2023 Pats: Offseason

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
41,946
Maybe I have the reflexive need to defend Bill, but we are heading into year 4 of post-Brady and made the playoffs with a rookie QB 2 years ago and had a team with a top defense last year.
What should we have expected in the last 3 years that did not occur? Because honestly, I think the team has performed above where you would expect a team to perform during a reset.
I could not agree with this more. We just witnessed 2 plus decades of excellence that may never be matched in sports, never mind in the NFL.

They lost the best QB of all time, played the following season with an absolute broken down QB in Cam, made the playoffs with a rookie QB in year 2, and then missed the playoffs in year 3 because of a fucking crazy lateral play and/or a fumble going in for a score at the end of another game, while trotting out maybe the worst coaching group that Bill could possibly have put together, an offensive line that sucked and a skill position group that blew chunks.

Meanwhile,

The Raiders have played in one playoff game (2016 loss) since 2002.
The Broncos haven't been to the playoffs since they won a SB with Manning in 2015
The Cardinals have been to the playoffs once since 2015, loss in 2021 WC.
The Falcons lost to the Pats in the SB in 2016, won a WC game in 2017, and haven't been back since.
The Ravens have won one playoff game since 2014
The Panthers haven't won a playoff game since their SB loss in 2015
The Bears haven't won a playoff game since 2010
The Browns won a WC game in 2020. Their last playoff win before that was against the Pats in 1994
The Cowboys make the playoffs, win a WC game here and there, and haven't made it to a Conference Champ since 1995
The Lions haven't won a playoff game since 1991
The Packers, with a surefire, HOF QB haven't been in a SB since 2010
The Texans have won 2 WC games since 2012
The Colts have won one playoff game (WC) since 2014
The Jags have won 3 playoff games (2 in one season) since 2007
The Chargers have won 3 playoff games, all WC games, since 2007
The Dolphins haven't won a playoff game since 2000.
The Vikings have won 2 playoff games since 2009
The Saints haven't made the playoffs since Brees retired either.
The Giants have won one playoff game (this year, WC) since the 2011 SB against the Pats
The Jets haven't been to the playoffs since 2010
The Steelers haven't won a playoff game since 2016
The Seahawks have won one playoff game (WC) since 2016
Without Brady, the Bucs hadn't won a playoff game since 2002
The Titans have won 3 playoff games (2 WC wins) since 2003
The Commanders haven't won a playoff game since 2005


We are just so fucking entitled, and our sense of how hard it is to win in the NFL is so warped that most Pats fans have lost all ability to be subjective. If BB should be on the chopping block for what's happened over the last 3 seasons, well, tell me who you want, because as you can see above, that list is littered with a LOT of teams that have tried to replace coaches and QB's and everything else, and their success rate still sucks.
 

Justthetippett

New Member
Aug 9, 2015
2,391
I could not agree with this more. We just witnessed 2 plus decades of excellence that may never be matched in sports, never mind in the NFL.

They lost the best QB of all time, played the following season with an absolute broken down QB in Cam, made the playoffs with a rookie QB in year 2, and then missed the playoffs in year 3 because of a fucking crazy lateral play and/or a fumble going in for a score at the end of another game, while trotting out maybe the worst coaching group that Bill could possibly have put together, an offensive line that sucked and a skill position group that blew chunks.

Meanwhile,

The Raiders have played in one playoff game (2016 loss) since 2002.
The Broncos haven't been to the playoffs since they won a SB with Manning in 2015
The Cardinals have been to the playoffs once since 2015, loss in 2021 WC.
The Falcons lost to the Pats in the SB in 2016, won a WC game in 2017, and haven't been back since.
The Ravens have won one playoff game since 2014
The Panthers haven't won a playoff game since their SB loss in 2015
The Bears haven't won a playoff game since 2010
The Browns won a WC game in 2020. Their last playoff win before that was against the Pats in 1994
The Cowboys make the playoffs, win a WC game here and there, and haven't made it to a Conference Champ since 1995
The Lions haven't won a playoff game since 1991
The Packers, with a surefire, HOF QB haven't been in a SB since 2010
The Texans have won 2 WC games since 2012
The Colts have won one playoff game (WC) since 2014
The Jags have won 3 playoff games (2 in one season) since 2007
The Chargers have won 3 playoff games, all WC games, since 2007
The Dolphins haven't won a playoff game since 2000.
The Vikings have won 2 playoff games since 2009
The Saints haven't made the playoffs since Brees retired either.
The Giants have won one playoff game (this year, WC) since the 2011 SB against the Pats
The Jets haven't been to the playoffs since 2010
The Steelers haven't won a playoff game since 2016
The Seahawks have won one playoff game (WC) since 2016
Without Brady, the Bucs hadn't won a playoff game since 2002
The Titans have won 3 playoff games (2 WC wins) since 2003
The Commanders haven't won a playoff game since 2005


We are just so fucking entitled, and our sense of how hard it is to win in the NFL is so warped that most Pats fans have lost all ability to be subjective. If BB should be on the chopping block for what's happened over the last 3 seasons, well, tell me who you want, because as you can see above, that list is littered with a LOT of teams that have tried to replace coaches and QB's and everything else, and their success rate still sucks.
We're definitely entitled. We're also running out of time with BB and RKK. I fully expect the years after BB to be filled with challenges and a slow rebuild. I'd love to see them go for it while he's still the HC and I'll live with the consequences after. Franchises don't operate that way but fans can! Jackson and BB would be fun as hell to watch.
 

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
41,946
We're definitely entitled. We're also running out of time with BB and RKK. I fully expect the years after BB to be filled with challenges and a slow rebuild. I'd love to see them go for it while he's still the HC and I'll live with the consequences after. Franchises don't operate that way but fans can! Jackson and BB would be fun as hell to watch.
I get with respect to BB, I just don't think Jackson gets us much further than we already are. I think putting Jackson on a team with an average roster, particularly on offense doesn't make us a SB contender, and ties up so much cap. I'd rather put a guy like Mac or someone else on the field on a cheap contract, and surround them with studs like SF has done, and Philly did, etc. I think that's a better usage of resources, particularly when you know BB is going to field a good defense.

The RKK stuff could not worry me in the slightest. He has virtually zero to do with the day to day or the administration of the football operations. By all accounts, Jonathan Kraft has been handling the Kraft family oversight of football operations for over a decade, he's the President of the team, and I see almost nothing changing with RKK out of the picture.
 

