Damien Harris tees off on BB over 2022 offense

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
45,906
Melrose, MA
I actually found this breakdown by Warner insightful. By the Giants game last year Mac wasn’t always “making something out of nothing” — there’s a parade of horribles in blocking and route running and play design, but again and again in this film even when he gets solid protection and open receivers he just cannot make the throw or see where the throw should go. It’s a pretty big indictment of Mac, although of course people will say he was broken by then, the revolving coordinators, etc. Plenty of blame to go around.
That's also true.
 

j-man

Member
Dec 19, 2012
3,816
Arkansas
after brady left there was always going to be a dropoff unless u couild cretae 1989 joe montana in his place

what hurt bill in the end was the 28-3 comeback to ATL

bill allreald had jimmy g ready at qb for the next season had ATL won 35-17 or 42-10 bill wouild had traded brady to a NFC Team allthrough i doubt he gets kraft appoval but i couild had saw a thing to where Kyle gets the SF job trades 2 ones and a def starter to ne for brady brady QB sf for 4-5 years wins 2-3 super bowls and bill wins 10-11 games a year and gets shula rec but cant pass KC one of those 1st round picks wouild been SF 3rd overall pick in 17
 

j-man

Member
Dec 19, 2012
3,816
Arkansas
so in retrosept was the 2018 super bowl worth it for kraft as a broncos fan i say yes because mahomes wouild have 4 rings

but unlees mayo is mike tomiln keeping brady instead or reload with jimmy might turn u into to the broncos 2017 onwards unlees drake may is a top qb u will be stuck in a 4-9 win loop for 5-10 years
 

johnmd20

mad dog
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2003
62,390
New York City
after brady left there was always going to be a dropoff unless u couild cretae 1989 joe montana in his place

what hurt bill in the end was the 28-3 comeback to ATL

bill allreald had jimmy g ready at qb for the next season had ATL won 35-17 or 42-10 bill wouild had traded brady to a NFC Team allthrough i doubt he gets kraft appoval but i couild had saw a thing to where Kyle gets the SF job trades 2 ones and a def starter to ne for brady brady QB sf for 4-5 years wins 2-3 super bowls and bill wins 10-11 games a year and gets shula rec but cant pass KC one of those 1st round picks wouild been SF 3rd overall pick in 17
This is a take. A legitimately bad take. What hurt Bill was winning the Super Bowl?

Brady wasn't leaving after the 2016 season. And Jimmy G wasn't taking his place at that point because Brady stayed awesome despite his age. Pats lost the 2018 Super Bowl and Brady still stayed two more years.
 

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
13,020
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
This is a take. A legitimately bad take. What hurt Bill was winning the Super Bowl?

Brady wasn't leaving after the 2016 season. And Jimmy G wasn't taking his place at that point because Brady stayed awesome despite his age. Pats lost the 2018 Super Bowl and Brady still stayed two more years.
I do think there's a universe in which the Patriots lose 41-17 to the Falcons, Garoppolo gets extended and Brady isn't the QB in 2018. Brady stayed awesome and Bill still wouldn't give him an extension and still had Jimmy as the succession plan up until the last possible time he could trade him.
 

johnmd20

mad dog
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2003
62,390
New York City
I do think there's a universe in which the Patriots lose 41-17 to the Falcons, Garoppolo gets extended and Brady isn't the QB in 2018. Brady stayed awesome and Bill still wouldn't give him an extension and still had Jimmy as the succession plan up until the last possible time he could trade him.
But the Atlanta SB was the 2016 season. Lose or win, the Pats, with Brady, made the Super Bowl the next two seasons. And he did lose the Super Bowl in the 2017 season and he stayed with the Pats two more seasons. A Super Bowl loss never resulted in Brady even being close to leaving the Pats.

