The Patriot Way
by jaffe28 on Mar 5, 2009 12:09 PM MST
Email
PrintHere's something that has been on my mind the last couple of days, and I wondered what you all would think about it. Sorry if the post ends up a little wandering, but I'm sort of thinking as I go.
There is no real debate (except from Pittsburgh maybe) that the New England Patriots are the most consistently successful team of the new century. It's hard to argue with 4 Superbowl appearances with three wins, and a perfect regular season thrown in for good measure. That kind of success definitely brings attention, and since smart people often want to emulate the success they notice, it gets a lot of people thinking that maybe we could be that good if we could do it the same way that they do. So, other teams have raided Patriots' leadership for coaches (Crenell, Weis, Mangini, and now Jedi McD) and GMs (Dimitroff, Pioli) in hopes of implementing THE PATRIOT WAY.
The problem, in my opinion, is that THE PATRIOT WAY was never implemented in New England. Rather it emerged from the Patriots' underdog run to their first superbowl win. They learned to do things in the organization first, players are interchangable, 'the rest of the world just doesn't get it' way they do things during that rise to prominence. It probably isn't a coincidence that this style emerged from a team where the only bona fide star on the team was hurt and replaced by an unknown who led them to greatness. They did things in a way that made them feel good about themselves as they won, continued success reinforced the methods, and THE PATRIOT WAY came to be what we all know and love/loathe.
Of course, we all know how the experiment with coaches brought in to impose THE PATRIOT WAY has turned out so far. Cleveland under Crennel has been mostly awful and the Jets under Mangini have been average at best. Weis at Notre Dame is demonstrating that THE PATRIOT WAY probably isn't real effective for college kids.
Here's my theory as to why it has been so difficult to translate THE PATRIOT WAY to other teams through coaching changes. It's because it's such a harsh and unforgiving way to do things. Unless you are part of its emergence or deliberately choose to embrace it (in free agency for example), THE PATRIOT WAY is going to seem constraining, brutal and downright unreasonable. To illustrate what I'm saying let me bring on a big piece of group psychology from history. German fascism under the Nazi's was constraining, brutal and downright unreasonable yet vast numbers of Germans loved Hitler and the Nazi way. Why? Because he made the German people believe that if they banded together against all that opposed them, both within and without, their natural greatness as a people would inevitably emerge. What a brilliant message for a proud, but historically second tier power like Germany. So from within their own pride and desire to be great the German people were willing to cull those who they blamed for messing them up from within (the Jews most notably of course) and to try and use their way to conquer all that opposed them.
Now look at the Patriots. They have always been a proud and class organization. Prior to their current dynasty, they had moments of success that always ended in disappointment (think WW I for the Germans). You gotta think (and Broncos fans could relate to this for a very long time) that maybe the organization and their fans might have had a long term self-esteem problem. So when Bill Belichick (der Fuerher) and his way of doing things led them on the path to greatness, everybody from coaches to players to fans was willing to go with it. The point being, that like fascism, the harsh and brutal and unreasonable emergence of THE PATRIOT WAY came from within.
The other half of this theory is to look at what happened historically when the Germans tried to implement their harsh and brutal way of doing things on other people. Those people fought it tooth and nail. You simply can't go to another group of proud people treat them harshly and tell them it is for their own good. It's unreasonableness is apparant and people resist. Fascism that comes from within feels like the soft grip of the velvet glove while fascism imposed from without feels an awful lot like taking brass knuckles to the kisser. People embrace the first and fight the second.
My point in terms of football, the Belichick coaching tree, and its failures to this point is that you can't force people to accept THE PATRIOT WAY just by showing up and trying to make it so. THE PATRIOT WAY is not a system like the West Coast Offense or the Amoeba Offense or the 46 Defense. It's a way of being and thinking and constructing identity, and a hard one at that. Coming in and treating people with a dictatorial, harsh, and unforgiving attitude looks unreasonable and unjustified to people that haven't accepted it on their own terms. Is it any wonder then, that Jedi McD is finding the overt ruthlessness he learned in New England is blowing up in his face early on in his Broncos career?
Jedi, think about this. THE PATRIOT WAY emerged. It was not imposed. My advice to you is be open to letting THE BRONCOS WAY emerge from the blend of your systems, coaches, players, and fans. Get players that fit your way, but also move your way toward players you already have. Adjust and let the Broncos become something. Don't try to make them into something. People hate being made to do things.
And if you don't believe me, look at the one current success story in Atlanta. Michael Vick (like the Versailles Treaty) brought the Falcons to rock bottom. This made them pretty open to letting nearly anything better emerge from within. Dimitroff's vision is what is being implemented, but those guys had to be willing to go with the program. Jedi McD, the Broncos are a different animal with a pride and history and level of success that means you are going to have to give to get.
And now I"ve written WAAAAAAY more than I meant to :) .
DISCLAIMER: I am not calling Bill Belechick or Josh McDaniels Nazis! It's a metaphor!
This is a Fan-Created Comment on MileHighReport.com. The opinion here is not necessarily shared by the editorial staff of MHR
49 comments
|
19 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Excellent write up
A lot of food for thought here. I agree that it can be harsh, what I would like to see like you is a blend of the ways. I think for the first two years (personally), we need to draft draft draft and bring in FA’s to teach our rookies what it means to play in a system and for a team. I have to say I don’t think Brian Dawkins is a Patriot Way kind of guy so that makes it easy for me to think we are doing something a bit different. I think the Dawkins signing shows a different approach. It shows we are going to get people who are fired up to play whenever and where ever they can. I think we will see more of our FA’s walk out of here than most people think. I dont know if Jordan, Buckhalter Arrington Simms or the like make it all the way through their contracts! I think they are brought in to teach these kids that each person no matter where you sit on the depth chart has an important role to play! Anyway Like I said great write up!
"We should have kept Seattle and dumped San Diego from the Division"
Davis and Sharpe to the Hall!