54thMA

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2012
10,154
Westwood MA
Meanwhile,

The Raiders have played in one playoff game (2016 loss) since 2002.
The Broncos haven't been to the playoffs since they won a SB with Manning in 2015
The Cardinals have been to the playoffs once since 2015, loss in 2021 WC.
The Falcons lost to the Pats in the SB in 2016, won a WC game in 2017, and haven't been back since.
The Ravens have won one playoff game since 2014
The Panthers haven't won a playoff game since their SB loss in 2015
The Bears haven't won a playoff game since 2010
The Browns won a WC game in 2020. Their last playoff win before that was against the Pats in 1994
The Cowboys make the playoffs, win a WC game here and there, and haven't made it to a Conference Champ since 1995
The Lions haven't won a playoff game since 1991
The Packers, with a surefire, HOF QB haven't been in a SB since 2010
The Texans have won 2 WC games since 2012
The Colts have won one playoff game (WC) since 2014
The Jags have won 3 playoff games (2 in one season) since 2007
The Chargers have won 3 playoff games, all WC games, since 2007
The Dolphins haven't won a playoff game since 2000.
The Vikings have won 2 playoff games since 2009
The Saints haven't made the playoffs since Brees retired either.
The Giants have won one playoff game (this year, WC) since the 2011 SB against the Pats
The Jets haven't been to the playoffs since 2010
The Steelers haven't won a playoff game since 2016
The Seahawks have won one playoff game (WC) since 2016
Without Brady, the Bucs hadn't won a playoff game since 2002
The Titans have won 3 playoff games (2 WC wins) since 2003
The Commanders haven't won a playoff game since 2005


We are just so fucking entitled, and our sense of how hard it is to win in the NFL is so warped that most Pats fans have lost all ability to be subjective.
Wow is that sobering.

Patriots fans are having a hard time dealing with reality because from 2011 through 2019, it was basically Win the Division/get the #1/#2 seed, play a tomato can in the divisional round/advance to the AFCCG, almost an entire decade of success, capped off with 5 trips to the Super Bowl and 3 wins.

Or the 2001 through 2007 run, very similar with 4 trips to the Super Bowl and 3 wins, bookend dynasties if you will.

Try being a fan from 1968 through 2000, nine trips to the playoffs, two trips to the Super Bowl where lost both, a drug scandal broke the day after the first Super Bowl and their coach bolted for a hated division rival the day after the second one, 32 years of buffoonery.

How hard it is to win in the NFL indeed.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,403
around the way
DotB, if you ever contemplate moonlighting as a sports talk radio host, do not under any circumstances show them post #551. They might tar and feather you.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,375
That’s a false equivalency. In mlb, 67 wins might be worst in the league (conference equivalent) and 104 wins might be best in the league.
7 or 11 NFL wins is assuredly neither.
To make that point even more stark: there have been plenty of 1 win teams in the NFL.

1-15 (back when it was a 16 game season) = .063 = 10 MLB wins

And there have been plenty of, say, 14 win NFL teams.

14-2 = .875 = 142 MLB wins

So there's a broader "range" in the NFL than in MLB.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,375
I could not agree with this more. We just witnessed 2 plus decades of excellence that may never be matched in sports, never mind in the NFL.

They lost the best QB of all time, played the following season with an absolute broken down QB in Cam, made the playoffs with a rookie QB in year 2, and then missed the playoffs in year 3 because of a fucking crazy lateral play and/or a fumble going in for a score at the end of another game, while trotting out maybe the worst coaching group that Bill could possibly have put together, an offensive line that sucked and a skill position group that blew chunks.

Meanwhile,

The Raiders have played in one playoff game (2016 loss) since 2002.
The Broncos haven't been to the playoffs since they won a SB with Manning in 2015
The Cardinals have been to the playoffs once since 2015, loss in 2021 WC.
The Falcons lost to the Pats in the SB in 2016, won a WC game in 2017, and haven't been back since.
The Ravens have won one playoff game since 2014
The Panthers haven't won a playoff game since their SB loss in 2015
The Bears haven't won a playoff game since 2010
The Browns won a WC game in 2020. Their last playoff win before that was against the Pats in 1994
The Cowboys make the playoffs, win a WC game here and there, and haven't made it to a Conference Champ since 1995
The Lions haven't won a playoff game since 1991
The Packers, with a surefire, HOF QB haven't been in a SB since 2010
The Texans have won 2 WC games since 2012
The Colts have won one playoff game (WC) since 2014
The Jags have won 3 playoff games (2 in one season) since 2007
The Chargers have won 3 playoff games, all WC games, since 2007
The Dolphins haven't won a playoff game since 2000.
The Vikings have won 2 playoff games since 2009
The Saints haven't made the playoffs since Brees retired either.
The Giants have won one playoff game (this year, WC) since the 2011 SB against the Pats
The Jets haven't been to the playoffs since 2010
The Steelers haven't won a playoff game since 2016
The Seahawks have won one playoff game (WC) since 2016
Without Brady, the Bucs hadn't won a playoff game since 2002
The Titans have won 3 playoff games (2 WC wins) since 2003
The Commanders haven't won a playoff game since 2005


We are just so fucking entitled, and our sense of how hard it is to win in the NFL is so warped that most Pats fans have lost all ability to be subjective. If BB should be on the chopping block for what's happened over the last 3 seasons, well, tell me who you want, because as you can see above, that list is littered with a LOT of teams that have tried to replace coaches and QB's and everything else, and their success rate still sucks.
Also, among the teams we'd say have been really successful lately...

The Rams had a good 5-year run after spending 12 years in the wilderness, winning 4 or fewer games in 5 of those 12 seasons. During this good run, they went to two Super Bowls, losing one (to our Patriots), and after going all-in, winning one. Great for them, good job, legit way to go. They went for it and it worked. Well, now they're back at the bottom, trading away and releasing a ton of good players, short on draft picks, dealing with injuries and cap issues, and coming off a 5-win season. They are a long way from being good again.

The 49ers have been good the past 4 seasons, but even then they dealt with a 6-win season (albeit due to massive injuries, but hey, that's life in the NFL). And while they've been good, they also haven't won a Super Bowl since Steve Young was QB.

The Bengals are obviously headed in the right direction, with a great QB at the helm. But they also went through 5 trash seasons and piled up a million high first round picks in order to finally land their top QB. Are we in NE okay with going through THAT process?

The Bills are also headed in the right direction, with a similarly great QB at the helm. They also went 24 years without winning a playoff game until they finally got over that hump in 2020. They didn't even make the playoffs for 19 of those 24 years. And despite being one of the best teams in the AFC the past 3 years, they haven't gotten to one Super Bowl yet in this time.

The Eagles have been good for the most part for a while, usually fielding competitive teams, and twice recently going to the Super Bowl, winning it one time (too soon!). But in the last twelve years, they've missed the playoffs in six of them, and in only three of the last twelve years have they won a playoff game. They had to endure a 4-win season in order to build to where they are now.

The Chiefs. Now THAT is the exception. They've been really good ever since Reid took over, and went from good to great once Mahomes replaced Smith at QB. Nobody has done it better the past 5 years, and if you look at the last 10 years, only the Patriots have been at KC's level.

