SBLII: What Did the Butler Do?

Sportsbstn

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 8, 2004
8,794
They did adjust in the second half. Correct me if I am wrong, but to start the game, Rowe (6'1") was on Jeffery (6'3"). In the second half they switched GIlmore (6'0") to cover Jeffery.

I think this is a combination of a bunch of things. Butler being sick. Butler not being effective in the slot. Butler being smaller. Butler having a down year. Butler having a bad week of practice. Butler having problems with coaching.
The switch to Gilmore on Jeffrey was made before the half
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
37,069
Hingham, MA
Man in retrospect I wish they had just traded Butler straight up for Cooks, kept pick #32, and figured out the #2 CB position some other way. But It Is What It Is.
 

Riconway3155

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
775
Ma
A friend texted me saying that Butler is expected to speak to the media today, but I can't find any information on that. Has anyone else heard this?
 

RoDaddy

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jun 19, 2002
3,247
Albany area, NY
If there's any truth to Rapoport's report that there were multiple factors involved in Butler's benching (showing up a day late, a bad week of practice, attitude issues, a violation of team rule), isn't it time to hear from Butler that the issue was somewhat complicated rather than just his "They gave up on me" etc. that throws BB under the bus?
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
24,661
where I was last at
Or it's:

"The outfielders have made 8 errors on deep fly balls today. Hmmm...our guy is throwing 88 MPH and his curve isn't biting. Let's put in the guy who hasn't pitched effectively in two weeks and recently disclosed he has arm soreness. That will do the trick!"
Could be, but whether you stick with your starter too long, your outfielders can't catch a can of corn, or your DBs can't defend a pass, a manager should probably make a game-time personnel adjustment recognizing the reality of the situation.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,406
around the way
How dare Belichick think that Rowe gave them the best chance to win and play him, when my zero years of professional experience tells me that Butler was obviously the better option? Even the talk radio hosts and Dan Shaughnessy agree with me. How dare he?

You fucking guys need to turn off your radios and watch one of your five Three Games To Glory videos.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
34,402
How rigorous was the Friday practice? A less-than-100% Butler might have been able to be a full participant on Friday if it wasn't a very intense session. We know very little here.
 

Ralphwiggum

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2012
9,827
Needham, MA
The baseball analogies are stupid because once you take a guy out of a baseball game you can’t put him back in.

Literally the only thing I am questioning is why they didn’t try Butler for a series. Three plays. If he’s awful and gets toasted and every bit as bad (or worse) then the guys playing in his place, go back to the other guys.
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
24,661
where I was last at
Its a managerial analogy and assessing and adjusting to game-time situations/reality.

And I agee what would have been the harm in seeing if Butler could be effective.
 

TheoShmeo

Skrub's sympathy case
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
12,890
Boston, NY
How dare Belichick think that Rowe gave them the best chance to win and play him, when my zero years of professional experience tells me that Butler was obviously the better option? Even the talk radio hosts and Dan Shaughnessy agree with me. How dare he?

You fucking guys need to turn off your radios and watch one of your five Three Games To Glory videos.
I well understand this take. Bill's accomplishments are what they are. And I am far from a Pats fan who is grabbing a pitchfork.

But it doesn't take a talk show yahoo to note that it's one thing to bench Butler -- for whatever reason -- to start the game and it's quite another thing to see that your D is getting fucking shredded and to nevertheless leave a starting CB who played 98% of the snaps on the bench for the entire game. And the disciplinary angle is tough for me to accept because Butler actually played in the game, albeit one snap. If he was being benched and was still dressed for depth reasons, that in and of itself is a little bit of having it both ways, and so is playing him for even a snap. So bottom line, BB does deserve all the deference in the world regarding how he attacked the game to start. But sorry, when he saw Philly routinely going up and down the field on his D and he had a guy just standing there who he had on the field for virtually the entire season, I think the questions are more than fair. The DVDs can wait.

As to In Bill I Trust, there's no one I would rather have coaching the Pats and I will sign up for another 10 years. Period.

That said, there is a decent list of things one could question.