Lose the myth of "harsh"
Does anyone remember what happended to Steve Attwater? Shanny uncermoniously dumped him and he went to NYJ.
What about Al Wilson? His leadership and loyalty were rewarded with a trade to NYG that only fell apart cause he couldn’t pass a physical.
Trevor Price?
Mike Anderson?
Have you forgotten that Shanny wouldn’t re-sign Shannon Sharpe and that’s why he wound up in Bal?
Let’s cut the crybaby sentimentalism and stare down the unvarnished truth. NE is no more harsh or cruel than Shanahan was, or any other successful team. Hell the 49ers let Montana go. The only real difference that I can see is that NE is far more rational and consistent about it than other teams.
by SlowWhiteGuy on Mar 6, 2009 10:06 AM MST up reply actions
well business
us never friendly. I am not saying shanny wasnt harsh or anything like that
"We should have kept Seattle and dumped San Diego from the Division"
Davis and Sharpe to the Hall!
by Jon Tollerud on Mar 6, 2009 10:32 AM MST up reply actions
Rec'd!
I was thinking of posting something along those same lines. as well as the PATRIOTWAY works in new england i don’t really want it here. We’ve got a great tradition and over the years have developed something you could call Broncos football. I still don’t get the Mike Leach thing and it seems like a move by a young coach who hasn’t cut the cord.
Anyway, here’s to McD developing his own thing and creating something that may not be old Broncos football but not the PATRIOTSWAY either.
Excellent post
I guess the thing I am haveing a hard time with is that I want the Broncos to be better BUT I dont want us to look like a copycat team who simply took someone elses idea and transplanted it here. I loved your comment about how a certain attitude emerged from within the team, thats axactly what I would like from the Broncos there own identity and not just a way of doing things that has been lifted from someone else. Anyway very nice post.
Couldn't agree more
Does all the new kid know is how to mimic Belicheat? The problem with imitators is that they never have the same qualities as the original. “The Patriot Way” lite will never beat the real thing. I sure hope McBushleague has a twist or improvement on what he is copying, or else the Broncos will be doomed to 2nd-best status (at best) forever.
New things
If you’re really asking if he knows anything but Belechick’s way, the answer is yes. He went into the first meetings with Joe Ellis and Pat B with an extensive presentation on exactly what he’s going to do and how. The play, according to what’s been revealed, includes a lot of new concepts as well as the experiences that he had in NE
I wouldn’t debate whether or not he’ll be a good coach – we’ll find out soon enough. But the idea that he doesn’t know anything but what another coach does, given that the entire point of his presentaions and subsequent hiring was the opposite, just doesn’t match with what we know about the situation. If we get away from the personal insults and attacks (and we try to do that on MHR), we don’t have enough information to make a decision on whether his approach will work or not.
Hillis in '09
Great read, rec'd
The media works in mysterious ways lol. By coining “The Patriot Way,” what the Patriot organization has done over the years is now known as a system. The same goes for the Cowboys being “America’s Team.” I have a friend that is a Cowboy fan that gets pissed everytime he hears “Why do the Cowboys think they are America’s team?!” when in fact they never call themselves that. It’s not on any of their official gear, their website, and I’ve heard none of them say it. It’s the media.
On topic though, I agree that the Patriot Way hasn’t worked in the past with other organizations because it was resisted and not groomed from within. The same can be said for trying to fuse the Broncos Way together with the Patriot Way because McD doesn’t know the Broncos Way well enough. What he does have though is Mike Nolan who knows something about our past and can help him mold the Broncos Way. I also think the fact that McD is so young works in our favor because he isn’t so set in his ways of do this or else. The way McD and Xanders draft this April will also help us determine which “Way” this organization is going.
agreed
i do like that McD’s young brain should be flexible and hopefully creative… once he stops clinging to his old team like a kindergartener clings to his mom’s leg on his first day of school.
That funny that you said "his" first day of school
My fiancee’s little brother started kindergarten last year and cried when he found out his mom was leaving. She talked to the teacher later that day and said that all the little boys cried, while all the little girls were fine.
I think he will find his own way. He seems intelligent enough to know that he gained good knowledge from his upbringing over there, but he needs to instill something a little different because Denver is a different type of culture. At least I hope he’s intelligent enough…
More rational than thou
I think one thing that NE has done better than anyone is take advantage of the irrationality of other teams. The paper “The Loser’s Curse” that was posted here a while back (I forgot by who – sorry) points out that GMs overvalue choices in the first round relative to later choices and present draft choices for future draft choices. Taking advantage of these biases has allowed NE to maintain high draft choices despite being highly successful.
Another bias that has really benefited NE is that players are overvalued if they play on good teams (probably also true with coaches, which we may find out). This has allowed many NE free agents to get high salaries and caused other teams to be too generous in trading for NE players. I think this is one reason why individuals on NE buy into the “team-first” concept, since if the team is successful than they will eventually be rewarded.
Belichick also seems to have mastered installing an “us-against-the-world” mentality, which is a way of taking advantage of the irrationality of his players.
Of course, all this rationality looks very cold-blooded, particularly when applied to the decision to retain key players. For after all, who is more irrational than a football fan. Maybe McDaniels brought this mindset with him, as the Cutler trade-that-wasn’t may show. To apply the Patriot Way, McDaniels has to ignore the sentimentality of fans.
by Snaggins on Mar 5, 2009 1:11 PM MST reply actions 1 recs
Good point.
You know, the manipulation of irrationality is a primary aspect of fascism. Just sayin’! :)
A question
I think this is a good post – it’s probably going to create discussion and give people a chance to think from a different perspective, and I thank you for that. For that reason, I’m glad to Rec the article.
My question is this. I’m taking this as your analysis of The Patriot Way:
They learned to do things in the organization first, players are interchangable, ‘the rest of the world just doesn’t get it’ way they do things during that rise to prominence. It probably isn’t a coincidence that this style emerged from a team where the only bona fide star on the team was hurt and replaced by an unknown who led them to greatness. They did things in a way that made them feel good about themselves as they won, continued success reinforced the methods, and THE PATRIOT WAY came to be what we all know and love/loathe
.
