SBLII: What Did the Butler Do?

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

BB makes risky decisions all the time, though. If Butler doesn't intercept Wilson in SB 49, BB gets roasted for not using his time outs at the end of the game to save time for Brady.

He made a risky move that superficially makes little sense, and it didn't work out. He'll get attacked for it, but I highly doubt he's going to change his approach.

 

[soxhop411]

For what it is worth, WEEI is reporting that Kraft is furious that Butler did not play.

I don’t buy it.

 

[DJnVa]

In a nod towards those who are mad at Belichick, lets say his ego cost them this game. How do you separate that from the same ego that got this team here, won them five other Superbowls and had them within a few freak plays of winning two more?

You don't. But it's eminently fair to wonder why, on a team that prides itself on in game adjustments, one was not made here.

It sucks because as bad as all that shit was last night--the illegal formation, the catch/no catch, pass interference on Hogan on the last play, the horrible defense, losing Cooks, the missed opportunities, the botched FG--I had 100% confidence that with about 2 minutes left, down 5, we were going to win. That's why it hurts.

All that shit happens and Pats lose by 14-18 points and it sucks and you move on. In a game where they really only needed ONE more play from someone, anyone, each little thing you can point to is magnified. And of course, that it's Butler who has made that "ONE PLAY" in the Super Bowl--it makes this hard to figure out.

I don't want to look like a whiner to my non-Pats friends and point out 2 of the Eagles TDs possibly should have come off the board (adding 8 points to their score) so I think it's fair for Pats fans to say, yeah, BB is fucking awesome, but Butler couldn't have made 1 play? Just 1?

 

[lexrageorge]

For those dismissing the Browner instagram post, apparently Bademosi liked it as well as Hightower. This thing stinks, bad.

Grain of salt and all that, but in case anyone is interested, there are a bunch more Butler-related posts on Browner's Instagram. A couple have been "liked" by former Pats (not just current ones like Hightower) and one in particular is pretty pointed ("F** the politics," addressed to BB).

My first reaction is a LOL to Bademosi's "like"; noone here really cares what he thinks.

Hightower's been here long enough to know what Bill is like; he still came back when he could have gotten the same money elsewhere. I don't think his liking a post is that big of a deal; he was probably a bit frustrated and emotional as well.

Random posts from anonymous former players don't really hold much water; again, their thoughts are not really relevant.

For what it is worth, WEEI is reporting that Kraft is furious that Butler did not play.

It's been a long, long time since WEEI has had a relevant source inside the Patriots. Kraft may very well have been emotional after the loss, and may have also mentioned Butler not playing. But I doubt that will have any long term impact on any decision.

 

[lexrageorge]

You don't. But it's eminently fair to wonder why, on a team that prides itself on in game adjustments, one was not made here.

It sucks because as bad as all that shit was last night--the illegal formation, the catch/no catch, pass interference on Hogan on the last play, the horrible defense, losing Cooks, the missed opportunities, the botched FG--that I had 100% confidence that with about 2 minutes left, down 5, we were going to win. That's why it hurts.

All that shit happens and Pats lose by 14-18 points and it sucks and you move on. In a game the really only needed ONE more play from someone, anyone, each little thing you can point to is magnified.

I don't want to look like a whiner to my non-Pats friends and point out 2 of the Eagles TDs possibly should have come off the board (adding 8 points to their score) so I think it's fair for Pats fans to say, yeah, BB is fucking awesome, but Butler couldn't have made 1 play? Just 1?

That 2nd TD should not have come off the board under any circumstances. Ertz had clearly established himself as a runner, and there is no "survive the ground" rule as a runner.

 

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

That 2nd TD should not have come off the board under any circumstances. Ertz had clearly established himself as a runner, and there is no "survive the ground" rule as a runner.

Agreed. The other TD was very questionable, but the Ertz one was legit.