Bill wasn't walking away from that consistent production. I don't see a world where Brady isn't on the team for the entirety of the 2010s. He was too good. If Brady got old like a normal human, maybe. But he wasn't normal.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
45,906
Melrose, MA
Lose or win, the Pats, with Brady, made the Super Bowl the next two seasons. And he did lose the Super Bowl in the 2017 season and he stayed with the Pats two more seasons. A Super Bowl loss never resulted in Brady even being close to leaving the Pats.
True, but by the time they lost that SB, Jimmy was gone. And Brady threw for 505 yards and 3 TDs in the losing effort.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,825
That’s more like it. :)

Harris’ take mirrors a lot of what I’ve been saying for awhile so obviously I found what he’s describing here pretty interesting. But even putting aside the Mac stuffthere are some wrinkles and/or additional detail in here that I found interesting:

1) That the team was collectively underwhelmed when Bill brought in Cam Newton in 2020. Harris doesn’t dwell on the point but he suggested the team felt Bill seemed lackadaisical about replacing Brady when it was obvious to everyone for the whole previous year that he wouldn’t be back.
They didn’t really have a lot of options. They had been kicking the can down the road for 15 years with Brady. That year the bill came due. The one thing they might have done differently is draft Jordan Love and let him sit on the bench and learn for a couple of years. But that would still have meant signing Cam Newton (or another retread) to start for a couple of years while Love learned the job.

2)) That the changing of the offensive scheme in 2022 was either because Bill a) was paranoid about using another team’s scheme b) refused to run it back bc he was sore about McDaniels leaving or c) felt they needed a scheme they could call their own even if it was basically the same plays with different names. This part was absolutely worth listening to I thought.
The Patriots ran variants of Erhardt-Perkins for the better part of 50 years. Through multiple regimes. They ran a complex variant thereof, of course, given the changes in the game since Ray Perkins’s day. I’m not sure that the offense changed so radically in 2022 so much as they just tried accounting for the fact that they had a noodle armed QB that couldn’t throw the ball accurately if the ball had to travel more than 20 yards in the air.

Mac Jones was never any good. Mac Jones could have had Bill Walsh as an offensive coordinator and he still would have failed, because Mac Jones lacks the necessary physical and mental tools to be an NFL QB. He has the arm of Pete Gray with the mental toughness of Tony Eason.
That’s actually an insult to both Tony Eason and Pete Gray (unless you’re comparing their right arms, in which case it’s a toss up).

They could have given him Don Coryell and Kyle Shanahan and Mac still would have failed because Mac fucking sucks and he's a selfish weak willed asshole.
Could you imagine Macaroni Jones trying to run Air Coryell? The comedy value would be off the charts.
 

j-man

Member
Dec 19, 2012
3,816
Arkansas
This is a take. A legitimately bad take. What hurt Bill was winning the Super Bowl?

Brady wasn't leaving after the 2016 season. And Jimmy G wasn't taking his place at that point because Brady stayed awesome despite his age. Pats lost the 2018 Super Bowl and Brady still stayed two more years.
my point was bill dug his heels in on brady and was not wrong in his eyes bill just lacked OFF createtivey and was stick in mid 90's football once josh left really dick rayburn needs a sature as well because without his glowing rec on brady they pick tim rattay with tim rattay basiccy bill is out of NE by 2005 and then back in dallas as parcells DC

by the way as far as college goes tim rattay was the better college qb by a mile than brady

that 03-04 pats teams still makes the playoffs but they are a 2nd round team and out
 

Toe Nash

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2005
5,733
02130
This is a good point. Does anyone really have a problem with Bill bringing in Cam?
Yes, because they should have tanked for a better pick after losing the GOAT like they ended up doing last year. The roster was not great and they had no QB. They were lucky to even get Mac in that draft.
 

dynomite

Member
SoSH Member
Yes, because they should have tanked for a better pick after losing the GOAT like they ended up doing last year. The roster was not great and they had no QB. They were lucky to even get Mac in that draft.
This is interesting! I'm not sure I agree with the logic, though -- there were so many Super Bowl winning veterans on that team, not to mention Belichick's pride and quest for Shula's record, that I don't see any way this would have happened.

The 2020 roster apart from Brady -- which I get is like saying "The Bulls without Jordan" or "The Oilers without Gretzky" but still -- was pretty still somewhat related to the 2018 SB team and the 2019 team that had hosted a playoff game. Harris/Michel/Burkhead/White at RB, Edelman and Meyers at WR, and a defense that finished 7th in points allowed and featured a pretty stacked secondary (Gilmore/McCourty/Adrian Phillips/JC Jackson).

