In BB We Trust

[cmasspatsfan]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I cringe every time people people use the phrase "In BB we trust". It just sounds pathetic!

I just think it's bizarre how Rex Ryan can transform a defense overnight, yet we're still waiting for BB, the "defensive guru", to come up with a solid defense. It's pretty sad when I think of BB, I think of offense, not defense.

Some of you just done get it and never will. Lets see how many playoff games Rexy wins before we start tooting his horn.
Talk about overraction. Think long term not one game.

 

[upstater1]

After what BB let Rex Ryan do to us (I won't go into detail as I've been warned), no, I don't trust him.

If you had a dog which let you get mauled by robbers whilst it played with a bone, what would you think of it?

Ryan had his way with us, the disgusting slob.

If I had a dog that was mauled by robbers, I'd think it was an inside job done by Kline.

 

[Deus Irae]

It has somehow become vogue to consider fans who have confidence in BB blind, ignorant, unthinking homers. While those that question him, doubt him, and expect the worst, are simply being realists.
Consider this:
In the last 8 years"
1 time we lacked talent to compete (2002)
1 time we lost our GOAT QB
In the other 6 seasons with everything else that got in the way, with all of the criticisms of scheme, play calling, coordinators, drafting, etc, etc there were 6 other seasons
5 were at least to the AFFC (4 to the Sb, and 3 SB wins)
1 was a divisional round loss in the year we tried to 3peat when Bruschi had a stroke

Given that we do not lack talent, as in 2002, and Brady is at QB, history says 5/6th of the time we advance at least to the AFCC with a great shot at winning it, and a great shot at winning the next one, and 1/6th of the time, we only advance to the divisional round.

Explain to me again why believing in BB is the unthinking (Koolaid slurping) approach and doubting him is the well thought out reasoned one.

This organization, even under Belichick, has made mistakes. It's the nature of having humans in charge. The Duane Starks trade happened, and the O'Connell draft pick happened, and they are not the only failed moves by this team under BB. Any objective look at this offseason has to look at the turnover, tumult and maneuvers, and look at the first two games of the season, and concede that it's entirely possible that mistakes have been made.

As for

Explain to me again why believing in BB is the unthinking (Koolaid slurping) approach and doubting him is the well thought out reasoned one.

Some questions/issues brought up by people during the past months

Loss of McDaniels
Loss of Pioli
Questionable Cassel/Vrabel trade
Questionable Seymour trade
Questionable Burgess trade
Passing on top flight LT prospect in round 1 of draft
Passing on all the top linebackers in rounds 1 & 2 of the draft
Trading of Hobbs for low level picks that could have been gotten in other ways
Failure to maintain a fullback
Questionable decision not to give Brady a lot more time in the preseason games
Apparent over-reliance upon the health of one defensive player
Questionable game plan v. Jets on both sides of the ball

Anyone who thinks that such a long list of questions/issues should leave no room for doubt, and should be ignored in favor of "In Bill We Trust" is kidding himself. No human being is beyond legitimate questioning, especially when the list of questions/issues is so long. Having a reservoir of confidence based upon past performance is not the same thing as blindly following, nor should it be.

 

[upstater1]

I cringe every time people people use the phrase "In BB we trust". It just sounds pathetic!

I just think it's bizarre how Rex Ryan can transform a defense overnight, yet we're still waiting for BB, the "defensive guru", to come up with a solid defense. It's pretty sad when I think of BB, I think of offense, not defense.

Why would you think of offense?

He's been in the NFL for 20 odd years, designing DEFENSES. In that time, he's been to I don't know how many championship games, 10 or 11 maybe? He's been to 7 Super Bowls, all while designing the defense.

In the last 20 years, Belichick's defenses have been to the Super Bowl 7 times.

That's something that NO ONE else can say. He's the greatest defensive mind ever.

And you think he's synonymous with offense?