Included:

- Going for it on 4th and13 while in FG range in the Abomination Game;

- Trading Branch after Givens left before the 2006 season;

- Not calling a TO against the Seahawks because he could read Carroll's soul; worked out beautifully but if it had not, we'd all wonder a lot about why he did not preserve the TOs;

- The truly odd game plans for the last two losses in 2005, which essentially gave Denver a home game in the AFCCG and made winning much harder given the Pats' history in Denver;

- Trading Jimmy mid-season and losing the insurance of a quarterback substantially better than Brian Hoyer if Brady went down (as he almost did) for, essentially, a one round move in draft pick compensation and the chance to keep Jimmy from choosing an AFC team.

There are other things one could note. The point is not to re-litigate each item. Good arguments exist on both sides for each of them. The point is that questioning Bill in the past or now given all of the above does not make one a presumptuous ninny or a classic talk show shut in. Bill is the best human HC/GM there is, but he's still human and therefore subject to second guessing.
 
In his post-SB podcast, Bill Simmons suggested a theory I've not seen here: Belichick told Butler he wouldn't be starting not too long before the game, and Butler reacted badly, which meant that Belichick only at that point decided to relegate him to the "break glass in case of emergency/injury" guy. That makes at least as much as 90% of the suggestions in this thread, methinks.

(Note - this was just a Simmons theory, not anything backed by hard evidence.)
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
53,850
In his post-SB podcast, Bill Simmons suggested a theory I've not seen here: Belichick told Butler he wouldn't be starting not too long before the game, and Butler reacted badly, which meant that Belichick only at that point decided to relegate him to the "break glass in case of emergency/injury" guy. That makes at least as much as 90% of the suggestions in this thread, methinks.

(Note - this was just a Simmons theory, not anything backed by hard evidence.)

Actually, that’s been mentioned in here somewhere.
 

RetractableRoof

tolerates intolerance
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2003
3,836
Quincy, MA
If this were BBs first playoff game or his Superbowl I could understand the anger/frustration. But this man was working on his eighth appearance in a game this large and coming in was 2 plays from 7-0 (and maybe 3 plays from 4-3). Plus countless playoff games. It isn't his first rodeo, and anyone acting like he couldn't figure out that his defense could have used a boost is nuts. Anyone that thinks he wouldn't have asked him for one play or one series if it was possible to make a difference that way is nuts.

He didn't play him for a reason, based on a lifetime of experience and giving everything to his profession. There is nothing wrong with Monday morning QB conversations imo, but the outrage and anger and demand of an explanation is so far out of line. The idea that I might know even a fraction about being a head coach or running an entire organization compared to the greatest coach in NFL history is beyond laughable. No one is infallible but to think I would know enough about this situation (without the entire context) to believe I could offer an approach that BB hadn't considered is high comedy. Anyone doing that must think awful highly of themselves.

But hey I've only been watching him for 17 years
or so - maybe this BB guy will grow into the job a bit. Sometimes the moment is just too big for a person.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,387
Let's say for a minute that the Butler situation can fairly be described as Bill sticking rigidly to Bill's principles. And let's say for a minute that this cost them the Super Bowl. Just for the sake of discussion.

If back in 2000, you would be told that Belichick would take over this team and implement a program with a set of rigid principles that would produce 5 Super Bowl championships, 3 Super Bowl losses, 17 straight winning seasons, 12 seasons of 12+ wins, 15 division titles, and 12 trips to the AFCCG, even if it occasionally cost them a possible championship or two (like maybe 2015 with the strange coaching decisions against Miami that cost them HFA, and this Butler situation), is there any Patriots fan that would not have been THRILLED with that result?

If there is a fan that would NOT be thrilled with that, that fan should be shot. Or forced to root for the Jets, which may be worse.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,478
Melrose, MA
How dare Belichick think that Rowe gave them the best chance to win and play him, when my zero years of professional experience tells me that Butler was obviously the better option?.
By that final drive, he literally could not have been worse.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,478
Melrose, MA
Let's say for a minute that the Butler situation can fairly be described as Bill sticking rigidly to Bill's principles. And let's say for a minute that this cost them the Super Bowl. Just for the sake of discussion.

If back in 2000, you would be told that Belichick would take over this team and implement a program with a set of rigid principles that would produce 5 Super Bowl championships, 3 Super Bowl losses, 17 straight winning seasons, 12 seasons of 12+ wins, 15 division titles, and 12 trips to the AFCCG, even if it occasionally cost them a possible championship or two (like maybe 2015 with the strange coaching decisions against Miami that cost them HFA, and this Butler situation), is there any Patriots fan that would not have been THRILLED with that result?