Is that the Patriot way? I ask this as a question, not as a given. I’d have to add that the Patriot Way is much more. Their offenseive scheme includes a willingness to use the RB in committee to maximize production from the team, good TEs that have a specific role in the scheme, and an attack based in 3 receivers, liberal use of the shotgun and passing first, including but not limited to the use of short RB passes. I’m sure others can add much more more.
We also see a defense (and this is true of the offense as well) that adapts to each specific team and game – the Patriot schemes and players are in general more cerebral than many. It prefers the 3-4 because the core belief, recently reiterated by McD, is that the 3-4 offers a greater flexibility of scheme and option.The Patriot Way beleives in dictating to the other team what they can do, rather than responding to their performances. It does, however, emphasize adaption within the game as well as within the season, something that the Broncos have been missing.
It does use players in particular and very specific roles, and it shows a willingness to accept that both offensive and defensive players can and will leave if the evolution of their careers doesn’t fit the team mold financially, because the Patriot’s central belief is that the team is more important than the individual and that they can be replaced by other players who will fit the mold as well or better. It does not require star players – it requires very good, smarter than average players who buy into the scheme and their role in it. When stars emerge, it makes appropriate use of their level of talent and contribution.
So far, that has been incredibly successful, and that adds another component that you mentioned – players will play here because it is their nature to desire winning, and this organization currently offers the best chance to do so.
Again – I appreciate your viewpoint and the well presented article, and I commend you for it. I would go further – the Patriot Way tends to win because they emphasize preparation, knowledge, excellent execution of specific roles and intellect as well as physical ability. They tend to play smarter, but do not sacrifice the ability to play very physical football at the same time. This combination of scheme, flexibillity, role-specific skill and execution and the importance of the team over the individual is not necessarily a metaphor for a eco-political system, but one of the best ways to effectively maximize the contribution of it’s players within their football system. If we achieve that, we’ll be doing well indeed.
I would like to add this because the point has come up so often – the ineffective performance of other ex-assistants is not an indicator of the outcome of McD’s tenure, any more than Clady should have faiedl because Foster had failed before him and both were 1st round picks. McD is a very different person with different skills and intellectual grasp of the concepts. His outcome will be dependent on his own performance, rather than being tied to others’ success or failure. However, I think that you make several valid points about what the palyers will have to accept for the system to work in Denver. Thanks – should have made it a post…
Hillis in '09
by Doc Bear on Mar 5, 2009 1:56 PM MST reply actions 11 recs
Rec'd comment
I agree with everything the Good Doctor says…
by Douglas A. Lee on Mar 5, 2009 2:09 PM MST up reply actions
Me too, Doc has hit on something------The Game of Football is tied so strongly to
statistics, that players & coaches are judged by the statistics they create, and not by their Individuality.
I’m not sure if this is coming across as intended.
Help Doc.
Great Post—Rec’d
I see said the Blind man to the Deaf man who was near.
What is it you hear when I speak in your ear.
by UB3 on Mar 5, 2009 4:01 PM MST up reply actions
Yes, UB3
I think that you’re making the point that in many situation, you can analyze the factors – posessions, down, yardage, etc – and see what is most likely to be attempted by your opponent. You can use the formations that have the best statisical chance of success (and always throw in certain new things that don’t fit the throw them off).
Additionally, with players you can establish what you will pay for X position and what factors matter to you. That can be flexible in a very few instances, but overall, you know what you will pay and what you will run as plays to establish the specifics of your preferred skillset. You look for cerebral players, perhaps at the higher levels of height and weight (and/or strength) when possible to gain an advantage. When you know what pieces you need, it’s easier to quantify what you do and don’t have. That lets you establish a direct game plan in the draft and in FA.
Like all plans, it has strengths and weaknesses, but overall, for the past decade it has worked very well.
Hillis in '09
Thanks Doc, as the saying goes, you hit the nail on the head------however this line of thinking
is getting off subject from jaffes wonderful post—-perhaps this needs a post of its own, and you my friend
have a gift.
As a side note jaffe, as nybronco said a very thought provoking post——we must remember to debate the message,
not attack the messenger——or better put don’t throw the baby out with the bath water.
I see said the Blind man to the Deaf man who was near.
What is it you hear when I speak in your ear.
by UB3 on Mar 5, 2009 4:49 PM MST up reply actions
Rec'd comment Doc
Very well said.
I spend a lot of time in Boston and watch a lot of Pats games and listen to a lot of what the Boston media says about the ‘Pats Way’. The media and fans there are bought in 100% just as the players and assistant coaches are. That’s what happens when you win with consistency and at times, don’t just dominate, but simply outclass other organizations.
I always considered the ‘Pats Way’ (or whatever you call it) a really pragmatic, honest approach to football. Its percieved as being cold, but its because its a no nonsense, no BS, no loyalty kind of approach.
Denver’s getting a crash course in the ‘Pats Way’ right now. These theings are never smooth.
Anything that moves the ball will be considerd. That’s how Belichick rolls, and that how, at least right now, McD rolls. He’ll find his own way, but right now, his way is his old coach’s way.
Great response,
and definitely the sort of analysis I was hoping for in response. As far as our definitions of the Patriot way, I think they can both be correct. So a system can be smart, versatile, and effective and at the same time be harsh and difficult to live within. I think we might be approaching things from a slightly different level. Your analysis of the Patriots focuses on what they try to implement while mine focuses on the sort of ruthlessness the Patriots are willing to engage in order to make that program work. I thinking more of the general attitude of the organization.