Last 10 years:

KC: 113 regular season wins, 7 first place finishes, 9 playoff appearances, 3 AFC titles, 5 AFCCGs, 2 SB titles
NE: 111 regular season wins, 7 first place finishes, 8 playoff appearances, 4 AFC titles, 6 AFCCGs, 3 SB titles

But obviously KC has been MUCH better than NE the past 5 years.

But that's....it. Just one franchise can really claim to have the goods like NE.
 

nattysez

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2010
8,429
And from the Ravens' perspective, you don't not make a good trade because of what... a half-hearted conference rivalry? It's not even a team in your division you see twice a year.
This is fair, and I also think I'm conflating how John H feels with how Eric DeCosta feels, which could be very different.
 

Toe Nash

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2005
5,592
02130
Jacksonville and Houston both sucked but i don't think either tanked. Houston would actually have the number one pick if they lost their last game of the season (oops).
I would have hoped this was obvious but by tank I don't mean "the team loses on purpose." I mean, you make every move with an eye towards next year. So, guys who are kinda injured get put on IR, you cut guys who aren't going to help you later, you draft / pickup guys who might be projects, etc. You don't sign Cam Newton and install a gimmicky offense to try to sneak out a few wins, you get some normal-style quarterback for cheap like Davis Mills or Mike Glennon and let him suck. You don't play worse players on purpose but you try to see what you have and hopefully find a few gems for next season who other teams overlooked. Etc.

This is basically what NBA teams do when they "tank" (the actual Process is rare) and NFL teams do all the time. And in this case I conceded they wouldn't get the #1 pick but they would have been in much better position and we wouldn't have had to watch Cam Newton try to throw the ball. The best case scenario with the Cam team was sneaking into the playoffs, but by the time they were 2-5 it was pretty obvious it wasn't going to happen.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
4,546
Jacksonville and Houston both sucked but i don't think either tanked. Houston would actually have the number one pick if they lost their last game of the season (oops).
Also very thankful for the 2020 Jets, who started the season 0-13 before winning 2 of their last 3 games and fumbling Trevor Lawrence for Zach Wilson.
 

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
41,946
DotB, if you ever contemplate moonlighting as a sports talk radio host, do not under any circumstances show them post #551. They might tar and feather you.
Yeah, I'm not going after our boy, Arcand's, job any time soon. The only thing I have going for me for sports radio is my face.
 

sodenj5

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
6,619
CT
Also very thankful for the 2020 Jets, who started the season 0-13 before winning 2 of their last 3 games and fumbling Trevor Lawrence for Zach Wilson.
Thank you, Adam Gase. Lawrence isn’t perfect but he’s about 1000x better than Zach Wilson.
 

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
12,751
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
I just think the comparison to those teams is disingenuous to a degree because Bill is still here. If I told you guys in, say, 2017 the post Brady era would entail the "well, at least we aren't the Texans or the Browns!" defense, you'd probably believe something went wrong along the way. Two plus decades of "as long as we have Bill" didn't really condition me to expect to be satisfied with being one game below .500, no division titles and no playoff wins in a three year span. But sure, they've been mediocre, the situation is not as bad as it could be. Hooray? I mean, is the Pete Carroll era remembered as a success around these parts?
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,375
On the other hand, if you were told that post-Brady, they'd need to completely retool the team, and while completely retooling, they'd have three seasons where the team was overall .500, and were, each season, competitive for a playoff spot (making the playoffs once).... maybe you'd say, ok, that's not a bad retool process, and after 20 years of unparalleled greatness, I guess I can live with that.

I mean, we'd all rather the Pats be great all the time, even in a post-Brady world. But that's not remotely realistic. Rebuilding takes time and will include some period of not being very good. Thankfully this "not very good" rebuild period still has the Pats at least being competitive.

That's how I'm looking at it anyway. YMMV.
 

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
12,751
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
On the other hand, if you were told that post-Brady, they'd need to completely retool the team, and while completely retooling, they'd have three seasons where the team was overall .500, and were, each season, competitive for a playoff spot (making the playoffs once).... maybe you'd say, ok, that's not a bad retool process, and after 20 years of unparalleled greatness, I guess I can live with that.

I mean, we'd all rather the Pats be great all the time, even in a post-Brady world. But that's not remotely realistic. Rebuilding takes time and will include some period of not being very good. Thankfully this "not very good" rebuild period still has the Pats at least being competitive.

That's how I'm looking at it anyway. YMMV.
I can "live" with anything, I can live with 1-16. I just think setting the bar at "well, they haven't been awful" when Belichick is still running the show is retconning a whole lot of narratives and expectations the media and the fanbase held for 20 years. Which is fine. I'm not "insulted" or outraged or feel like Belichick owed me more than this, I just don't think it's good enough for the standard he himself set.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,375
I can "live" with anything, I can live with 1-16. I just think setting the bar at "well, they haven't been awful" when Belichick is still running the show is retconning a whole lot of narratives and expectations the media and the fanbase held for 20 years. Which is fine. I'm not "insulted" or outraged or feel like Belichick owed me more than this, I just don't think it's good enough for the standard he himself set.
For me, I am not retconning anything. When Brady left, it was clear to me right away that the team would need to go through a massive overhaul, a huge rebuilding process. My hope was that they wouldn't have to have several 4-win seasons in order to rebuild. Now maybe that is exactly what SHOULD have happened - suffer through three years of abject catastrophe in order to build through several years where they had high draft picks. Maybe. But they've been able to rebuild while still remaining competitive, which is what I had hoped would happen.

It just remains to be seen if they can get back to the lofty perch they were once on, which is where we all hope they get to.
 

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
12,751
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
For me, I am not retconning anything. When Brady left, it was clear to me right away that the team would need to go through a massive overhaul, a huge rebuilding process. My hope was that they wouldn't have to have several 4-win seasons in order to rebuild. Now maybe that is exactly what SHOULD have happened - suffer through three years of abject catastrophe in order to build through several years where they had high draft picks. Maybe. But they've been able to rebuild while still remaining competitive, which is what I had hoped would happen.

It just remains to be seen if they can get back to the lofty perch they were once on, which is where we all hope they get to.
I guess this is where my fundamental disagreement with this view comes from, I don't know how competitive they've been. I see a team that routinely beats up on the dregs of the league while being incapable of winning a game against competent offenses. I think they've for the most part looked helpless against contenders. So yeah, competitive in terms of them not having awful records at the end of the year, sure, but I never once in these three seasons thought this team had a chance of winning a game of significance or being on a path to achieve that. Their ceiling is beating 8-10 win teams. Makes for not only a reasonably boring viewing experience, but also hard to imagine the steps they could take into becoming actual contenders. The Dolphins last year won 9 games, but you could see what they looked like when Tua was healthy and their offense was humming, it was explosive, it was exciting. Same for the 9 win Jaguars. The avenue for them to become great is more easily identified in my mind than it if for the Pats. I guess that's what I wanted to see, the potential to be better than "competent". If I felt these three years were building to something I could get excited, but I just see the same roster construction philosophy and don't think improved coaching is going to be enough to fundamentally change the results. Again, I'm not owed anything and I realize just how hard it is to win in this league, I just thought the direction would be clearer at this point.
 