 

[upstater1]

This organization, even under Belichick, has made mistakes. It's the nature of having humans in charge. The Duane Starks trade happened, and the O'Connell draft pick happened, and they are not the only failed moves by this team under BB. Any objective look at this offseason has to look at the turnover, tumult and maneuvers, and look at the first two games of the season, and concede that it's entirely possible that mistakes have been made.

As for



Some questions/issues brought up by people during the past months

Loss of McDaniels
Loss of Pioli
Questionable Cassel/Vrabel trade
Questionable Seymour trade
Questionable Burgess trade
Passing on top flight LT prospect in round 1 of draft
Passing on all the top linebackers in rounds 1 & 2 of the draft
Trading of Hobbs for low level picks that could have been gotten in other ways
Failure to maintain a fullback
Questionable decision not to give Brady a lot more time in the preseason games
Apparent over-reliance upon the health of one defensive player
Questionable game plan v. Jets on both sides of the ball

Anyone who thinks that such a long list of questions/issues should leave no room for doubt, and should be ignored in favor of "In Bill We Trust" is kidding himself. No human being is beyond legitimate questioning, especially when the list of questions/issues is so long. Having a reservoir of confidence based upon past performance is not the same thing as blindly following, nor should it be.

I look at that list and it looks like it's been ****ed up. I see only Seymour and the Jets gameplan that makes any sense. Nothing else. How is it a "mistake" to let McDaniels leave? Why would you question Belichick for that.

We know why Seymour was traded. That's no mystery.

 

[BradyFTW!]

It has somehow become vogue to consider fans who have confidence in BB blind, ignorant, unthinking homers. While those that question him, doubt him, and expect the worst, are simply being realists.
Consider this:
In the last 8 years"
1 time we lacked talent to compete (2002)
1 time we lost our GOAT QB
In the other 6 seasons with everything else that got in the way, with all of the criticisms of scheme, play calling, coordinators, drafting, etc, etc there were 6 other seasons
5 were at least to the AFFC (4 to the Sb, and 3 SB wins)
1 was a divisional round loss in the year we tried to 3peat when Bruschi had a stroke

Given that we do not lack talent, as in 2002, and Brady is at QB, history says 5/6th of the time we advance at least to the AFCC with a great shot at winning it, and a great shot at winning the next one, and 1/6th of the time, we only advance to the divisional round.

Explain to me again why believing in BB is the unthinking (Koolaid slurping) approach and doubting him is the well thought out reasoned one.

Belichick is a human being. Human beings make mistakes. Belichick makes mistakes, and there are many examples of this. So yeah, when people disagree with a decision that the team has made, why shouldn't they speak up? In most of the cases that I've seen, this hasn't been a case of revisionist history- there are a series of highly questionable moves that the team has made, and some fans questioned them even as they were being made. The first two games would seem to suggest that a lot of these concerns are valid.

Doesn't mean that we don't have faith in Belichick as a coach; he is, after all, the best at what he does. It just means that we philosophically disagree with certain, specific choices that he has made, based on the information that is available to us. Apparently you would prefer that everyone sit around in a circle nodding and talking about how perfect and infallible he is, which would make for a pretty boring discussion forum.

Even geniuses are wrong. Einstein was way off on quantum mechanics, but that doesn't invalidate him at all. It just proves that everyone is wrong from time to time.

BTW, what you're presenting here is a textbook example of an appeal to authority, which is one of the most basic and elementary logical fallacies that there is. Any 101-level debate course will teach you that.

 

[cmasspatsfan]

This organization, even under Belichick, has made mistakes. It's the nature of having humans in charge. The Duane Starks trade happened, and the O'Connell draft pick happened, and they are not the only failed moves by this team under BB. Any objective look at this offseason has to look at the turnover, tumult and maneuvers, and look at the first two games of the season, and concede that it's entirely possible that mistakes have been made.

Of course he makes mistakes, your cherry picking individual mistakes and not looking at his whole body of work. Does he put out a competetive team every year in an era of a salary cap? Has he won Super Bowls? Has he made any good picks and decisions? If the good outweigh the bad and he wins thats all I ask for as a fan.
I criticize some moves too but in the end we dont know all the circumstances and if they're right there and have a chance to win a SB, Im a happy.