Even though I brought the Nazis into it, I don’t think that the way the Patriots do things is wrong or even bad. If the goal of football is to win games then there is no arguing that their way works. If the Broncos do something similar and win a lot of games I, other Broncos fans, and the Broncos themselves will likely be very happy about it. What I’m really questioning is whether a system that is so rationally and ruthlessly efficient as the Patriots’ is one that can be imposed from the outside very easily. It hasn’t seemed to be easily exported, and I think that is due, in part, to the possibility that it’s a harsh and alien way to do things for most teams. There is no pretext of sentimentality with the Patriots, just stark efficiency. If circumstances occur that allow a group of people to come together and form a system like that in a way that gets good results then I can see why the system is beloved within that group, but trying to take that kind of show on the road is a difficult proposition.
As far as Jedi’s chances to be successful, I actually think he’s a got a pretty good chance. I think his youth will actually work in his favor in that he will be able to blend the Patriots’ football system with the general culture of the Broncos. He’s a young dog that can learn new tricks. The trick is going to be getting the Broncos to feel like they are part of creating their own way instead of having a way stuffed down their throat. The new way can even be harsh so long as it’s allowed to emerge in a way that makes the team feel good about itself.
I, too, am recommending jaffe28's article, broncobear
not because I agree with everything he says, but because 1) as implied in your first sentence above it raises important issues, and 2) it has provoked a brilliant response in your own post, which testifies to its fruitfulness. In fact, the existence of not only your multiply recommended response but also some penetrating insights in other posts shows just how fruitful it’s been. In noting that New England has taken advantage of other teams’ irrationality Snaggins highlights the fact that New England’s relative rationality has given them a competitive advantage, and his observation, “Of course, all this rationality looks very cold-blooded, particularly when applied to the decision to retain key players,” circles back nicely to jaffe28‘s central concern. Your own response offers numerous details that illustrate how that rationality works on the field, in terms of schemes and player usage, and it, too, circles back to player attitudes: “players will play here because it is their nature to desire winning.” But you also add a telling point that addresses another of jaffe28’s central concerns when you argue that “the ineffective performance of other ex-assistants is not an indicator of the outcome of McD’s tenure, any more than Clady should have failed because Foster had failed before him and both were 1st round picks.” A similar insight animates nycbroncosfan‘s response when he notes of Belichick assistants turned head coach, “They have all failed (so far) for unique reasons.” By also asserting that “The Patriot Way” could more aptly be called “The Parcells Way” he highlights the notion of a coaching tree, another central element in jaffe28’s article, and enables us to ask and attempt to answer the question(s), What is the nature of a Patriot Way, or Belichick Way, or Parcells Way, and to what extent and by what means is it portable?
Begin at the end. Why have Crenell, Weis, and Mangini not been successful like Belichick? Because they’re not Belichick. What they exemplify is not the Patriot/Belichick Way but the Crenell Way, the Weis Way, the Mangini Way. They resemble one another because they’re all descendents of the same progenitor, but they’re not identical and they’re not equally talented. There’s no Patriot Way that can be imported intact unless you hire Belichick! But why do some coaches begat more successful “offspring” than others? A coach has to determine how much potential each person under him has. Can this guy be an effective assistant position coach? Can this assistant be an effective position coach? Can this position coach be an effective offensive or defensive coordinator? Success at any level is no guarantee of success at the next level up. But a coach’s success is dependent only on his ability to evaluate potential up to the level directly beneath himself. It offers no competitive advantage to choose, between two candidates with equal potential as a coordinator, the one who will eventually make a better head coach. In such instances his “decisions” are a measure of his inner self. Does he eat his children, or is his core need to make them better even than himself?
Coming back to the question of what is Belichick’s Way, it seems to me it’s the clarity with which he sees the bottom line. I don’t think I can improve on the descriptions of what the Patriots do, but I did discover a revealing pattern at pro-football-reference.com. Under Belichick the Patriots’ average yards gained rank has been 12.2, their average points scored rank has been 9.2. Only twice have they ranked lower in points scored than in yards gained. The defensive stats are even more striking. Their average rank in yards given up has been 14.3, their average rank in points allowed 8.2. Not once have they failed to rank better in points allowed than in yards given up! The upshot is that the Patriots win lots of games in which the other team moves the ball better, due to lots of little, invisible key plays and a few big, noticeable ones. They’re good at uncovering relatively ordinary players who do their best when it matters most, and in coaching them in ways that maximize that capacity.
Turn now to the Cutler fiasco, which is the occasion for all this soul-searching. I might be the only one here who thinks that McDaniels probably did try to trade Cutler and that it wouldn’t necessarily have been a bad thing. The key comparison is points scored. The Patriots had a lower points scored than yards gained ranking for only the second time under Belichick, but they still did far better than we did. They ranked 5th vs our 2nd in yards gained, but 8th vs our 16th in points scored. For all of our ability to move the ball we were only average in our ability to score, whereas the Patriots were well above average, and that’s the bottom line of how good our respective offenses were. Even if McDaniels is wrong about his apparent feeling that Cassel would have been better quarterback to have, that doesn’t mean he’s not a good coach to have. In picking players luck plays a big role in individual instances, but in the long run luck averages out and superior evaluation skills and a more rational, bottom-line approach will win out.
Will Cassel be the better player? It’s not inconceivable, but I see an interesting scenario in which Cutler turns out to be significantly better (even if Cassel turns out to be very good). In his third year Drew Brees had a TD/INT ratio of 11-15. Many thought he was a bust. But in his fourth year his ratio was 27-7 and his YPA went from 4.3 to 7.8, and he’s been a star ever since. In his fourth season the game suddenly slowed down for him, and he could see and react fast enough to burn opponents a lot more often than they burned him. This isn’t always the case with Cutler. He sometimes makes bad “decisions”, he gets picked in the red zone, he doesn’t (or can’t) go through his progressions fast enough but fixates on his primary target. Yet he’s still done pretty well, and all those yards have led many people to see last season as his breakout year. What if it wasn’t? What if he hasn’t gotten over the hump yet? What if, as good as he’s been so far, he’s going to be a lot better once he does?