If there is a fan that would NOT be thrilled with that, that fan should be shot. Or forced to root for the Jets, which may be worse.
This is a wholly different issue. Even if this was 100% certain BB having a Grady moment, BB’s track record of success is still an obvious difference between the two.

As infuriated by when happened Sunday as I am, I’m not one of those calling for BB’s firing.
 

Marceline

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2002
6,441
Canton, MA
This is a wholly different issue. Even if this was 100% certain BB having a Grady moment, BB’s track record of success is still an obvious difference between the two.

As infuriated by when happened Sunday as I am, I’m not one of those calling for BB’s firing.
Is anyone calling for his firing? That seems to be a straw man. I think we can question and criticize this particular decision while still believing he is by far the best coach in the NFL.
 

PaulinMyrBch

Don't touch his dog food
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 10, 2003
8,316
MYRTLE BEACH!!!!
I'd love to have the time (and access) to review the last 3 games Butler played and the practice film for Super Bowl week. I have to think BB knows a bit more about what he was seeing on tape than what anyone reporting things on this story will ever know. Reports are coming out that teammates weren't surprised by the benching based on what they were seeing. So this may have been a 100% football move and MB fell that far, that fast. It's totally possible that he was in some packages that didn't get called due to the personnel the Eagles had on the field. It's also possible the late decision may have been that BB was evaluating him right up through warmups. If he showed up looking like he had a rough night, maybe that was the last straw.

If nothing else this proves how hard it is to repeat. Hard to maintain focus the second time around. I only hope the loss drives the offseason in a way that more than one player comes out with a scorched earth mentality.

And Butler will probably have his best year playing for someone else. At least it won't be all Jimmy G "what could have been" stories next year, it will be a mixture of both.
 

Humphrey

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2010
3,163
By that final drive, he literally could not have been worse.
Funny thing is, and I've posted it here before, worse would have been better. Completely blowing a coverage and giving up a 30-40 yard gainer (or td) would have been better than the Eagles making several first downs and bleeding the clock, which until it got under 5 minutes they probably weren't even trying to do.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,387
This is a wholly different issue. Even if this was 100% certain BB having a Grady moment, BB’s track record of success is still an obvious difference between the two.

As infuriated by when happened Sunday as I am, I’m not one of those calling for BB’s firing.
I get why you'd say it's a completely different issue, but I don't know that it is. We can be livid at any single instance where BB costs us a game or even a championship. But we must remember that the same guy, operating under the same principles, has given us more than we ever dreamt possible as Patriots' fans, and that if he was a different kind of coach, in no way would the Pats have had this kind of success. Heck, good chance he isn't even here this length of time.

The point is that even if we grant the premise that this is on BB, it's the very same approach that has brought all this success that may have cost the Pats in this instance. And that's a trade I'm willing to make without even thinking twice.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,100
Where's Will McSclusive when you need him? I fear the writers out there now can't find their own shadow. Did any of them discover anything significant on Deflategate, for example?
None of them uncovered anything significant on Deflategate because there was nothing to discover, other than Ideal Gas Law and measurement errors.

More on topic: I'm expecting that it may take a few weeks before the full story comes out. I'm assuming that the cause was a combination of illness, bad practices, and a general, season-long trend of issues around Butler. Which means that there's unlikely to be one true "smoking gun" incident, but just a slew of issues that finally pushed Bill over the line. I'm also assuming that Patricia was fully on board with it as well.

It will come out; it's too big of a story. Between Patricia's and McDaniel's departures, and the usual turnover among players and staff, there will be people willing to share what they know. And people will know pieces, and a good reporter will be able to piece together the fragments.

It will take time, and it will not be a sports radio hack like Minnehane breaking the story (several of his key points have already been disputed). And, of course, there will be room for interpretation between the lines.
 
Last edited:

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,504
Let's say for a minute that the Butler situation can fairly be described as Bill sticking rigidly to Bill's principles. And let's say for a minute that this cost them the Super Bowl. Just for the sake of discussion.
Sheer speculation on my part, but if Belichek benched Butler because of his "principles" (TEAM first), then it strikes me that the worse the Pats defense was playing, the less likely it would be that Belichek would put Butler in. If he puts Butler in and the defense starts making stops, then Butler gets all the credit and the last laugh. Something I'm sure BB would want to avoid if this was about his principles.