BTW, what you're presenting here is a textbook example of an appeal to authority, which is one of the most basic and elementary logical fallacies that there is. Any 101-level debate course will teach you that.

No were looking at the end result. Its the ones saying we're doomed, its all over, he's lost it that what he referring to.

 

[HEY BRO! WHAT UP?]

Why would you think of offense?

He's been in the NFL for 20 odd years, designing DEFENSES. In that time, he's been to I don't know how many championship games, 10 or 11 maybe? He's been to 7 Super Bowls, all while designing the defense.

In the last 20 years, Belichick's defenses have been to the Super Bowl 7 times.

That's something that NO ONE else can say. He's the greatest defensive mind ever.

And you think he's synonymous with offense?

The reason why I say offense is because of '07 and '08. Both teams had a great offense, while the defense was mediocre. It seems like BB spends more time with his offense than defense.

I don't know why you guys live in the past when you defend the Pats. You guys always argue with stats 10-20 years ago, instead of 3-5 years ago. From 2005-2008, BB's defensive schemes have been outdated and haven't fooled anybody. They have collapsed in recent championship games and had two super bowls on a silver platter that they let slip away.

 

[Deus Irae]

The whining and complaining done by DI is hindsight based on happenstance. They are the fathers who will berate their children for being late to get home. "You should have taken Broad Street, not Elm Street. There was an accident on Elm." They don't care that Broad Street is generally the best choice, and will be the best choice next time. Rather than reward the good process used, they use the happenstance result as a means to carp and complain.

It is really really dumb. I'm sure there is a reason for this behavior, but it is still dumb.

This is sheer and utter nonsense. I've made my points about the issues I've had at the time they occurred. Furthermore, analyzing the games is neither whining nor complaining. Making a thread about those mean people calling others homers is whining and complaining.

I opposed the Cassel deal when it happened, in terms of value received. I called it a solid for a friend, and had no issue with it in that manner.
I opposed the Hobbs deal when it happened because of the questions in the secondary.
I opposed the Seymour deal.
I said that Brady should get more work in the exhibition games.
I opposed the Burgess deal when it happened.
I talked about the struggles of Sanchez in the Texans game.

I also said, following the Bills game:

It was just week one, and I expect things to get better. The team is integrating a fair amount of new parts, and that's going to take time. Mayo missed a lot of the game, as well. I was one of the people in the chat room telling people to relax. However, the game's done and it's time for honest evaluation.

And:

They won. We're now moving on to looking at the game to read what we can from it. The offense struggled for most of the game. The defensive front seven struggled too. If they don't play much better next week, and much stouter on the lines, they'll get run over by a Jets team that looks as if it plans to play extremely physical.

It's neither hindsight nor whining. It's analysis and opinion.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Whether or not you agree with Deus, nothing that he's saying now is revisionist history. He's been pretty vocal about his opposition to a lot of these moves since the day that they happened.

 

[Deus Irae]

I look at that list and it looks like it's been ****ed up. I see only Seymour and the Jets gameplan that makes any sense. Nothing else. How is it a "mistake" to let McDaniels leave? Why would you question Belichick for that.

We know why Seymour was traded. That's no mystery.

1.) Read..... Questions/issues is NOT just Questions. The question posed was "Explain to me again why believing in BB is the unthinking (Koolaid slurping) approach and doubting him is the well thought out reasoned one.". The absence of important helpers is a valid reason that someone might doubt Belichick, certainly in the short term, I think any rational person would agree.

2.) Thinking that you know why Seymour was traded is not actually knowing. Furthermore, even if the reasons for the trade are the same as you think they are, it doesn't mean that the trade was a good one.

 

[Deus Irae]

Of course he makes mistakes, your cherry picking individual mistakes and not looking at his whole body of work. Does he put out a competetive team every year in an era of a salary cap? Has he won Super Bowls? Has he made any good picks and decisions? If the good outweigh the bad and he wins thats all I ask for as a fan.
I criticize some moves too but in the end we dont know all the circumstances and if they're right there and have a chance to win a SB, Im a happy.