So has McDaniels been too callow, too ruthless, too Patriots-dependent, too hard on the players and us fans? Were the Patriots’ players any less shaken up when Belichick started his reign? I think we’re all just in shock, and words such as harsh, brutal, and nazi are just a reflection of that. I feel like
I’m hanging on to a James Bond speedboat with one hand while the boat weaves in and out of river traffic, with the bad guys chasing and firing guns and rockets. We might get better, we might get worse, but things will change. McDaniels might turn out to be a failed experiment or a coaching star – some of the signs are pretty encouraging. It’s scary but exhilarating. I think I’m going to have to get used to it.
Must. Shut. Up.
"In the empty spaces - lacunae, vacuums, pauses, voids, black holes - new things begin. We are born anew from the unexplored space, the badlands, the outlaw territory." - Sam Keen
by spock on Mar 6, 2009 3:03 PM MST up reply actions 4 recs
nice response
I think the Vulcan is going to get a little “green” himself…
Concision in style, precision in thought, decision in life.
by Jeremy Bolander on Mar 6, 2009 6:04 PM MST up reply actions
Fascinating post, Jaffe
What you say makes a lot of sense. I’m not saying that I agree, but it’s certainly an interesting take. My biggest questions are these…
- McD is bringing in some of his own players, but that is not unique to the Patriots. All coaches do it – Shanny did it, plus Nolan is also doing it now. That doesn’t mean he’s bringing them in to be “Patriots”
- We’re all focusing on two things to say that McD is alienating players – the Cutler non-trade and replacing Leach with Paxton. First of all, we still don’t know what truly happened with Cutler – I doubt McD was trying to send Jay a message. As for Paxton, I’m going to assume that he just thinks Lonie is a better snapper.
- Perhaps you’re also looking at the reports of shopping Scheffler. Well, maybe Tony just doesn’t fit the new offensive system. Or, maybe he is worth more to another team in a traditional pass-catching TE role than McD thinks he’s worth to the Broncos.
- I think much of what you’ve described isn’t necessarily “The Patriot Way.” In other words, I don’t think it’s original – I think all of this is more aptly named “The Parcells Way,” and we all know how successful that has been.
- It’s dangerous to compare McD to the other former Belichick assistants. They have all failed (so far) for unique reasons, and it’s important to note that Mangini wasn’t really a failure. He had a winning record in 2 out of 3 seasons for what is generally a joke of a franchise. I don’t think he got his full chance here in NY.
Remember, I realize he can’t, but it’s not like McD came in here and said he was going to mold the Broncos after the Patriots. Not only that, but he went out of his way during his introductory press conference to say that he would run a very different ship than both Belichick and Saban ran. So while it is a reasonable inference that McDaniels will try to instill a lot of New England’s philosophies, we don’t actually know that to be the case. Keep in mind that Brian Xanders and Mike Nolan are not Belichick or Parcells guys. Extremely well-written, thought-provoking post and Rec’d.
PS
I forgot to add that “The Parcells Way” may also not be original, but at my youthful age I have no idea whether that’s the case.
by Douglas A. Lee on Mar 5, 2009 2:16 PM MST up reply actions
Hands down the worst metaphor I have read this year.
Might be my European upbringing, but comparing the Patriots with the brutality of the Nazi Regime to illustrate a diffence in football philosophy is completely absurd. My take on the Patriots is, that they to a greater extend than most other teams in the league, have cracked the code on “player value”. And that they are more business minded, than most teams.
I hope you're wrong
A brutish organization…already not sure if I can adjust to a shotgun offense. We’ll see, I guess.
"Be not like dumb-driven cattle...."
Patriot Way overhyped at best.
Lets looks at the Patriots dynasty, for not a BS call, they don’t go to the 1st Super Bowl, for not a couple of clutch FGs, they don’t win any of the SB, the one season they seemed completely dominant, they choked in the SB. Lets’ put it this way, Patriots in some ways benefited from luck more than “their way”, I think they do a lot of things well, but their are not the end all or be all way to do things.
"Me fail english, that unpossible" - Ralph Wiggum
"Duffman is thrusting in the direction of the problem" - Duffman
"McDaniels must go!" - Broncoman
Of course there was some luck involved...
… there always is but you also can’t deny the fact that they are a very efficiently ran organization. I think that was the OP’s point.
I think it should be called "The Belichick Way"
He strikes me as just being “the man” there. And as much as his disciples may try to imitate him they cannot duplicate him. I think you have to do things your own way to be successful, so I hope McD does things his way and we’ll see if it works.
Have a good time all the time...that's my motto. - Viv Savage
I don't mind you comparing the Patriots to Nazis...
just don’t compare THE BRONCO WAY with Stalin okay? lol just playing with you, great write up. rec’d man!
Verbose in style, dispersion of thought, procrastination in life.
Nice Post Jaffe
I think the issue for some Bronco Fans is that long before McDaniels was coaching the Shanahan Way or the Bronco Way beat the pants off the Patriots Way. We owned NE. During the Mike Shanahan Era…
1995 – 37 – 3 Broncos
1996 – 34 – 8 Broncos
1997 – 34 -13 Broncos
1998 – 27 – 21 Broncos
1999 – 24 – 23 New England
2000 – 28 – 19 New England
2001 – 31 – 20 Broncos
2002 – 24 – 16 Broncos
2003 – 30 – 26 New England
2005 – 28 – 20 Broncos, 27 – 13 Broncos(Playoffs)
2006 – 17 – 7 Broncos
2008* 41 – 7 New England*
*(we all know Cutler’s early finger injury totally changed the game and because of that I am not adding it to the stats)
From ’95 – ’06 the Broncos won 9 out of 12. The three that New England won they beat Griese in first two years as a starter and Danny Kanell. During that span the Broncos scored 327 points for a 27.25 average. The Pats scored 199 total points for a 16.58 average.