I still think Cam was a solid gamble. If he'd been good that Patriots team would have been pretty good. Instead Cam wasn't good, the offense ranked 27th in points scored, and Bob's your uncle.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,838
Yes, because they should have tanked for a better pick after losing the GOAT like they ended up doing last year. The roster was not great and they had no QB. They were lucky to even get Mac in that draft.
The problem was that it was unclear they could simply get bad enough to snag Trever Lawrence, the only first round QB from that draft that is anywhere close to being worth his draft slot. Sure, they could have drafted other positions, but I'm not sure they would have gone that direction. Deliberate tanking seldom works in the NFL.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
38,900
Hingham, MA
The problem was that it was unclear they could simply get bad enough to snag Trever Lawrence, the only first round QB from that draft that is anywhere close to being worth his draft slot. Sure, they could have drafted other positions, but I'm not sure they would have gone that direction. Deliberate tanking seldom works in the NFL.
I do wonder how many games the 2020 team would have won with Stidham at QB. You're right that it may not have been enough to snag Lawrence. We also don't know how any of those other QBs might have played in NE.

Also, we might have Micah Parsons.
 

EricFeczko

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 26, 2014
4,892
McCorkle is so bad at NFL he was named McCorkle from birth.

McCorkle is so bad at NFL that his stats are worse when he’s given the freedom to throw and little pressure ( early 2022 ) than when he’s repeatedly sacked and hurried by a weak OL ( late 2022 ).
 

Old Fart Tree

the maven of meat
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 10, 2001
14,382
Boulder, CO
This is a take. A legitimately bad take. What hurt Bill was winning the Super Bowl?

Brady wasn't leaving after the 2016 season. And Jimmy G wasn't taking his place at that point because Brady stayed awesome despite his age. Pats lost the 2018 Super Bowl and Brady still stayed two more years.
Yeah I… I don’t really know what to make of that “logic.” Especially when, you know, they won ANOTHER Super Bowl after that. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

But either way, the pats aren’t gonna compete until they find a top ten or top 12 QB, and it’s as simple as that. Everything else is window dressing.
 

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
9,087
Philly
I think the problem with if X doesn't happen then Y wouldn't have happened is you don't know that and you can't possibly predict what would have happened.

I think J-man you are right that a lot had to break right for the Pats dynasty and part of that was luck, for sure. To be fair though you can say that about any SB winner and dynasty! But it is dubious to me to say well if it weren't for Rehbein that none of this would happen. Didn't Grier like Brady too? And maybe it happens with Bledsoe anyway. A lot has to go right for teams to win and history is a fragile interwoven set of strings where if you undo one the rest would in theory unravel. Does pulling it apart actually help analyze anything though? I don't think it does and it is so speculative the conversation derails pretty quickly. It's amusing to think sometimes about but you can't take it seriously. For me I think what if they had drafted AJ Brown instead of Harry. And then I pound my head into the nearest concrete wall. I guess maybe not so fun ;)
 

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
8,928
I don't think too many people have a problem with them signing Newton. The problem is that they had a soon to be 43 year old quarterback who wanted out and the plan for next year was Jarrett Stidham and whatever crap is left on the junkheap at the end of the offseason.

I cannot believe that we are still debating on any level that Mac Jones being terrible and Bill Belichick royally botching the position are somehow mutually exclusive. Hell, the former even rolls rather nicely into the latter.
Absolutely was fine on signing Newton. What’s incredibly difficult to understand is that Newton fell in their lap. How could BB really have been planning on Stidham as his starting QB? It just boggles my mind.
 

Captaincoop

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
13,858
Santa Monica, CA
I think the problem with if X doesn't happen then Y wouldn't have happened is you don't know that and you can't possibly predict what would have happened.

I think J-man you are right that a lot had to break right for the Pats dynasty and part of that was luck, for sure. To be fair though you can say that about any SB winner and dynasty! But it is dubious to me to say well if it weren't for Rehbein that none of this would happen. Didn't Grier like Brady too? And maybe it happens with Bledsoe anyway. A lot has to go right for teams to win and history is a fragile interwoven set of strings where if you undo one the rest would in theory unravel. Does pulling it apart actually help analyze anything though? I don't think it does and it is so speculative the conversation derails pretty quickly. It's amusing to think sometimes about but you can't take it seriously. For me I think what if they had drafted AJ Brown instead of Harry. And then I pound my head into the nearest concrete wall. I guess maybe not so fun ;)
I totally agree with 99% of your post, but nothing good was happening with Bledsoe by 2001. He was a mess.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,838
Absolutely was fine on signing Newton. What’s incredibly difficult to understand is that Newton fell in their lap. How could BB really have been planning on Stidham as his starting QB? It just boggles my mind.
The Patriots had zero cap space. Brady's void years, Antonio Brown fiasco, et al depleted their space to near zero.