I wasn't "cherry picking" individual mistakes. I was pointing out examples of mistakes and noting that more were made. Your 'argument' is really a non-argument in the context of the thread and my post, because we were asked to give reasons and that's what I was doing. If you want to blindly follow Belichick, you should do so. I choose not to take that path.

 

[upstater1]

1.) Read..... Questions/issues is NOT just Questions. The question posed was "Explain to me again why believing in BB is the unthinking (Koolaid slurping) approach and doubting him is the well thought out reasoned one.". The absence of important helpers is a valid reason that someone might doubt Belichick, certainly in the short term, I think any rational person would agree.

2.) Thinking that you know why Seymour was traded is not actually knowing. Furthermore, even if the reasons for the trade are the same as you think they are, it doesn't mean that the trade was a good one.

#1. Belichick trained those kids. Do you really think McDaniels was ready for any of this before he went to Bill Belichick school?

#2. What are you arguing here anyway? I was agreeing with you. Jeez.

 

[upstater1]

Whether or not you agree with Deus, nothing that he's saying now is revisionist history. He's been pretty vocal about his opposition to a lot of these moves since the day that they happened.

Someone is going to have to point out how anyone could oppose half the things in the list. Most of those aren't coaching decisions.

 

[upstater1]

BTW, what you're presenting here is a textbook example of an appeal to authority, which is one of the most basic and elementary logical fallacies that there is. Any 101-level debate course will teach you that.

Uh, that debate can be blown out of the water when message-board posters assume they know a millionth as much about football as Belichick.

Read the opening posts again. No one said you can't criticize Belichick's gameday decisions and mistakes.

People are all over this board questioning Belichick's football philosophy and strategy.

That's preposterous.

Einstein may have been wrong about Quantum Mechanics, but certainly there was no message board around to "correct" him on the error of his ways.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Uh, that debate can be blown out of the water when message-board posters assume they know a millionth as much about football as Belichick.

Read the opening posts again. No one said you can't criticize Belichick's gameday decisions and mistakes.

People are all over this board questioning Belichick's football philosophy and strategy.

That's preposterous.

Einstein may have been wrong about Quantum Mechanics, but certainly there was no message board around to "correct" him on the error of his ways.

Nobody on this forum knows a millionth as much as any NFL head coach. Therefore, I guess we should all just nod dumbly and applaud every move that every team makes at all times, or are you going to get around to acknowledging that mistakes are frequently made, and that even we lowly mortals from time to time can see them for what they are?

You're right, there weren't literal message boards around to criticize Einstein's attempts at the theory of everything, but there were a whole hell of a lot of people, amateur and professional alike, who knew from the get-go that he was operating on a flawed premise of predictability. You didn't have to be even one hundredth as smart as he was to see where he was erring, which was exactly what made it so frustrating.

That's pretty much how I feel with Belichick- the guy's a genius, and I'll never claim to know even a fraction as much as he knows, but I *do* know that a team that can't get solid play on both sides of the line isn't going very far. I'm sure he has every intention of fixing that, and I hope that he can, but it's not exactly a foregone conclusion.

As far as the opening post, the 'givens' are hardly a given. How do we know that this team doesn't lack talent? From what I've seen so far, we have major questions at LB, DE, OT, and WR. We have potentially major health concerns at LB, QB, and WR. The depth at LB, OT, C, and QB is extremely thin. And at this point, Brady isn't the Brady that we remember. I do expect that he'll shake the rust off, but going by what we've seen over the first 2 weeks of the season (and in a 16 game season, that's a fair amount), it's perfectly reasonable to have questions. I do think that some of these issues will work themselves out (Brady), and there are others that I'm not sure of, but I agreed with the choice at the time so I can't very well criticize them (Galloway). There are others, though, that I've vocally disagreed with either since they happened (the Seymour trade) or for well over a year (not upgrading OT).