Just spitballin' here.
 

Captaincoop

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
13,487
Santa Monica, CA
Sheer speculation on my part, but if Belichek benched Butler because of his "principles" (TEAM first), then it strikes me that the worse the Pats defense was playing, the less likely it would be that Belichek would put Butler in. If he puts Butler in and the defense starts making stops, then Butler gets all the credit and the last laugh. Something I'm sure BB would want to avoid if this was about his principles.

Just spitballin' here.
How the team is playing has no impact on whether Belichick is putting him in at that point. This is not about Bill Belichick's ego or about who gets the last laugh. If it was a disciplinary decision (which seems at least pretty clear now), then the decision was a final one at the moment it was made.
 

Bowhemian

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2015
5,701
Bow, NH
They did adjust in the second half. Correct me if I am wrong, but to start the game, Rowe (6'1") was on Jeffery (6'3"). In the second half they switched GIlmore (6'0") to cover Jeffery.

I think this is a combination of a bunch of things. Butler being sick. Butler not being effective in the slot. Butler being smaller. Butler having a down year. Butler having a bad week of practice. Butler having problems with coaching.
Butler, Butler, BUTLERRR!!
 

Bellhorn

Lumiere
SoSH Member
Aug 22, 2006
2,328
Brighton, MA
I get why you'd say it's a completely different issue, but I don't know that it is. We can be livid at any single instance where BB costs us a game or even a championship. But we must remember that the same guy, operating under the same principles, has given us more than we ever dreamt possible as Patriots' fans, and that if he was a different kind of coach, in no way would the Pats have had this kind of success. Heck, good chance he isn't even here this length of time.

The point is that even if we grant the premise that this is on BB, it's the very same approach that has brought all this success that may have cost the Pats in this instance. And that's a trade I'm willing to make without even thinking twice.
You are continuing to miss the point. Obviously, if this decision turns out to be nothing more than a particularly intransigent application of The Patriot Way, then so be it. The question is whether that is a fully satisfactory explanation of this particular incident.
 

PaulinMyrBch

Don't touch his dog food
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 10, 2003
8,316
MYRTLE BEACH!!!!
I think it was a combination of several factors as have been reported, but ultimately for BB, I think it came down to football. I think he honestly felt the D had a better chance with Rowe on a big and Chung/Bademosi in the slot. We don't know all the matchups they were preparing for, so we can't rule out that Butler may have been a starter on a special package that just never got used due to Eagles personnel. And the greatest coach in the history of football reviewed practice film that we'll never see.

If it was strictly discipline, then I doubt he's on the punt team. When Welker went off on the feet in that press conference, the punishment was one offensive series. Granted that isn't the same level of transgression, but it was clearly punishment and BB made no bones about the fact that it was. He never said it was best for the football team to have Welker on the sidelines. If he was punishing Butler, then I think he would have made that clear to some degree.
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
Don't listen to WEEI.
I listened between 2:00 and 6:00 yesterday, and the hosts offered 4 hours of common sense. There were a couple of nut case callers. It’s not all bad. The competing station, at least in the afternoon, is a cesspool.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
42,297
AZ
It's amazing how many Patriots fans have completely lost touch with reality. It's gonna be brutal for them when BB and Brady are done.
It's going to be brutal for even the reasonable Patriots fans.

Look, this thread is not unusual. This is what happens after every awful loss when you've come so close. It can take many forms. Complaining about officiating. Complaining about the other team's class. Hand wringing about a thousand perceived slights. Calling players out because they are seen with a beer in a facebook post.

If the Patriots lose another Super Bowl, there will be a thread on SOSH that is 20 pages in 36 hours un-raveling every facet of something or other.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,012
Mansfield MA
Man in retrospect I wish they had just traded Butler straight up for Cooks, kept pick #32, and figured out the #2 CB position some other way. But It Is What It Is.
Yeah, it seems like Belichick miscalculated how Butler would respond to being in a contract year (as opposed to, say, Logan Ryan). But the front seven was going to be shaky coming into the year; it would have been tough to leave the D in a position where the secondary was also shaky.