ShaneTrot

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Nov 17, 2002
6,401
Overland Park, KS
I could not agree with this more. We just witnessed 2 plus decades of excellence that may never be matched in sports, never mind in the NFL.

They lost the best QB of all time, played the following season with an absolute broken down QB in Cam, made the playoffs with a rookie QB in year 2, and then missed the playoffs in year 3 because of a fucking crazy lateral play and/or a fumble going in for a score at the end of another game, while trotting out maybe the worst coaching group that Bill could possibly have put together, an offensive line that sucked and a skill position group that blew chunks.

Meanwhile,

The Raiders have played in one playoff game (2016 loss) since 2002.
The Broncos haven't been to the playoffs since they won a SB with Manning in 2015
The Cardinals have been to the playoffs once since 2015, loss in 2021 WC.
The Falcons lost to the Pats in the SB in 2016, won a WC game in 2017, and haven't been back since.
The Ravens have won one playoff game since 2014
The Panthers haven't won a playoff game since their SB loss in 2015
The Bears haven't won a playoff game since 2010
The Browns won a WC game in 2020. Their last playoff win before that was against the Pats in 1994
The Cowboys make the playoffs, win a WC game here and there, and haven't made it to a Conference Champ since 1995
The Lions haven't won a playoff game since 1991
The Packers, with a surefire, HOF QB haven't been in a SB since 2010
The Texans have won 2 WC games since 2012
The Colts have won one playoff game (WC) since 2014
The Jags have won 3 playoff games (2 in one season) since 2007
The Chargers have won 3 playoff games, all WC games, since 2007
The Dolphins haven't won a playoff game since 2000.
The Vikings have won 2 playoff games since 2009
The Saints haven't made the playoffs since Brees retired either.
The Giants have won one playoff game (this year, WC) since the 2011 SB against the Pats
The Jets haven't been to the playoffs since 2010
The Steelers haven't won a playoff game since 2016
The Seahawks have won one playoff game (WC) since 2016
Without Brady, the Bucs hadn't won a playoff game since 2002
The Titans have won 3 playoff games (2 WC wins) since 2003
The Commanders haven't won a playoff game since 2005


We are just so fucking entitled, and our sense of how hard it is to win in the NFL is so warped that most Pats fans have lost all ability to be subjective. If BB should be on the chopping block for what's happened over the last 3 seasons, well, tell me who you want, because as you can see above, that list is littered with a LOT of teams that have tried to replace coaches and QB's and everything else, and their success rate still sucks.
What about the fact that BB is in his 70s? I am guessing you work a professional job. Do you work with anyone who is in their 70s? I don't. Last year was the worst-coached Pats team since before Parcells. The special teams were atrocious. The offensive line was horrendous for stretches, with free runners and penalties. Don't get me started with how sideways the offense was. Besides Rhamondre and Owenu, every offensive player was worse than in 2021. Maybe the attention to detail has slipped. Maybe BB wants to coach with people he likes to be around and they don't challenge him. All things end, people are not fantastic at their jobs forever. Father time is undefeated. I believe in BB but the team has slipped and he is in charge. I want him to leave on his own but if the 2023 Pats are as sloppy as the 2022 Pats, I will start to think he may be cooked.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,375
I guess this is where my fundamental disagreement with this view comes from, I don't know how competitive they've been. I see a team that routinely beats up on the dregs of the league while being incapable of winning a game against competent offenses. I think they've for the most part looked helpless against contenders. So yeah, competitive in terms of them not having awful records at the end of the year, sure, but I never once in these three seasons thought this team had a chance of winning a game of significance or being on a path to achieve that. Their ceiling is beating 8-10 win teams. Makes for not only a reasonably boring viewing experience, but also hard to imagine the steps they could take into becoming actual contenders. The Dolphins last year won 9 games, but you could see what they looked like when Tua was healthy and their offense was humming, it was explosive, it was exciting. Same for the 9 win Jaguars. The avenue for them to become great is more easily identified in my mind than it if for the Pats. I guess that's what I wanted to see, the potential to be better than "competent". If I felt these three years were building to something I could get excited, but I just see the same roster construction philosophy and don't think improved coaching is going to be enough to fundamentally change the results. Again, I'm not owed anything and I realize just how hard it is to win in this league, I just thought the direction would be clearer at this point.
I hear you. But that's how most middle of the pack teams are - they beat the worse teams, and lose to the better teams.

I agree with you in that I'm not sure that the rebuild is WORKING. I don't know if the Pats are closer to being "back" than they were in 2020. They've definitely added some exciting young talent, but the real key is Mac Jones. If he's NOT the guy, then this team needs to continue to rebuild and it could be a long time before they're "back". If he IS the guy, then we should start to see the results of that soon as he enters the last couple of years of his rookie contract.

The frustrating thing is that we just don't know which of these things it is.

What was particularly bothersome to me last year though was how sloppy they were, as @ShaneTrot referenced in the post above this. The number of special teams penalties, the number of drive-killing mistakes, the number of absolutely bone-headed plays....just boggled the mind. They EASILY could have won 11 games this past season. Easily. But...you are what you are, and they didn't win 11 games because they did incomprehensibly stupid things to lose games.

But I can see a world where that stuff gets cleaned up and suddenly they're an 11 win team, and THAT would surely change our outlook on them, don't you think?
 

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
12,751
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
I hear you. But that's how most middle of the pack teams are - they beat the worse teams, and lose to the better teams.

I agree with you in that I'm not sure that the rebuild is WORKING. I don't know if the Pats are closer to being "back" than they were in 2020. They've definitely added some exciting young talent, but the real key is Mac Jones. If he's NOT the guy, then this team needs to continue to rebuild and it could be a long time before they're "back". If he IS the guy, then we should start to see the results of that soon as he enters the last couple of years of his rookie contract.

The frustrating thing is that we just don't know which of these things it is.

What was particularly bothersome to me last year though was how sloppy they were, as @ShaneTrot referenced in the post above this. The number of special teams penalties, the number of drive-killing mistakes, the number of absolutely bone-headed plays....just boggled the mind. They EASILY could have won 11 games this past season. Easily. But...you are what you are, and they didn't win 11 games because they did incomprehensibly stupid things to lose games.