 

[Buck Showalter]

No, it will not. The story of SB52 will be of Doug Pederson's brilliant game plan and Nick Foles' terrific execution of said plan to outlast an incredible offensive performance by Tom Brady. Outside of New England, the benching of Malcolm Butler will be a curious footnote at best.

Okay, not attacking you personally here - but this reads like a smoke screen for Team Belichick and it ain't going to fly.

Even Rowe has admitted that his start was unplanned. So now you're catching the back-up(s) off-guard with the move and it's unfair to their preparation as well.

I "love" Belichick. I think he's the greatest coach in the history of American Professional Sports. But if you don't think this decision doesn't hurt his legacy in the days and weeks to come.....in the face of current players, former players, and ownership (where there already exists a frosty relationship) questioning the action --- I don't think you're analyzing this properly.

I'm sure Kraft, Brady, the supporting coaching staff, and almost the entire organization is fuming this morning at BB's decision and refusal to answer the basic questions.

Someone is going to break / leak to the media.

BB can't suppress this one in its entirety.

 

[Eddie Jurak]

I doubt Butler playing would have made a significant difference. The pass rush was non-existent. The Eagles game plan was terrific and highlighted the NE linebackers’ issues with pass coverage. Sure Butler may have made a tackle that another D did not. (May) being the key word there. But he would not have flipped the final score of the game I watched yesteday.

Define ‘significant difference’. This game arguably turned on 1 play not being made out of 12-15.

 

[Byrdbrain]

For what it is worth, WEEI is reporting that Kraft is furious that Butler did not play.

Unless I heard it wrong they were playing a prediction game and were just throwing crap out there. I'm almost 100% positive they weren't saying that as fact.

 

[Hoodie Sleeves]

I don't think it's flu related. That doesn't explain Butler's postgame comments, it doesn't explain why he was available for special teams (as opposed to being inactive), and, even with large grains of salt taken, doesn't explain Browner's comments.

Sure it does.

The rumors were that he had the flu all week. Maybe he felt better and wanted to play, but the coaches thought he looked like trash, and didn't have the stamina to play a full game. He disagreed. I could see being really upset when you think you're ready to play and the coaches disagree.

I've never played in the NFL, but I was a D1 college athlete - and I've tried to compete sick before. The point where you think you're healthy enough to compete is way earlier than the point where you're actually healthy enough to compete.

I don't see any problem with the coaches saying "Sure, this guy can run down the field once in a while and play ST, but not run backwards at full speed 75 times in a game". That's a reasonable opinion.

Browners comments don't need to be explained - he's not on the team and has no special knowledge.

 

[Ed Hillel]

That 2nd TD should not have come off the board under any circumstances. Ertz had clearly established himself as a runner, and there is no "survive the ground" rule as a runner.

Yup, I thought both plays were quite obvious - the first was incomplete and the second was a TD. I’m baffled they didn’t overturn the Clement play, it was clear as day, but whatever. That’s not why they lost.

 

[NortheasternPJ]

I don’t buy it.

Why not?

We've been led to believe that BB makes all football decisions, especially on game day. BB decided to bench Butler, they got smoked on D and the owner is pissed they lost. There's 359 posts so far on this same topic, all saying the same thing.

I'm not saying that Kraft would interfere or do anything about it, but it's extremely likely he's pissed as are many on this board.

 

[DeadlySplitter]

every championship team we've fielded has had some type of decent defense. made a couple huge plays. last two SB losses especially, inept defenses couldn't get it done.

you can have the best offense in the history of the game (that's how they played last night for 90% of the time), but it's really hard to get away with inept defense.

 

[Deathofthebambino]

That 2nd TD should not have come off the board under any circumstances. Ertz had clearly established himself as a runner, and there is no "survive the ground" rule as a runner.

You guys are talking about different td's. The two td's that should have come off the board were the Clement non-catch in the back of the end zone (the first one that was reviewed) and the trick play to Foles. He's not talking about the Ertz catch. The trick play to Foles was clear illegal formation. Like the most basic rule you can have. You need 7 guys on the line of scrimmage. The Eagles had 6. The refs completely whiffed on it.