And it would have been tough to deal Butler at the deadline a la Jamie Collins - Gilmore had just missed three games and Rowe was in the middle of missing seven straight (and 8 of 9). So it's probably best they kept Butler. I guess.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,387
You are continuing to miss the point. Obviously, if this decision turns out to be nothing more than a particularly intransigent application of The Patriot Way, then so be it. The question is whether that is a fully satisfactory explanation of this particular incident.
It might not be. He might have made a huge mistake. I offered the premise of IF this was just part of how BB operates, then his way of operating has been enormously successful.

Of course, that premise could be wrong.
 

DourDoerr

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 15, 2004
2,937
Berkeley, CA
It was mentioned upthread (and my apologies to the poster who made the point - it was pages ago), that another side of benching Butler is that you're rewarding the next guy up for practicing diligently and, presumably, with some level of skill. It's an important principle and has resonance throughout this run. Butler himself is a perfect example. He didn't really play much until the 2nd half of the Seattle SB and his playing time was a result of the starter sucking AND Butler being diligent in his preparation and practicing, presumably, with some level of skill.

It goes to the core of what BB and this Patriots dynasty stand for. Always be prepared - you may be playing at any moment. It's a great motivator to get the bottom of the roster motivated and ready to step up. Other teams and coaches marvel at the Pats' ability to have backups step in and how there's little decline in the unit's play. It's because of this principle - and the iron will behind it to enforce it - that makes this a profound reason why they've been to 8 SB's in this era.
 

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
41,949
I listened between 2:00 and 6:00 yesterday, and the hosts offered 4 hours of common sense. There were a couple of nut case callers. It’s not all bad. The competing station, at least in the afternoon, is a cesspool.
I agree. I want to hear what guys like Christian Fauria have to say. After all, he knows BB better than any of us do, he played for the guy, and his feeling was that he has no doubt in his mind that if Belichick made a decision to bench him, he would stick by that decision regardless of what happened on the field. Yeah, it flies in the face of what's in the "best interests of the team on the field," but that's who Belichick is and that's who he is always going to be. For better or worse.

And it sucks, IMO, for everyone not named Malcolm Butler. Great, he was punished. Now, he only has 2 Super Bowl rings instead of 3, and will soon have tens of millions in the bank, while the rest of his team, including a bunch of guys that have never been there and may never get back there, members of the staff and the organization, as well as millions of fans, get screwed. But Bill got to be a man of his word (a word he won't share with anyone else apparently) and stick to his guns, and that's one of the reasons he's been so successful and blah, blah...

It sucks and it stinks and it sucks.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

Throw Momma From the Train
Moderator
SoSH Member
May 20, 2003
35,734
Deep inside Muppet Labs
And it sucks, IMO, for everyone not named Malcolm Butler. Great, he was punished. Now, he only has 2 Super Bowl rings instead of 3, and will soon have tens of millions in the bank, while the rest of his team, including a bunch of guys that have never been there and may never get back there, members of the staff and the organization, as well as millions of fans, get screwed. But Bill got to be a man of his word (a word he won't share with anyone else apparently) and stick to his guns, and that's one of the reasons he's been so successful and blah, blah...

It sucks and it stinks and it sucks.
He won't share it with people outside of the organization. I highly doubt he refused to share it with the coaching staff. And at least one of the reports says the team captains were aware of the decision at coin flip time.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
30,244
And it sucks, IMO, for everyone not named Malcolm Butler. Great, he was punished. Now, he only has 2 Super Bowl rings instead of 3, and will soon have tens of millions in the bank, while the rest of his team, including a bunch of guys that have never been there and may never get back there, members of the staff and the organization, as well as millions of fans, get screwed.
I don't feel screwed.
 

jmanny24

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 6, 2003
620
I'm sure this has been brought up but how would things change (from a coaching and fans' perspective) if you replace Butler with Brady or Gronk and the defense holds Philly to 14 points and they still lose because they struggled mightily to move the ball? Curious people's thoughts on this.
 

DourDoerr

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 15, 2004
2,937
Berkeley, CA
I wonder where BB gets his info from during halftime. I'm curious if he consults Ernie Adams at these moments to figure out what kind of switches he may need to make. We know Adams looks at the game differently and with a laser focus. The decision to keep benching MB might be tied to it. They weren't getting pressure so perhaps that knowledge - combined with photo/observations that Rowe, etc. were not consistently out of position - was enough to keep throwing out the same lineup.