But I can see a world where that stuff gets cleaned up and suddenly they're an 11 win team, and THAT would surely change our outlook on them, don't you think?
I don't know, I'd have to see it. Are they constantly facing teams devastated by injuries and missing their starting QB (something they've been exceedingly lucky at the past two seasons)? Have they won games in which they've given up 23+ points? I guess with the 2023 schedule winning 11 games would necessarily mean they've beaten a lot of good teams, so yeah, if they go 11-6 this season it would almost certainly indicate things are looking up.
 

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
41,946
I can "live" with anything, I can live with 1-16. I just think setting the bar at "well, they haven't been awful" when Belichick is still running the show is retconning a whole lot of narratives and expectations the media and the fanbase held for 20 years. Which is fine. I'm not "insulted" or outraged or feel like Belichick owed me more than this, I just don't think it's good enough for the standard he himself set.
Who is setting the bar at "Well, they haven't been awful." Unless we're talking about regular season wins, and not actual team success, since Tom Brady left, they've arguably been as good, or better, than what, 70% of the league?

Since Brady left, they've played more playoff games than the Raiders, Broncos, Cardinals, Falcons, Panthers and on and on. They've played just as many playoff games as the Chargers. They have the same amount of playoff wins as the Steelers (zero).

The Cowboys have one WC win, and one more playoff appearance.

The Ravens have one more playoff win than the Pats.

I mean, if everything is awful, not quite awful, or the Chiefs/Eagles/Bills/Niners, then yeah, they are not quite awful. But expecting this team to be in in the Final Four every year isn't realistic, or in the case of the vast majority of the NFL, expecting them to even sniff the Final Four isn't realistic.
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
11,921
They played one playoff game since Brady left, and weren’t competitive at all. I mean, I guess that’s better than many teams but I’m sure Belichick isn’t happy with it.

Sure they’ve been better in the past three years than the Raiders, Cardinals, Broncos, Panthers, Falcons, Jets…etc, all teams who have changed head coaches at least once in that time.
 

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
41,946
What about the fact that BB is in his 70s? I am guessing you work a professional job. Do you work with anyone who is in their 70s? I don't. Last year was the worst-coached Pats team since before Parcells. The special teams were atrocious. The offensive line was horrendous for stretches, with free runners and penalties. Don't get me started with how sideways the offense was. Besides Rhamondre and Owenu, every offensive player was worse than in 2021. Maybe the attention to detail has slipped. Maybe BB wants to coach with people he likes to be around and they don't challenge him. All things end, people are not fantastic at their jobs forever. Father time is undefeated. I believe in BB but the team has slipped and he is in charge. I want him to leave on his own but if the 2023 Pats are as sloppy as the 2022 Pats, I will start to think he may be cooked.
BB's got some glaring weaknesses, but I'm one of the few folks that talked about those weaknesses even during their run of dominance. The man should have the keys taken away from him when buying groceries on offense and I've been arguing that point for a long, long time. Tom Brady covered up a metric fuck ton of warts on that side of the ball forever.

The guy had Charlie Weis, BoB and Josh for almost his entire career. He had Dante covering his ass up for any mistakes he made picking up offensive linemen for most of his career too. He then lost Josh, and tried to finagle a disaster of a plan with Patricia/Judge and the team took a step back. I think its pretty clear to everyone that BB knew early on he fucked that up, and he rightfully went and got BoB back as soon as he could. Now, if he'll let other voices in the room when it comes to drafting/signing offensive players, we'll have to see. From my perspective, he still hasn't when it comes to receivers, and probably never will and it drives me fucking insane.

But BB is still one of the greatest defensive coaches in football, even with sub par talent, and can put together a game plan that keeps a less talented team in a game better than anyone. Andy Reid just turned 65, and he seems to be doing ok.

Pete Carroll is older than Bill, and IMO, is coaching as a mirror image. Once he lost Kris Richard and the Legion of Boom, he hasn't been able to retool that defense or the defensive coaching staff, but his offenses are great. Last year with Geno fucking Smith, they were a top 10 passing offense in the NFL (4th in tds), and aside from the prior year, have been a top 10 offense every year since 2017. Their defense hasn't cracked the top 10 in that entire time.

Is the leash getting shorter with Bill, absolutely, but that leash was so long to begin with that you could have wrapped it around the Earth a few times. There's still quite a few links left in there, and as I've pointed out, it's not easy to find great coaches who last a while in the NFL having success. It might be even harder to do that than it is to find a great QB, just ask Green Bay.
 

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
41,946
They played one playoff game since Brady left, and weren’t competitive at all. I mean, I guess that’s better than many teams but I’m sure Belichick isn’t happy with it.
What does Belichick's happiness have to do with the discussion?

I'm just pushing back on this narrative that the Pats are some sort of NFL doormat. If that's true, then well, there's apparently only doormats and Italian Chandeliers and nothing in between.
 

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
12,751
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
Who is setting the bar at "Well, they haven't been awful." Unless we're talking about regular season wins, and not actual team success, since Tom Brady left, they've arguably been as good, or better, than what, 70% of the league?

Since Brady left, they've played more playoff games than the Raiders, Broncos, Cardinals, Falcons, Panthers and on and on. They've played just as many playoff games as the Chargers. They have the same amount of playoff wins as the Steelers (zero).

The Cowboys have one WC win, and one more playoff appearance.

The Ravens have one more playoff win than the Pats.

I mean, if everything is awful, not quite awful, or the Chiefs/Eagles/Bills/Niners, then yeah, they are not quite awful. But expecting this team to be in in the Final Four every year isn't realistic, or in the case of the vast majority of the NFL, expecting them to even sniff the Final Four isn't realistic.
I don't understand how these statements jive with one another. Do you believe those fanbases are happier than we are over their team's results in the last three years? Why is being (arguably) better than those teams over that timeframe enough? Isn't this just reiterating how the bar is "they haven't been awful"?
 

Mystic Merlin

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 21, 2007
46,767
Hartford, CT
I’m not in a rush to join the wonderful game of head coach/GM roulette that many franchises constantly lose at despite in some cases picking qualified candidates on paper.
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
11,921
What does Belichick's happiness have to do with the discussion?

I'm just pushing back on this narrative that the Pats are some sort of NFL doormat. If that's true, then well, there's apparently only doormats and Italian Chandeliers and nothing in between.
Belichick isn’t happy with the team’s performance over the past few years, I presume, so why should the entitled fanbase.

I think I must have missed the argument / narrative that the Pats are an NFL doormat, but carry on.
 

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
41,946
I don't understand how these statements jive with one another. Do you believe those fanbases are happier than we are over their team's results in the last three years? Why is being (arguably) better than those teams over that timeframe enough? Isn't this just reiterating how the bar is "they haven't been awful"?
When the conversation was begging the question of whether or not we should be firing Bill in the near future, the onus should be on the fans of the team to explain who they think can replace them, why they think he should be replaced and IMO, comparing the results of the team to the vast majority of the NFL is a decent place to start, no?
 