 

[DeadlySplitter]

It sucks because as bad as all that shit was last night--the illegal formation, the catch/no catch, pass interference on Hogan on the last play, the horrible defense, losing Cooks, the missed opportunities, the botched FG--that I had 100% confidence that with about 2 minutes left, down 5, we were going to win. That's why it hurts.

this is probably just me but I would have felt partially guilty winning that game 39-38 or 41-38.

they did not deserve it at all. it would have been cool for Tom to shoulder the entire team to a 6th. but the team aside from O some egg on their face this morning. a reality check was harshly delivered - not saying necessarily they went into the game cocky, but still

 

[Byrdbrain]

That 2nd TD should not have come off the board under any circumstances. Ertz had clearly established himself as a runner, and there is no "survive the ground" rule as a runner.

The 2 TDs that should have come off were the Foles catch with the illegal formation and the bobble. I don't think anyone is questioning the Ertz play.

Edit: Too late

 

[Byrdbrain]

this is probably just me but I would have felt partially guilty winning that game 39-38 or 41-38.

they did not deserve it at all. it would have been cool for Tom to shoulder the entire team to a 6th. but the team aside from O some egg on their face this morning. a reality check was harshly delivered - not saying necessarily they went into the game cocky, but still

I'm guessing you would have ended up being ok with it.

 

[lexrageorge]

Yup, I thought both plays were quite obvious - the first was incomplete and the second was a TD. I’m baffled they didn’t overturn the Clement play, it was clear as day, but whatever. That’s not why they lost.

At the risk of going off-topic, and with the caveat that there's been some unusual replay reversals this season:

I can see why the Clement catch was upheld. I get the feeling from the replay that it was a very close play, and too close to reverse. The ball did slide, but it's a judgment call on whether he truly "lost" possession. He had one hand on it at least the whole time. I realize that alone is not enough to establish a catch, but it was about a close as a call can be, so letting the call on the field stand is a defensible decision in that situation.

 

[DeadlySplitter]

I'm pretty sure Riveron after being criticized for not letting "plays that look like TDs but aren't by the letter of the law" stand was more inclined to let a play like Clemente's stand. I get it and I guess we had it coming after Jesse James.

 

[Mystic Merlin]

Okay, not attacking you personally here - but this reads like a smoke screen for Team Belichick and it ain't going to fly.

Even Rowe has admitted that his start was unplanned. So now you're catching the back-up(s) off-guard with the move and it's unfair to their preparation as well.

I "love" Belichick. I think he's the greatest coach in the history of American Professional Sports. But if you don't think this decision doesn't hurt his legacy in the days and weeks to come.....in the face of current players, former players, and ownership (where there already exists a frosty relationship) questioning the action --- I don't think you're analyzing this properly.

I'm sure Kraft, Brady, the supporting coaching staff, and almost the entire organization is fuming this morning at BB's decision and refusal to answer the basic questions.

Someone is going to break / leak to the media.

BB can't suppress this one in its entirety.

If enough people say that a single personnel decision in a single game 'diminishes his legacy' then that it will become true by definition. But Bill has failed and made personnel or strategic decisions (relying on Doug Gabriel and Reche Caldwell at receiver in '06) that were/could be criticized before. He's coached in the NFL for 40 years, like other humans, even ones exceptional at a particular skill or job, he loses and is responsible for the losses to varying degrees.

The end of the 2015 season was a more prolonged and glaring series of mistakes in terms of in game performance and roster management, but the Butler saga was more visible and had more baggage that could be attached to it, so it can be used as a Legacy Moment rather readily.

 

[nolasoxfan]

For those dismissing the Browner instagram post, apparently Bademosi liked it as well as Hightower. This thing stinks, bad.

This ^ and this
>>No team has ever gained 600 yards of offense and lost. Playoffs, regular season, ever. Well, had. That has to be the craziest stat. 613 yards and lost lol.<<

are making me sick to my stomach. Last night’s game was winnable; a wasted opportunity.