It's been a hallmark of the defense this season to clamp down somewhat in the 2nd half and BB may have been expecting the same. We simply don't know what he was seeing that contradicts the fans' consensus reaction that MB would be better - or that a change at CB was needed at that moment. BB has always been consistent and one factor within that skillset is his ability to surprise and my assumption is that Adams plays a role in that. Not making a switch to MB certainly fits that narrative. All speculation on my part, of course.
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
Yeah, it seems like Belichick miscalculated how Butler would respond to being in a contract year (as opposed to, say, Logan Ryan). But the front seven was going to be shaky coming into the year; it would have been tough to leave the D in a position where the secondary was also shaky.

And it would have been tough to deal Butler at the deadline a la Jamie Collins - Gilmore had just missed three games and Rowe was in the middle of missing seven straight (and 8 of 9). So it's probably best they kept Butler. I guess.
So here is the wildest theory I have heard yet. Overheard while working out this morning. Offered by a 20-something personal trainer to one of his clients:

BB pulled Butler from the SB because BB was afraid Butler would fuck him. In the biggest game and on the grandest stage, obviously, cuz money. The ultimate payback.

Now I find it inconceivable. Because of the competitive drive and pride of professional athletes, because Malcolm would not do his teammates that way, and because Malcolm is not putting up shitty tape in the biggest game on the cusp of FA. So it’s nuts.

But it does go to trust. And I’m reminded of a really interesting thing Kraft said in the Two Bills 30 for 30. When Parcells bolted, he really liked BB. But he could not bring himself to offer him the job. He had to disinfect the organization, get rid of all the Parcells people. I thought it was a bit paranoid, but at a certain level I get it.

So if you add a season of not responding well in a contract year, to illness and sketchy practice during SB week and top that off with a broken curfew, maybe you get a little paranoid.

In retrospect, I wish they’d have lowered their price and dealt Butler to the Saints. The Saints obviously now are happy they didn’t.
 

Jungleland

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 2, 2009
2,351
I'm sure this has been brought up but how would things change (from a coaching and fans' perspective) if you replace Butler with Brady or Gronk and the defense holds Philly to 14 points and they still lose because they struggled mightily to move the ball? Curious people's thoughts on this.
I think this goes back to Rapoport's assertion that this was a decision based on a number of factors. Butler was mediocre this year and was coming off a practice week killing illness - Brady and Gronk are just in a different stratosphere of talent and importance at this point. A fairer comparison is probably Chris Hogan or Lewis, to which I'd react the same as I am now - I disagree with the decision, but I can see it as in character for a Coach who deserves the benefit of the doubt.
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
There's zero chance that Butler would sabotage the Super Bowl just to fuck with BB. ZERO.

That's the dumbest theory yet.
Of course. But it does get in roundabout way to the broader issue of trust. And it demonstrates how sports fans with no axe to grind — this guy is not a Pats fan or hater — are fascinated with this decision.
 

DourDoerr

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 15, 2004
2,937
Berkeley, CA
I'd venture that BB's decision to announce the cornerback switch at the last minute is to gain a small advantage. The Eagles' coaches didn't know about the switch until the game was being played, so they had little time to adjust. Pretty consistent with how BB operates.
 

Leather

given himself a skunk spot
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
28,451
In retrospect, I wish they’d have lowered their price and dealt Butler to the Saints. The Saints obviously now are happy they didn’t.
Are they? They were one play from making the NFC championship game.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
37,069
Hingham, MA
Yeah, it seems like Belichick miscalculated how Butler would respond to being in a contract year (as opposed to, say, Logan Ryan). But the front seven was going to be shaky coming into the year; it would have been tough to leave the D in a position where the secondary was also shaky.

And it would have been tough to deal Butler at the deadline a la Jamie Collins - Gilmore had just missed three games and Rowe was in the middle of missing seven straight (and 8 of 9). So it's probably best they kept Butler. I guess.
Unless #32 was used on a CB or front 7 player... yeah, I probably agree. Although I will say Jon Jones actually reminded me a lot of Butler this year, but of course he got hurt too.