Elway was 11 – 0 against New England and so that means the Broncos went 17-4 (including ‘08) since the 83’ season and we have never lost to them when it really counted, the post season. In 2005 when Broncos football was working it’s mojo the team was said to have “ended the Pats dynasty”…now all the sudden we want to become them because they won some Super Bowls over 4 years ago and we needed to rebuild a defense?
I understand the trepidation and feel like perhaps we threw out the baby with the bath water but I won’t allow it to cloud my faith in the Broncos and particularly Pat Bowlen. I will definitely give McDaniels and Xanders a chance and hope that we improve to the point where we will be competive again, quicker rather than later. My hopes are that he takes his experience and understanding of football and blends it into a new brand of Bronco Football and not a copy cat version of his former team. I have faith that we will be a solid NFL team rather quickly and will have discovered a new brand of Bronco football.
"I am not trying to start anything I am just saying that i think if you take Knowshon and draft D later you guys will be hella good next year" ...IamtheGreatest - The smartest Chiefs fan I ever had the priviledge of reading!
"But I’d trust more of Bobby Turner. Remember – he had to keep his job. His boss made the final decisions, and he knew it. And he can get performance out of a yugo, but that’s no reason not to by a nicer car." ... Broncobear 02/24/2009
by Steve O' on Mar 5, 2009 5:37 PM MST reply actions 1 recs
Is Cutler’s injury really why we lost that last game? It certainly didn’t help, but do you think the Broncos would’ve won otherwise? That’s a stretch, Steve, and removing one game arbitrarily is not in the spirit of statistics. Legitimate stats are inclusive, not selective. Don’t you think the Pats may have had an excuse for one of the times we blew them out? As for the head-to-head play, the results don’t mean the Broncos were better. It just meant the Broncos out-coached and outplayed them head-to-head. That’s all it means. Some teams have each others’ numbers. When I was growing up, I remember the Dolphins always being much better than the Jets, yet the Jets seemed to beat them all of the time. Didn’t make the Jets better…
To me, the only way you can compare the franchises is via Championships. They’ve won 3, we’ve won 2. Both teams have accomplished a lot, so we’re talking about degrees of greatness. 3 Super Bowls beats 2 Super Bowls every time. We could next look at playoff wins over the last 15 years, but then things will look much worse for Denver. The reality is that Mike Shanahan and his Broncos were the best team in the NFL in the late 90’s, bar none. However, since the turn of the century/decade it’s clearly been the Pats. Yes, we had their number. But we weren’t the better team.
by Douglas A. Lee on Mar 5, 2009 6:28 PM MST up reply actions
You make a good point and perhaps I should have included '08
I don’t think that one game ultimately changes the stats on the whole however. I also agree that “styles make fights” as they say in boxing and certain teams match up better against certain opponents. The bigger point I was trying to make was that the Denver seemed to have an advantage against NE and I can see how some would question why we would want the “Patriot Way” in Denver.
Coming from New England, I just really don’t like them because growing up a Bronco fan I was in a bunch of arguments quite often. That reinforced my love for Denver and my hatred for the Pats.
"I am not trying to start anything I am just saying that i think if you take Knowshon and draft D later you guys will be hella good next year" ...IamtheGreatest - The smartest Chiefs fan I ever had the priviledge of reading!
"But I’d trust more of Bobby Turner. Remember – he had to keep his job. His boss made the final decisions, and he knew it. And he can get performance out of a yugo, but that’s no reason not to by a nicer car." ... Broncobear 02/24/2009
I'm with you, brother
I HATE the Pats. I’ve worked with plenty of Pats fans and have watched football regularly with several Pats fans as well. Quite painful. They’re arrogant, smarmy and they think the Pats are just smarter than everyone else. Holding Elway and Shanahan’s respective records over their heads has always been my only ammo, so I’ve certainly used it enough. However, between you and I and the rest of our fellow Broncos fans, I can admit that the Pats have been the far better team for the past 8 years.
As for the stats…as you say, one game shouldn’t change the overall picture, which only fortifies the idea that you shouldn’t have excluded it in the first place. But most importantly, excluding that game weakened your point unnecessarily. As for the Broncos Way vs. the Patriot Way, keep in mind that we’re trying to beat the entire NFL, not the Pats. They’re not even in our division. I think it’s pretty clear which “system” has worked better in that regard.
by Douglas A. Lee on Mar 5, 2009 7:28 PM MST up reply actions
Yes but Shanny's system worked great too
The issue wasn’t the system…the issue was the fact that Shanny wasn’t a GM, he was a miscast head coach. I wish that somehow someway Bowlen could have convinced Shanny to release his authority in the GM department, which by the way the Goodmans were showing skills in, and just focus on coaching his offense. Specialize in the offense only. Then get Nolan to come in and change the defense. Xanders sticks to the finances and the Goodmans find us help in the draft.
I know this sounds like I am not on board with the new regime but really I am. I will always be a fan of the Denver Broncos. I recognize the Patriots overall success, but we could just have easily targeted any successful team. This conversation could just as easily been about the Steelers or Colts, both have consistantly won over the last 10 years. Finding a great QB, whether in round 1 or round 6 surely helps too.
Perhaps my own ego is too large, I don’t want to copy anyone, I want to do it our own way.
"I am not trying to start anything I am just saying that i think if you take Knowshon and draft D later you guys will be hella good next year" ...IamtheGreatest - The smartest Chiefs fan I ever had the priviledge of reading!
"But I’d trust more of Bobby Turner. Remember – he had to keep his job. His boss made the final decisions, and he knew it. And he can get performance out of a yugo, but that’s no reason not to by a nicer car." ... Broncobear 02/24/2009
The probelm with head to head comparisons
is that they don’t mean s**t except for tie breakers. What matters is results. In the time frame you list the Broncos had two SB appearances winning both. The Patriots had 5 appearances winning 3. The Broncos may have been better head to head but WTF does anyone care.
???