I think DoTB is right, this thing stinks.

 

[kartvelo]

That 2nd TD should not have come off the board under any circumstances. Ertz had clearly established himself as a runner, and there is no "survive the ground" rule as a runner.

I believe the "2 TDs" reference is to the illegal formation TD and the OOB TD, not the "survive the ground" TD. That one was perfectly fine.

Edit: I'm so far behind the rest of you....

 

[JokersWildJIMED]

Season long personnel decisions are not in the same realm as a game day decision to bench the starting corner back and one of the emotional leaders of the team. This sure does stink and will reverberate for awhile.

 

[lexrageorge]

You guys are talking about different td's. The two td's that should have come off the board were the Clement non-catch in the back of the end zone (the first one that was reviewed) and the trick play to Foles. He's not talking about the Ertz catch. The trick play to Foles was clear illegal formation. Like the most basic rule you can have. You need 7 guys on the line of scrimmage. The Eagles had 6. The refs completely whiffed on it.

I actually missed that aspect of that play. But the following article has a different take on the situation:

https://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2018/2/4/16972192/nick-foles-touchdown-illegal-formation

 

[pedroia'sboys]

Okay, not attacking you personally here - but this reads like a smoke screen for Team Belichick and it ain't going to fly.

Even Rowe has admitted that his start was unplanned. So now you're catching the back-up(s) off-guard with the move and it's unfair to their preparation as well.

I "love" Belichick. I think he's the greatest coach in the history of American Professional Sports. But if you don't think this decision doesn't hurt his legacy in the days and weeks to come.....in the face of current players, former players, and ownership (where there already exists a frosty relationship) questioning the action --- I don't think you're analyzing this properly.

I'm sure Kraft, Brady, the supporting coaching staff, and almost the entire organization is fuming this morning at BB's decision and refusal to answer the basic questions.

Someone is going to break / leak to the media.

BB can't suppress this one in its entirety.

Ya there is not a shot in hell this does anything to his legacy. Butler fucked up somehow he crossed a line. BB has handled situations like this the same way his entire career. It's not if Butler did something it's what did he do and did it warrant the benching.

Why would Butler be informed prior to the game that he wouldn't be playing AT ALL unless it was for some non performance reason.

 

[DJnVa]

I don’t buy it.

Really? We're pretty much all furious, why wouldn't he be?

 

[nolasoxfan]

Yup. So far, pretty much everything points in one direction. “They gave up on me” is what he said, and Patricia’s and Belichick’s quotes seem to confirm that was exactly the case.

They decided a guy who played virtually every down all year should play zero snaps, and that would be the highest chance of victory. They elected a defense that left him odd man out.

What they saw is very hard to imagine. Why they stuck with it is hard to contemplate. There is a chance that it was the right decision, but didn’t work out. There is a chance they would have lost anyway.

But, for a team that allowed five TDs and three field goals in ten drives the Occam’s razor answer is that it was a high risk and highly unconventional decision that went down spectacularly in flames on the biggest stage in sports. I want a “why” that makes sense, but I don’t think there is one. I think the coaching staff saw something they thought would help them and they failed profoundly and dramatically. Their track record on those calls is pretty good. That’s why this one hurts.

I find this the most comforting scenario of all put forward. I can live with failure--even profound failure--when it is the result of sound and rational reasoning. I truly hope this was the case, because the hyenas and vultures are already out looking for a free meal at the team’s expense.

 

[DJnVa]

That 2nd TD should not have come off the board under any circumstances. Ertz had clearly established himself as a runner, and there is no "survive the ground" rule as a runner.

Yeah---totally not referring to that one. The Foles catch and the Clement TD.

 

[Harry Hooper]

At the risk of going off-topic, and with the caveat that there's been some unusual replay reversals this season:

I can see why the Clement catch was upheld. I get the feeling from the replay that it was a very close play, and too close to reverse. The ball did slide, but it's a judgment call on whether he truly "lost" possession. He had one hand on it at least the whole time. I realize that alone is not enough to establish a catch, but it was about a close as a call can be, so letting the call on the field stand is a defensible decision in that situation.