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
12,751
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
When the conversation was begging the question of whether or not we should be firing Bill in the near future, the onus should be on the fans of the team to explain who they think can replace them, why they think he should be replaced and IMO, comparing the results of the team to the vast majority of the NFL is a decent place to start, no?
Has the topic of potentially moving on from Bill Belichick been brought up by anyone in this thread? Why are you conflating "I don't think Bill's performance post Brady has been good enough/lived up to his standards" with "I'm thinking of firing Bill Belichick"?
 

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
41,946
Has the topic of potentially moving on from Bill Belichick been brought up by anyone in this thread? Why are you conflating "I don't think Bill's performance post Brady has been good enough/lived up to his standards" with "I'm thinking of firing Bill Belichick"?
This was the post that got me doing the work on how other teams have fared in the years since we lost Brady, but I don't think we also need to rehash the entire "Has BB lost his fastball" discussions...This isn't exactly a new idea or topic that's been floated around here, even if folks aren't coming out and willing to say it.

But we're also heading into year #4 post-Brady. At a certain point the "transition" becomes "we're just not that good anymore and we're not trending in a positive direction either".

College coaches deserve 4-5 years to get a program in better shape, but you really don't need that kinda time in today's NFL.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,460
uh, 4 straight years of playoff or borderline playoff play without a franchise QB is pretty good by NFL standards.
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
11,921
I don’t think that @8slim was suggesting the Pats should move on from Belichick; just that rebuilds don’t generally take all that long in the league and that after a few years, you should show some positive momentum in which way you are heading. The Pats have been about a .500 team post-Brady, which is fine and better than a lot of teams, however I imagine that Kraft and Belichick expect better and another 8-9 win season probably won’t be seen as a success (even if 13-16 teams will finish with a worst record).
 

8slim

has trust issues
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
24,829
Unreal America
I don’t think that @8slim was suggesting the Pats should move on from Belichick; just that rebuilds don’t generally take all that long in the league and that after a few years, you should show some positive momentum in which way you are heading. The Pats have been about a .500 team post-Brady, which is fine and better than a lot of teams, however I imagine that Kraft and Belichick expect better and another 8-9 win season probably won’t be seen as a success (even if 13-16 teams will finish with a worst record).
Geez, I wish someone had tagged me sooner. I wasn't remotely suggesting we move on from BB. I mean, WTF?

It's clear that KRAFT believes we are rebuilding/transitioning into a new era of competing for titles. It is quite possible to do that in 4-5 years. We've literally seen that accomplished repeatedly in the past couple decades of the NFL.

If all we are for the next few years is a fringe playoff team, so be it. I don't get the sense Kraft is gonna like that. But it's also not my team.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,375
I don’t think that @8slim was suggesting the Pats should move on from Belichick; just that rebuilds don’t generally take all that long in the league and that after a few years, you should show some positive momentum in which way you are heading. The Pats have been about a .500 team post-Brady, which is fine and better than a lot of teams, however I imagine that Kraft and Belichick expect better and another 8-9 win season probably won’t be seen as a success (even if 13-16 teams will finish with a worst record).
Uh………. Yeah they do.
 

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
41,946
I don’t think that @8slim was suggesting the Pats should move on from Belichick; just that rebuilds don’t generally take all that long in the league and that after a few years, you should show some positive momentum in which way you are heading. The Pats have been about a .500 team post-Brady, which is fine and better than a lot of teams, however I imagine that Kraft and Belichick expect better and another 8-9 win season probably won’t be seen as a success (even if 13-16 teams will finish with a worst record).
That's the point, rebuilds do take that long in the NFL, unless you land a guy like Mahomes. I mean, I just posted a list of like 20 teams and what they've done over the past decade or so. How has Denver's rebuild gone post-Manning? How has Baltimore rebuilt even with Lamar Jackson? How have the Steelers rebuilt post Big-Ben? After Brees, the Saints just had two seasons around .500 ball, and just gave Derek Carr 4yr/150mil, would folks have rather the Pats had done that before last season? How long into the Giants rebuild post-Eli are we now into?

Even the Chiefs took a while. Andy Reid took over a terrible 2-14 team, brought in Alex Smith, then transitioned to Mahomes. In those first 5 seasons, they made the playoffs 4 times. They had one playoff win to show for it. Is that really way better than the Pats? Would their trajectory look a little bit different if they were replacing Alex Smith with Mac Jones instead of Mahomes?

The Chargers had Rivers retire in 2019. They got Herbert in 2020 with the 6th overall pick. 3 years later, they now have one playoff win.

The Bills are heading into their 6th year with Josh Allen, a 7th overall pick, and they've made it out of the divisional round once.

The Bengals went like 30 years between playoff wins before they got Joe Burrow #1 overall.

How many years is it going to be until the Bucs get back to relevance if they don't hit on a franchise QB? How long has it been for the Jets and Bears?

The only two teams that I would put as the model of what the Pats can do are the Eagles and Niners. It's the only way, IMO, in today's NFL to have a realistic shot at a championship unless you have a top 3, maybe 5 QB. You have to surround that guy with weapons, sick offensive lines, and a defense. I'm not worried about BB defensively. I am, and have been for over a decade, worried about BB putting players around a middle tier QB.

Hoping the team is better, being unhappy the team isn't better are all fine. "Expecting" the team to be better than they are is ignoring the reality of today's NFL. No matter how butthurt the media claims Kraft might be, I highly doubt that he's even remotely considered moving on from BB, nor should he, IMO.
 
Last edited:

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
11,921
Well sure, I think the odds are that the Pats are most likely going to be like most other clubs and not be terribly successful in the next several years, based on these definitions, Belichick or not. Most teams that claim to be “rebuilding” or “retooling” never get anywhere close to experiencing sustained success, especially not what the Pats had over a two-decade period. Teams without good, never mind great QB’s, rarely succeed and I think that’s probably where the Pats are right now. They are just another team, which is fine, I guess.

I don’t know if Kraft is thinking of moving in from Belichick, but nothing lasts forever and the time when both men are gone is not that far into the future, sadly.
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
11,921
Uh………. Yeah they do.
Most rebuilds don’t work. For the ones that do, though? Mahomes won 12 games his 2nd year, SB his third. Burrow was in the SB in year two. Russell Wilson won the SB in year two. Brady won a SB in his first year with the Bucs (and second with the Pats), as did Stafford with the Rams.

I dunno, seems like you get the right QB and you can rebuild / retool / win right away, based in recent history. Don’t, and you won’t.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,375
Most rebuilds don’t work. For the ones that do, though? Mahomes won 12 games his 2nd year, SB his third. Burrow was in the SB in year two. Russell Wilson won the SB in year two. Brady won a SB in his first year with the Bucs (and second with the Pats), as did Stafford with the Rams.

I dunno, seems like you get the right QB and you can rebuild / retool / win right away, based in recent history. Don’t, and you won’t.
Well, yeah, obviously if you somehow land a superduperstar at QB the rebuild will go much faster. But take Cincinnati....