Every football team is a benevolent dictatorship (at best) but I can’t find a single argument in this post that shows why the “Patriot Way” is like Nazi Germany in WWII. Because of that, I can’t say much, because I can’t find an actual argument here to agree or disagree with. It’s just a big non sequitur, a few loose observations with strange unflattering conclusions tacked on the end.
I would compare the Patriot way to TQM, and you can also find more on the idea in the teaching of a statistics professor named W. E. Deming.
The Hitler comparison is ludicrous, although I’ve worked for a few despots so maybe I shouldn’t dismiss it completely. The best coaches are always despots, and so was Shanahan, but we love them for it, too. We’re not talking despotism though, we’re talking more along the lines of why Toyota makes good cars and out-competes other car companies.
PS — I will return to this subject as necessary. It’s clear to me now that there are a lot of Broncos fans who just don’t get it yet, and that’s largely because there’s been a vacuum of information on the subject.
Thanks for all feedback everyone.
Definitely more stuff to feed back into the mental hopper!
I want to emphasize that the point of the post was not to suggest that the Patriots system is fascist and Bill Belichick is Hitler. I actually have a great deal of respect for the Patriots and what they’ve accomplished. What I was trying to get at in terms of comparison is that the way the Patriots implement their system emphasizes cold efficiency over sentimentality and requires that members of the organization accept its harshness or be culled. Fascism is also a harsh system that demands conformity and ruthlessly enforces it. What I was wondering about was how it is that groups can come to accept being part of difficult social systems. An answer that I came up with was that people will take part in just about anything that they have a stake in and that makes them feel good about themselves. Those conditions are more likely to come about if the system emerges naturally from within than if it is imposed from the outside.
I guess another way to think about the point is to compare Huxley’s vision in “Brave New World” to Orwell’s vision in “1984”. In the former, the population buys into the dictatorial society of which they are a part. Everything runs pretty smoothly and the folks are generally happy, if completely controlled. The people survey themselves cause their oppression feels good to them and gets results they are happy with. In “1984”, the dictatorship comes form without. Surveillance is constant and punishment for violation assured. In that scenario, people resist. It’s in their nature.
I’m all for McDaniels trying to use his experiences with the Patriots to make the Broncos better. I hope he does a great job. I’m just thinking that he will be more successful in doing so if he can get the Broncos to feel like they are part of it and to feel pride in it. If it seems to emerge rather than being instituted then McDaniel’s program will work, even if it is harsh and ruthless. If he seems to just impose it then I doubt the chemistry necessary for success will develop.
When Hitler
was crossing into enemy territory I think he was using a Run and Shoot offense from, um, the shotgun formation. And throwing bombs. (Sorry – I don’t know what came over me. My apologies to George Carlin).
I get the Nazi analogy. Interesting idea. My view of the Pats Way, while agreeing with most of what I’ve read here, is similar to the Oakland A’s as described in “Moneyball”. They are 2 very different games, but bear with me. Oakland, when parting with a player that hits 50 HR a year, will replace him by getting 3 journeymen that hit 17 HR a year each as well as doing several other things well. They don’t need (and rarely keep) stars. Everyone contributes equally and the way they design their team (and by extension, their drafts), they fill their holes not with a single player, but with several overlapping players, each of which fill part of that hole and parts of other holes. It’s a very fluid system. The Pats do this, too, in their way. But their wrinkle is that because they have such a fluid and flexible team, they can gameplan much more specifially against their upcoming opponent. They do have a few players that are only a niche – like Moss. To be able to do this kind of chameleon shifting week to week takes intelligent players (as well as selfless players).
It takes a strong personality to make this work and keep it working. You have to keep 25 year old gazillionaire egos in check. Belichek does this, I think, by making “there is no I in TEAM” a primary consideration in deciding what players to get. If I recall correctly, he avoids those first round head case prima donnas and the TOs of the league (again, except Moss). The more team players you get together, the better your team plays together.
The fans are easy. They like winning and they know the Pats do something different that anyone else in the league. Who wouldn’t brag about that? Wouldn’t us Bronco fans do the same thing if we thought there was something called the Bronco Football?
Oh, wait, we do say that, which brings me to the question I intended to ask at the beginning of this ramble. What are everyone’s thoughts on what Bronco Football is? What, exactly, is the Bronco Way? Is it a way of doing business, a way of playing football, a combination thereof, or something else? How long has it been here? Since the beginning, 1977, 1983, or some other milestone? How do you define it?
by YosemiteSam on Mar 6, 2009 12:40 AM MST reply actions 1 recs
Guru said it Yosemite
re: what is the Bronco way? — We didn’t have one, unless you consider picking up players that nobody else wants, which we’ve now “harshly” allowed to seek employment elsewhere.
Agree completely on the "Moneyball" aspect of your comment.
Oakland’s system is becoming a more and more influential approach in all areas of pro sports.
There's no such thing as THE PATRIOT WAY
that is an invention of the MSM to give the talking heads something to blabber on about. Bill Belichick has a core philosophy about football, as does every successful coach. But more than anything, Belichick has been adaptable. Rather than rigidly adhere to any one system, he is always adapting based on how the game evolves. The Pats used to be very run centric, emphasizing a feature runner like Curtis Martin or Corey Dillon. When he had trouble finding an affordable feature back, he went to a short passing game using backs out of the backfield to simulate a ball control running game. When the NFL liberalized the passing rules, he resorted to more of a verticle passing game. When he realized that without a steady running game he couldn’t keep pass pressure at bay he resorted to a running back by committee approach. Defensively he has done similar adjustments over the years. The only thing you can really call this is “doing what works.”
His approach to personnel is the same. He believes in building through the draft because historically that has been the only way to consistently build and maintain a team. He uses statistical measures and detailed evaluations because he trusts a thorough analysis more than any individual’s “intuition.” They don’t spend on high priced free agents because that typically doesn’t work. Likewise they don’t like to overspend to keep players because of the effect that has on the rest of the team (look at what Fitzgerald’s contract did with Boldin last year).
