The NFL officials I've talked to kind of think he is a pain in the ass. 31 coaches in the league will let the officials make penalty decisions for the team. Guess which one won't. As they see it, there's no point in asking a coach whether they want 1st and 20 or 2nd and 1, the choice is obvious.
"Buffalo's performance after the game was as bad and weak-hearted as was their performance during the game."
I don't know much about how the mechanics of that works. But my suspicion is that he does this because he's been screwed before. Like, your 1st/20 vs. 2nd/1 example might be obvious. But what other situations might some refs (and possibly many coaches) find "obvious" whereas he is thinking outside the box in specific game situations? These are probably mostly edge cases, but that's where Bill butters his bread.
I'm more than okay with the coach of my team being a pita if it makes for a better outcome.
The way they officiate that call is so weird. The official watches the clock, if it hits zero he then tries to find the ball. If it's in play, they let it go, even if the snap came after clock hit zero. So, that means there are going to be slight differences.
The NBA seems to have it more or less OK with the shot clock. So it should be easy enough, I'd think. Maybe time for another bake sale
I have definitely seen refs look over at the sideline and make the decline sign in cases where they seem to assume it is the easy call where I think it is not and there might be a strange situational reason to do the unexpected.
He kept repeating that was an illegal formation and you let them snap the ball before the timeout. Curious of the alignment on the all 22 couldn’t get a good screen shot.
It's not about the fact that he wants to make the decision. It's annoying because it takes time, which in turn slows down penalty enforcement and gets the networks and NFL on their ass. These things are rigidly timed.
Seems like that's a reason to be mad at the league, not a coach who is just trying to coach.
But they aren't preventing him from coaching. As has been said, the coach can overrule the decision by the ref so they always have final say.
This is not the point I was making, nor the point I was responding to. CFB said that NFL officials that he speaks to say they view Belichick as a pain in the ass because he wants to be consulted before they announce penalties. I was saying that seems a bizarre reason to be angry at a coach. I can think of a zillion reasons why refs might regard a coach as a pain in the ass, but the fact that a coach would prefer not to have to correct the refs and instead would like the chance first seems . . . I dunno, fragile?
I'd guess that Belichick has two interests: first, ensuring the refs get the choice right---and I know they are very good at this, but I actually think there's some reason to believe he knows the rules as well as anyone, and better on rare occasions than a ref. Some of the reporting of the eligible/ineligible receiver stuff against the Ravens suggested that he felt the need to share the formation with the refs pre-game, which in part is just insurance but in part I believe indicates doubt at whether they'd get it right in the moment (because, as we all know, under current rules he was inarguably correct). Whatever other concerns i have with calls and reviews from an application of judgement perspective, I do believe the refs do an amazing job on "what rule applies here" overall. And, even so, there are a small number of times a year they do get it wrong and I'd guess BB wants to be sure he is never negatively impacted by one of those few.
Yes, misunderstood your post. I agree there is no reason for a ref to be annoyed or upset. That is just petty and arrogant but from what I understand that is not all that unusual for NFL refs.
Yeah, I had actually thought they were better in general than the other sports but I don't even know why I thought that. I guess that's why I was disappointed with what CFB reported. Maybe though I'm just being a homer because his friends happened to criticize our coach. I can think of reasons why people might not like Belichick. But I wouldn't have guessed this one.
This is also coming from a referee's perspective. They're thinking entirely of their own path of least resistance. Of course it's a pain in the ass to them that they have to take an extra step before announcing every penalty, over a 2% chance it makes a difference. As a fan, or as a player, or as an owner or GM evaluating a coach, I'm fine with my coach being that pain in the ass.
I assumed it was Bill. If there's a coach in the league that wants something done a bit differently on a highly situational play, I assume it's Bill Belichick. But if CFB was talking about McDermott, I still have the same reaction.
Mac absolutely is not a sure thing. He's a smart QB with limitations that got drafted into a good situation. Is there anyone here that thinks if Mac got drafted by the Bears or Jags he'd be any good? Let's not pretend that Fields or Trevor wouldn't be succeeding on this team.
Of course. I didn't mean to imply that he was, but I see how that was unclear. But that just further underlines my point that the NFL conspiracy is silly.
That's why he said "NFL-level coach" to distinguish the coaches who belong in the NFL from those who might by accident be there...
He’s not a QB who is going to win you the game himself. But he’s a competent and legitimate NFL quarterback making negligible money for several years, which is very very valuable. I have no particular confidence I’d ever want to see the Pats paying him $35Million a year but time will tell.
If there is any merit to the gripe, it's that the guy most skilled at and ready to implement an NFL offense and read NFL defenses fell to the team with the best coach and staff and who coincidentally just rounded up four FA skill positions to fill out the offense.
Yeah if anyone should be kicking themselves, it's SF. He would have done well there too. The Bears? My grandkids will be posting some day about how the Bears have never had a good quarterback.