 

[cmasspatsfan]

I wasn't "cherry picking" individual mistakes. I was pointing out examples of mistakes and noting that more were made. Your 'argument' is really a non-argument in the context of the thread and my post, because we were asked to give reasons and that's what I was doing. If you want to blindly follow Belichick, you should do so. I choose not to take that path.

I question some decisions too, but I think hes earned the right for me not to question his overall philosophy and to put a quality product on the field. He has a track record to fall back on.
I think the overall point of the OP is that BB has made more right decisions than wrong and overall the team has been successful enough that he should be given a chance to see how his latest moves pan out.

 

[upstater1]

Nobody on this forum knows a millionth as much as any NFL head coach. Therefore, I guess we should all just nod dumbly and applaud every move that every team makes at all times, or are you going to get around to acknowledging that mistakes are frequently made, and that even we lowly mortals from time to time can see them for what they are?

You're right, there weren't literal message boards around to criticize Einstein's attempts at the theory of everything, but there were a whole hell of a lot of people, amateur and professional alike, who knew from the get-go that he was operating on a flawed premise of predictability. You didn't have to be even one hundredth as smart as he was to see where he was erring, which was exactly what made it so frustrating.

That's pretty much how I feel with Belichick- the guy's a genius, and I'll never claim to know even a fraction as much as he knows, but I *do* know that a team that can't get solid play on both sides of the line isn't going very far. I'm sure he has every intention of fixing that, and I hope that he can, but it's not exactly a foregone conclusion.

Sigh. Why should I bother responding to you when you didn't bother reading my post.

ONCE AGAIN: No one said you can't criticize Belichick's mistakes. We said, it's preposterous for someone to assume they have a better football philosophy, or can strategize better.

And no, not every coach deserves this deference. A lot of coaches have had crappy strategies that were proven to be crappy by their record, everyone from Mouse Davis to Dave Campo and I could go on and on. The point is, Belichick's strategy works. He's been the most successful defensive coach in NFL history. No one's defense has been better.

 

[captain stone]

It has somehow become vogue to consider fans who have confidence in BB blind, ignorant, unthinking homers. While those that question him, doubt him, and expect the worst, are simply being realists.
Consider this:
In the last 8 years:
1 time we lacked talent to compete (2002)
1 time we lost our GOAT QB
In the other 6 seasons with everything else that got in the way, with all of the criticisms of scheme, play calling, coordinators, drafting, etc, etc there were 6 other seasons
5 were at least to the AFFC (4 to the Sb, and 3 SB wins)
1 was a divisional round loss in the year we tried to 3peat when Bruschi had a stroke

Given that we do not lack talent, as in 2002, and Brady is at QB, history says 5/6th of the time we advance at least to the AFCC with a great shot at winning it, and a great shot at winning the next one, and 1/6th of the time, we only advance to the divisional round.

Explain to me again why believing in BB is the unthinking (Koolaid slurping) approach and doubting him is the well thought out reasoned one.

I thought that those who question Bill were considered by many on this board to be Chicken Littles. In fact, according to the only poster on my ignore list, we should be grateful for this gift of a team.

Anyway, back to the premise. I'm afraid that you may be overestimating the talent level here. After Sunday, we should have a better idea if that talent level is closer to at least 2006, or closer to 2002.

Remember, past performance is no guarantee of future success.

 

[PatriotWarrior]

I don't understand how people think BB got outcoached. I mean Ryan has been talking about Belichick since he got hired by the jests. It's obvious was preparring for this game since the offseason.

Look at it this way. We know the defense did a good enough job to win on Sunday. Brady is still coming back from a injury, so it still takes time to get used to things again. We are 1-1 now. We will know more about this team as the year progresses. It's not how you start, it's how you finish. We all know this. I haven't lost trust in BB. We have lots of quality depth. I won't call anyone a homer if they trusted BB. I see no reason why we won't beat the jests in November either. I say that because I trust BB in the teams that he coaches and puts together. Why do I get the feeling that the game in November against the jests that BB will expose them as the douchebag's that they are and shut them up?