I have to disagree. There's one replay angle where his hands are cradled around the ball, but not on the ball. It's flopping against his torso/hip, negating the left foot being down in bounds when he first snagged the ball. The left foot then came down OOB. All the heat Riveron took this season got to him there, so no reversal.

Addendum: The other possibility concerns moving the replay operation from NYC to the Super Bowl site for the game. Knowing the NFL's propensity to cheap out, maybe Riveron didn't have all of his usual tools available yesterday to review the play.

 

[Byrdbrain]

I actually missed that aspect of that play. But the following article has a different take on the situation:

https://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2018/2/4/16972192/nick-foles-touchdown-illegal-formation

Interesting, he was off the line for sure but he checked and if the ref said no he would have scooted up a step or two. I just saw the still from Chatham and not the gif that shows the receiver checking.
Works for me.

 

[RedOctober3829]

Yeah---totally not referring to that one. The Foles catch and the Clement TD.

Yes those 2 plays should have been reversed. Clearly an illegal formation on the Foles catch and Clement TD was called an incomplete pass all year long. Nobody can say the refs favor the Pats after those 2 calls. Funny how there's no national outrage this morning over those because if those calls were in the Patriots favor it'd be huge controversy. Just goes to show you how hypocritical the media is.

 

[lexrageorge]

Okay, not attacking you personally here - but this reads like a smoke screen for Team Belichick and it ain't going to fly.

Even Rowe has admitted that his start was unplanned. So now you're catching the back-up(s) off-guard with the move and it's unfair to their preparation as well.

I "love" Belichick. I think he's the greatest coach in the history of American Professional Sports. But if you don't think this decision doesn't hurt his legacy in the days and weeks to come.....in the face of current players, former players, and ownership (where there already exists a frosty relationship) questioning the action --- I don't think you're analyzing this properly.

I'm sure Kraft, Brady, the supporting coaching staff, and almost the entire organization is fuming this morning at BB's decision and refusal to answer the basic questions.

Someone is going to break / leak to the media.

BB can't suppress this one in its entirety.

What if Butler was sick and looked lethargic in practice all week?

Would everyone still be fuming at Belichick? Do you have any proof that the above is not the case? Rowe also explained he practiced with the 1's most of the week.

 

[Ed Hillel]

Fwiw, I still think Butler did something and there was a disciplinary element here. Belichick might actually be protecting Butler by not mentioning what happened so it doesn’t impact him in free agency. If anything, last night drove his value up.

 

[DJnVa]

I actually missed that aspect of that play. But the following article has a different take on the situation:

https://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2018/2/4/16972192/nick-foles-touchdown-illegal-formation

Uh, no.

They ask if where they are lining up is OK at the moment they line up. With motion that can quite obviously change. That's not a good explanation for that. He was 1.5 yards back. The LOS isn't that malleable.

However, at least now we can do away with the "Patriots get all the calls" bullshit forever.

EDIT: Also, that's SB Nation.

 

[Byrdbrain]

Uh, no.

They ask if where they are lining up is OK at the moment they line up. With motion that can quite obviously change. That's not a good explanation for that. He was 1.5 yards back. The LOS isn't that malleable.

However, at least now we can do away with the "Patriots get all the calls" bullshit forever.

The formation changed but he was the end at all times. I agree he was too far back but the ref(line judge?) said he was ok so he was ok. If the ref said he wasn't ok he would have scooted up.

 

[Ed Hillel]

However, at least now we can do away with the "Patriots get all the calls" bullshit forever.

Ha!

 

[soxhop411]

Fwiw, I still think Butler did something and there was a disciplinary element here. Belichick might actually be protecting Butler by not mentioning what happened so it doesn’t impact him in free agency. If anything, last night drove his value up.

I agree with this. We don’t have the full picture.