Won 12 games in 2015. Then the next five seasons won:

2016: 6 wins
2017: 7 wins
2018: 6 wins
2019: 2 wins
2020: 4 wins

Then in 2021 they were back, winning 10 games and going deep in the playoffs.

But that was 5 years' worth of a rebuild and was only saved by adding a GREAT quarterback with the #1 pick in the draft.

Their rebuild started long before they added Burrow.

As for KC....they were already really good before adding Mahomes and weren't "rebuilding" at all.

2013: 11 wins
2014: 9 wins
2015: 11 wins
2016: 12 wins
2017: 10 wins (Mahomes' rookie year, and he didn't play)
2018: 12 wins (and they're off and running)

So in the four years prior to Mahomes being drafted, they won 43 games, an average of basically 11 wins per season. That's not a rebuild. That was a terrific team that went to an awesome team by adding (and playing) Mahomes.


The Rams?

2017: 11 wins
2018: 13 wins (went to the SB and lost to NE)
2019: 9 wins (SB hangover)
2020: 10 wins
2021: 12 wins (the year they added Stafford...won the SB)

So in the four years prior to adding Stafford they also won 43 games (11 per year) and had gone to a Super Bowl. They were also a good team that was in GFIN mode and added Stafford and won it all. They weren't rebuilding.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,460
I don’t think that @8slim was suggesting the Pats should move on from Belichick; just that rebuilds don’t generally take all that long in the league and that after a few years, you should show some positive momentum in which way you are heading. The Pats have been about a .500 team post-Brady, which is fine and better than a lot of teams, however I imagine that Kraft and Belichick expect better and another 8-9 win season probably won’t be seen as a success (even if 13-16 teams will finish with a worst record).
I mean, the problem is you're looking for momentum off wildly overperforming your talent. There is really only 1 way in the modern game to consistently make the playoffs and be a threat there, and it's to have good QB play. I don't see it as a knock on Bill that he's stuck around .500 because a lesser coach would be going 5-12 with these rosters.
Rebuilds that happen quickly and last are almost always ones where an elite QB falls in your lap. Would people think it was better if the Cam year we went 5-12, then 7-10 then 8-9? An exciting upward trend! Of course created mostly by performing poorly early then knocking on the door of the ceiling of not having a QB.
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
11,921
I guess it’s all dependent on when one determines that the rebuild starts. When your QB is Mac Jones, you’re probably going to be rebuilding forever. A good organization winning 5 games instead of 8 might help land a franchise QB- but it all depends on the year and who is available, and all that.

But yeah, get the right QB and you can contend right away. Don’t, and you won’t.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,096
I guess it’s all dependent on when one determines that the rebuild starts. When your QB is Mac Jones, you’re probably going to be rebuilding forever. A good organization winning 5 games instead of 8 might help land a franchise QB- but it all depends on the year and who is available, and all that.

But yeah, get the right QB and you can contend right away. Don’t, and you won’t.
And the obligatory reminder that Mac Jones ceiling is not yet known. He has one more year to prove that it is higher than league average QB (which would be a step up from last year). I realize many here have already made that determination; while understandable, he may yet find his groove in year 3.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,096
Most rebuilds don’t work. For the ones that do, though? Mahomes won 12 games his 2nd year, SB his third. Burrow was in the SB in year two. Russell Wilson won the SB in year two. Brady won a SB in his first year with the Bucs (and second with the Pats), as did Stafford with the Rams.

I dunno, seems like you get the right QB and you can rebuild / retool / win right away, based in recent history. Don’t, and you won’t.
What’s interesting is that for both Brady and Russell Wilson, neither were superstars when they won their first Lombardi. The 2001 Pats and 2013 Seahawks succeeded mainly due to their respective defenses and running games.
 

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
41,946
I guess it’s all dependent on when one determines that the rebuild starts. When your QB is Mac Jones, you’re probably going to be rebuilding forever. A good organization winning 5 games instead of 8 might help land a franchise QB- but it all depends on the year and who is available, and all that.

But yeah, get the right QB and you can contend right away. Don’t, and you won’t.
This isn't necessarily true though, and San Fran is the perfect example. They built that team up from the ground up. Prior to their SB run, their previous 6 years had wins of 8, 5, 2, 6, 4. They then went all in on bringing in weapons, and then made a move for their QB of the future in Trey Lance. That QB move didn't work, but they had still built the roster up to where they had studs everywhere, and then they still weren't done, had a position of need and went and grabbed McCaffrey. They've managed to win games with Jimmy G. and are literally undefeated with a healthy Mr. Irrelevant in Brock Purdy.

The Eagles went 4-11-1 in Hurts rookie year, mostly with Carson Wentz playing. They started building out the roster around Hurts, and went 9-8 (although his numbers were worse than Mac's rookie year), and then they built it out even further around Hurts and went to the SB in year 3.

I keep saying it, but this is the model that the Pats, and every team that doesn't have Mahomes/Allen/Burrow need to be following. The problem is the Pats aren't, at least not on offense. They're still using the model that they used when they had the GOAT under center, or the model that the Chiefs are using now, except we don't have Mahomes or Brady.
 

Toe Nash

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2005
5,592
02130
I think it's not that complicated. BB is a great coach, one of the best ever at filling out the last 35 or so roster spots and on gameday prep etc. That's why his teams consistently find ways to win and he very often finds guys more or less off the street that can produce in his systems (often because he has done a lot of homework and had those guys in for workouts etc previously).

But BB the GM is not significantly better at anyone else at filling out the top of his roster particularly on offense, outside of one pick which gave him the GOAT. He has had a lot of success there and he's better than average at it, but not enough to consistently have a number of high-end starters. (I am not sure anyone is consistently good at this or else they would be dominating the league.)

We have seen this for years as teams ebbed and flowed a bit, but Brady always made them competitive. When they've had a Brady and hit on a Gronk and a Hernandez or found a Welker and Moss for cheap, you have a nuts offense. When they've not had those guys or they weren't at their best, you get a good team like those in between years that Brady and BB squeezed every inch out of to get to the AFC championship game.

Now, we're seeing the effects of Brady leaving combining with perhaps a nadir of sorts in the talent pipeline with basically two starters coming out of the drafts from 2016-2019 (and one, Wynn, not worthy of a second contract). To compound this, BB's skill at getting the most out of his rosters means he hasn't had a high pick since then, so you don't get the kind of top ten picks other coaches might as you rebuild.

Maybe this is a longer way of saying that it's all about the QB, but I've come around a bit and I think you can win with an average-ish QB who makes few mistakes, which Mac could be on a playoff run. But, you need to find top guys around him. BB is not really prioritizing getting high picks or bringing in top FAs in the way most teams in the post-Brady situation would be. So he's generally not getting star players.

