This is only true in hindsight, and the last thing we should want is BB worrying about is whether his decisions look good in hindsight - that's the sort of shit that makes coaches punt down several scores instead of going for it.The essential problem in this case is that Butler could not have been worse than what was out there. I reminded myself of this on a few occasions when I wondered, “what would Wentz have done to us?!” And the answer is, “the same.” Because we yielded 41 points — none off turnovers — and we got a fortunate turnover of our down, and they punted only once.
Judging from the previous week's tape, it absolutely could get worse - Rowe had good coverage most of the game - and there were a lot of times where the only way the pass was completed was via a fantastic throw - but he was close enough to break up passes if the throws weren't perfect. There were just a lot of great passes because the lines were allowed to hold all day.
Butler, on the other hand, was 30 yards from the guy he was supposed to be covering on some plays. On some running plays he just completely gave up.
And he missed most of the film sessions because he was in the hospital during the week of.
It looks bad because they lost - and for no other reason. It's lazy, and results based.
I still wonder why people think this is far fetched, considering that we know he was too sick to do anything for most of the week.I still wonder if the braintrust didn't think Butler was physically up for being in for a whole series without coughing up a lung.