 

[lexrageorge]

Uh, no.

They ask if where they are lining up is OK at the moment they line up. With motion that can quite obviously change. That's not a good explanation for that. He was 1.5 yards back. The LOS isn't that malleable.

However, at least now we can do away with the "Patriots get all the calls" bullshit forever.

EDIT: Also, that's SB Nation.

Except that such a penalty is not always called in that situation. The officials probably felt he was "close enough" to make it appear he was a scrimmage line player to the defense, and that is the key point. Had he lined up half a yard forward, the Pats D still would have blown the play coverage.

 

[Ralphwiggum]

I'm totally fine with the initial decision to go with Rowe over Butler if it was in fact a game plan type decision. But when the D is getting abused all game long and you have Johnson Bademosi and Jordan Richards out there missing tackles and looking like the shitty football players that they are, and you don't throw Butler out there for a series or two to see if switching it up might slow down the Eagles, that's the part I can't understand.

He was dressed, which means at some point they planned on using him, but he was basically the last guy up in the secondary and was only going to see the field on an emergency basis if they were down a couple of other corners due to injury. Considering he played pretty much every defensive snap all season, there is something there that doesn't add up.

If he was limited by the flu then don't dress him. Dressing him and then not playing him at all is just really, really bizarre.

 

[DJnVa]

The formation changed but he was the end at all times. I agree he was too far back but the ref(line judge?) said he was ok so he was ok. If the ref said he wasn't ok he would have scooted up.

Fine. But refs screw up. That's the basis of my argument. The ref screwing up and saying he was okay presnap doesn't change the fact that he screwed up in my opinion.

EDIT: Wasn't why they lost, just frustrated.

 

[RedOctober3829]

I'm totally fine with the initial decision to go with Rowe over Butler if it was in fact a game plan type decision. But when the D is getting abused all game long and you have Johnson Bademosi and Jordan Richards out there missing tackles and looking like the shitty football players that they are, and you don't throw Butler out there for a series or two to see if switching it up might slow down the Eagles, that's the part I can't understand.

He was dressed, which means at some point they planned on using him, but he was basically the last guy up in the secondary and was only going to see the field on an emergency basis if they were down a couple of other corners due to injury. Considering he played pretty much every defensive snap all season, there is something there that doesn't add up.

If he was limited by the flu then don't dress him. Dressing him and then not playing him at all is just really, really bizarre.

My original thoughts were that Rowe and Gilmore would be on Jeffrey and Smith because of their size and Butler would be kicked inside on Agholor. That's what should have happened. It's inexcusable that this wasn't the plan. Hell, they didn't even have Gilmore follow Jeffrey until the 2nd half. The game plan was absolutely horrible.

 

[DJnVa]

Except that such a penalty is not always called in that situation. The officials probably felt he was "close enough" to make it appear he was a scrimmage line player to the defense, and that is the key point. Had he lined up half a yard forward, the Pats D still would have blown the play coverage.

Totally. My argument is more along the lines of "If the Pats get every fucking call, then they would have gotten that one. They didn't, so everyone should shut up and never ever say that again."

 

[Dollar]

I'm totally fine with the initial decision to go with Rowe over Butler if it was in fact a game plan type decision. But when the D is getting abused all game long and you have Johnson Bademosi and Jordan Richards out there missing tackles and looking like the shitty football players that they are, and you don't throw Butler out there for a series or two to see if switching it up might slow down the Eagles, that's the part I can't understand.

He was dressed, which means at some point they planned on using him, but he was basically the last guy up in the secondary and was only going to see the field on an emergency basis if they were down a couple of other corners due to injury. Considering he played pretty much every defensive snap all season, there is something there that doesn't add up.

If he was limited by the flu then don't dress him. Dressing him and then not playing him at all is just really, really bizarre.

Exactly. It makes some sense that the staff liked a certain personnel grouping that didn't include Butler to stop the Eagles receivers, but it quickly became obvious that it wasn't working. I was expecting a situation similar to SB 49, where the game plan just didn't work and they needed to make an adjustment. They put in Butler and the rest is history. The fact that they seemed to make no major secondary adjustments despite the complete shitshow is still the biggest mystery to me.