This is why I would personally chase Jackson is he is their best path to real contention without another couple years of "rebuilding" which BB will never really do fully anyway. Otherwise, you need to get multiple stars in the draft or real gems in FA, without a top ten pick or a path to getting any, and I don't think BB or anyone can do that consistently.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,460
This isn't necessarily true though, and San Fran is the perfect example. They built that team up from the ground up. Prior to their SB run, their previous 6 years had wins of 8, 5, 2, 6, 4. They then went all in on bringing in weapons, and then made a move for their QB of the future in Trey Lance. That QB move didn't work, but they had still built the roster up to where they had studs everywhere, and then they still weren't done, had a position of need and went and grabbed McCaffrey. They've managed to win games with Jimmy G. and are literally undefeated with a healthy Mr. Irrelevant in Brock Purdy.

The Eagles went 4-11-1 in Hurts rookie year, mostly with Carson Wentz playing. They started building out the roster around Hurts, and went 9-8 (although his numbers were worse than Mac's rookie year), and then they built it out even further around Hurts and went to the SB in year 3.

I keep saying it, but this is the model that the Pats, and every team that doesn't have Mahomes/Allen/Burrow need to be following. The problem is the Pats aren't, at least not on offense. They're still using the model that they used when they had the GOAT under center, or the model that the Chiefs are using now, except we don't have Mahomes or Brady.
San Fran built that roster on a lot of top 10 picks and trades using those picks, almost all their best players came from one or the other of those (plus a couple really nice 2nd and 3rd rounders). The Patriots can't build that way, they don't have a #2 pick, or a #7 or a #9 or #3.

Edit- the Patriots can't build the way many teams do because the way those teams built was being really bad for a half decade or more. They maybe could build the Eagles' way of walking into a really good QB on a super cheap deal, though even then that team had 2 key picks that were higher than anything the Patriots have had in 2 decades.
 

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
12,751
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
San Fran built that roster on a lot of top 10 picks and trades using those picks, almost all their best players came from one or the other of those (plus a couple really nice 2nd and 3rd rounders). The Patriots can't build that way, they don't have a #2 pick, or a #7 or a #9 or #3.

Edit- the Patriots can't build the way many teams do because the way those teams built was being really bad for a half decade or more. They maybe could build the Eagles' way of walking into a really good QB on a super cheap deal, though even then that team had 2 key picks that were higher than anything the Patriots have had in 2 decades.
The Patriots have been top 4 in defensive DVOA for two straight seasons now, so it makes sense to trust the system there and not invest too much in terms of both cap space and draft capital to increment that side of the ball. On the other hand the offense has some pressing needs and the opportunity is there to trade assets to put receivers around Mac, or to go sign Lamar Jackson and try to go toe to toe with the AFC's best knowing you have a QB who can be the best player on the field on any given Sunday. If they don't choose either path, I think it'll be a mistake. It's not like the roster sucks, the depth is good, they have few roles, it just lacks top tier talent on offense. Go grab it, the opportunity is there. This team doesn't need a complete retooling to compete. I don't think they're 5 years of top 10 picks away from being in a good position talent wise.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,460
The Patriots have been top 4 in defensive DVOA for two straight seasons now, so it makes sense to trust the system there and not invest too much in terms of both cap space and draft capital to increment that side of the ball. On the other hand the offense has some pressing needs and the opportunity is there to trade assets to put receivers around Mac, or to go sign Lamar Jackson and try to go toe to toe with the AFC's best knowing you have a QB who can be the best player on the field on any given Sunday. If they don't choose either path, I think it'll be a mistake. It's not like the roster sucks, the depth is good, they have few roles, it just lacks top tier talent on offense. Go grab it, the opportunity is there. This team doesn't need a complete retooling to compete. I don't think they're 5 years of top 10 picks away from being in a good position talent wise.
I'm not sure they go the Lamar route (or should given his injury history and contract/trade cost issues), but I definitely think people are over-selling the ability to just go get top offensive skill talent that will pair with Mac to make this a contender. Hopkins, Jeudy, those guys don't make the Patriots a contender. Last year Hill got traded, that cost a 1st, 2nd, two 4ths and a 6th... and a huge deal. That kind of guy isn't available this year because none of them are in contract disputes, and of course the Dolphins offense also works because they have another top 6 pick on the other side, and both WRs cost involved picks they got from trading away Tunsil for a boatload of picks (he himself was picked higher than the Patriots have drafted in decades). The Patriots lack of high end tradeable pieces acquired by years of high picks prevents them from building like that, even in the rare cases that true difference makers are out there (of course this also assumes that Bill sees Mac as an answer at QB, which isn't clear).
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,096
I assume most of the "Belichick is terrible at picking offensive players" is reflecting serious recency bias and his drafting record.

Belichick has had no problem bringing in suitable WR talent when Brady was here: beyond Moss and Welker, BB brought in guys like LaFell, Hogan, Branch, Stallworth, and (via draft) Mitchell. In the GFIN 2019 season he added Antonio Brown to a corps that already included Josh Gordon. One things all these players had in common, Moss excepted, is that they were available at reasonable cost money wise (and Moss was well worth whatever he was making at the time).

His WR drafting (Mitchell aside) has been bad, as has been noted here numerous times, and that has indeed hurt them. Would have been nice if Thornton panned out, but maybe year 2 brings a turnaround. But Kraft is right that they need to draft well, and that is on Bill. But I don't fault him for not chasing a 31 y/o Hopkins who has been limited to 19 games the past 2 seasons. And the asking price for Jeudy, assuming he is truly available, is going to be very high, and he is no Tyreke Hill. So instead it was back to making incremental improvements. JuJu is definitely better than Agholor and IMO is better than Myers. Gesicki is a massive improvement over Jonnu Smith, who was just a terrible signing. Team is fine at RB, and should at least see some improvement in OL with Wynn gone. Team still needs a really good draft to seriously contend, and I think that is where Bill needs to come through.
 

Justthetippett

New Member
Aug 9, 2015
2,391
I'm sure Bill prefers to build the way of the current 9ers. Or that he was so affected by the Parcells Giants teams that he thinks he can win with above average but not elite QB play. That's a strategy that can be defended. I'd rather roll the dice with a top flight QB and build around him in today's NFL. Lamar is also selfishly just more exciting than watching Mac, which isn't material but is...a lot more fun.
 
Last edited:

Bowser

New Member
Sep 27, 2019
400
Late to the game but would like to observe that to qualify as a rebuild, the team must first have experienced a period of sustained success. By definition, this excludes almost all teams. For example, I don't think it's fair to say the Raiders are in the 20th year of their rebuild. They're just incompetent, as are most franchises, more or less. I don't know what this means for our understanding of how long an actual rebuild typically takes, but in the end we might find we're dealing with too small a sample size to draw a conclusion.