isn’t for the reason you think, or at least imply.