 

[JimD]

Okay, not attacking you personally here - but this reads like a smoke screen for Team Belichick and it ain't going to fly.

Even Rowe has admitted that his start was unplanned. So now you're catching the back-up(s) off-guard with the move and it's unfair to their preparation as well.

I "love" Belichick. I think he's the greatest coach in the history of American Professional Sports. But if you don't think this decision doesn't hurt his legacy in the days and weeks to come.....in the face of current players, former players, and ownership (where there already exists a frosty relationship) questioning the action --- I don't think you're analyzing this properly.

I'm sure Kraft, Brady, the supporting coaching staff, and almost the entire organization is fuming this morning at BB's decision and refusal to answer the basic questions.

Someone is going to break / leak to the media.

BB can't suppress this one in its entirety.

If enough people say that a single personnel decision in a single game 'diminishes his legacy' then that it will become true by definition. But Bill has failed and made personnel or strategic decisions (relying on Doug Gabriel and Reche Caldwell at receiver in '06) that were/could be criticized before. He's coached in the NFL for 40 years, like other humans, even ones exceptional at a particular skill or job, he loses and is responsible for the losses to varying degrees.

The end of the 2015 season was a more prolonged and glaring series of mistakes in terms of in game performance and roster management, but the Butler saga was more visible and had more baggage that could be attached to it, so it can be used as a Legacy Moment rather readily.

I don't argue that Belichick may have put himself into a more difficult situation in the coming months (and maybe the coming seasons) with how he treated Butler last night, but when we talk 'legacy' I'm defining that as how Belichick will be remembered down the road and especially after he retires. Two Super Bowl rings as a member of the Giants staff, building the Patriots into the greatest modern-era dynasty to date, eight trips to the Super Bowl and five championships as a head coach, an undefeated regular season - how can anyone argue that all of those accomplishments will be tarnished by a single player personnel decision in one game?

 

[wade boggs chicken dinner]

Uh, no.

They ask if where they are lining up is OK at the moment they line up. With motion that can quite obviously change. That's not a good explanation for that. He was 1.5 yards back. The LOS isn't that malleable.

However, at least now we can do away with the "Patriots get all the calls" bullshit forever.

EDIT: Also, that's SB Nation.

Football zebras agree:

 

[DeadlySplitter]

because that game was a Super Bowl?

last night put Bill a few steps back in my mind. no longer head & shoulders above the rest of the league. still the top of the league.

 

[OurF'ingCity]

I don't really understand what could possibly come out down the line short of evidence that Butler committed some sort of major crime that would make Belichick look better here. If this was a strategic decision Belichick was stupidly rigid/overconfident in not changing the plan once it was obvious that the D was struggling. I don't think this was a disciplinary decision (if it was, Belichick probably would have admitted it and Butler probably only would have been sat for a series or a quarter, not the whole game), but if it was, Belichick put discipline over giving his team the best chance to win the championship - which makes no sense, because the whole point of instilling discipline is to give you that very chance to win a championship.

So unless I'm missing something, there just isn't any way sitting Butler was a smart, defensible decision (and that's not even counting the potential negative effects this could have on the locker room or at least among the other players in the secondary).

 

[JokersWildJIMED]

Totally. My argument is more along the lines of "If the Pats get every fucking call, then they would have gotten that one. They didn't, so everyone should shut up and never ever say that again."

Not so sure...Golic this morning brought up the "disparity" in penalties last night and mentioned it would have been an issue if the Pats had won. And though I did not have an issue with the officiating, pretty sure at least one or both of the Clement or Ertz tds would have been reversed if they were actually caught by White or Gronk.

 

[weeba]

Ex NBA reporter (FWIW)

 

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

Ex NBA reporter (FWIW)

That flies in the face of BB's response that it was not a disciplinary move.