The only other really distinguishing characteristic is the Belichick adamantly believes that the team comes before any individual player. Players who can’t or won’t buy into that just don’t fit in. There’s nothing harsh or brutal about it. How many ex-Patriots do you see bad mouthing the organization after they leave? Not only do his players love him, the ex-players and ex-coaches have the greatest respect for him. The criticism comes from outside the organization and looks to me like nothing more than petty sniping.
And let’s not forget, when Belichick took over the Pats were at best the #3 sports franchise in Boston (behing the Sox and Celtics) and maybe even #4 (behind the Bruins). There are a lot of good things about the Shanahan era that we hope we can retain; I think the retention of Dennison and Turner are indications that McD does appreciate some of those “traditions.”
But let’s not tear into McD based on ad hominem attacks that have little or no basis in fact.
I'm not criticizing McD or Belichick.
All I’m saying is that imposing a way of thinking, particularly in terms of its overt callousness about players, may create some resistance and make it more difficult to implement. I am fine with the McD hire. I believe that Pat Bowlen had every right to fire Mike Shanahan for not producing at the level expected. And I certainly don’t blame Mr. Bowlen for trying to catch lightening in a bottle by bringing in a mind developed in the most successful organization of the last decade.
I agree that the MSM is a huge factor in creating the mystique that surrounds what is labeled the Patriot way. Peter King is especially culpable. They are also responsible in many ways for over-simplifying what it is. That said, the fact that knowledgeable football people can consistently describe the Patriots methods does indicate that they have a “way”. In terms of personnel, one of the primary characteristics is ruthless efficiency. How do they get the most of what they want to run their football system while giving up the least. If that means unceremoniously dumping star players then that is what they do. They don’t emphasize sentimentality or loyalty at all. To many people that can seem like a harsh and unforgiving way of doing things. My interest in writing this post was not to compare the New England’s organizational ethos to fascism, but to try and understand the group dynamics that lead to acceptance of a system that may seem difficult in comparison to previous experiences. My argument is that people will buy into such systems if they emerge organically from the circumstances and relationships of a situation. I used the analogy of Germany because it is an excellent historical example of the fact that people will accept nearly anything that makes them feel good about themselves even if it is truly horrible. That nation rose from humiliation and defeat to become the most prominent nation in the world. That made the German people proud so they bought into the Nazi system. That Patriots, prior to Belichick were a second tier franchise in the NFL and the least popular team in their own city (as you point out) so when his way of doing things allowed them to rise to prominence, the team bought in. The problem so far has been that the way the Patriots operate hasn’t been easily transferable. I was just trying to figure out why that might be. My theory is that it’s difficult to impose a ruthlessly efficient formula for winning on organizations that don’t have experience with it. People don’t like being forced to accept things. In terms of Germany, their system was resisted when they tried to export it. Maybe I’m just saying that winning and ruthlessness need to come up together. If you try to impose the latter without the former then you’re gonna have conflict. To avoid that McD needs to let what the Broncos are going to become emerge from within the circumstances and relationship within the organization.
Frankly, I would be thrilled if Josh McDaniels could implement his system and have the success in Denver that Belichick has had in New England. I want the Broncos to win and be respected. I want to feel good about my team. Makes me no different than fans in New England or citizens in Germany. It’s part of human nature.
FURTHER DISCLAIMER: I should have realized that bringing fascism into it would look like a criticism instead of objective comparison of group dynamics. However, if would have used the example of a nation humiliated by 19 guys with box cutters feeling justified in imposing their system on outsiders and meeting limited success it would have started a serious flame war! :)
Nice Explanation...
but note that you still use the pejorative: ruthless – without pity or complassion. As I pointed out above, I don’t see any indications of ruthlessness in Belichick’s ways. His players love him. Former players and coaches have nothing but respect and admiration.
I think a better explanation for the failure of his former staff to have his success has to do with coaches who only see the form and miss the substance. That’s the same reason other teams have trouble simply copying Belichick.
Belichick’s success is not about systems, schemes, or game plans. It’s rooted in a core philosophy that no individual is above the team. He stresses playing as a team, not a few stars with supporting players. The Steelers take this same approach, as did the 49ers in their day. The Broncos under Shanahan took this approach on offense, but never translated it to defense.
I don’t see any signs of ruthlessness in McD’s appraoch either. He cut a bunch of players and did not re-sign a bunch more. But honestly, were any of those players “ruthlessly” released? Frankly, I don’t see anything that constitutes ruthlessness. That seems to be completely based on reactions to two events: the Cutler non-trade and the Paxton signing. Let’s look at those two.
While many in the MSM use vague terms like “shopping” Cutler or “dangling” him as trade bait none of them have had the balls to get specific. The only one I’ve seen get specific is Adam Shefter and he has repeatedly stated that the Broncos were approached. What is ruthless about answering the phone and considering a deal?
Then there’s the Paxton/Leach issue. Now I have to admit, on the surface this trade doesn’t seem to benefit the Broncos much. But just because we don’t know the rational reason for the signing doesn’t mean there isn’t one. And even if there isn’t, what is ruthless about a new coach wanting to bring in some players he is familiar with?
As I see it, most of the anti-McD posts are people venting their discomfort with the change going on. But let’s face it, the alternative to drastic change in the organization was continued mediocrity. Except for 2005, the Broncos have merely been an above average team, not a good one, let alone truly great.
What If ?
I always wondered what if we got to play the patriots instead of the colts in those playoff games. I think Peyton Manning would have won a lot more superbowls and the patriots wouldn’t have been the dynasty they are. Also shanny might still be employed.
I don't know about you guys...
but i’m hoping that after this year is over we will be comparing the Broncos D to Genghis Khan.
Blame it on their technology
The Mongol laminated recurved bow was vastly ahead of it’s time. No one had the tech to oppose it. I wonder if ew can develop somethign that isn’t covered by the rule book…..
Hillis in '09
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Getting Social With MHR
Web Stuff
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- Cliff Avril didn’t mean that thing he said about other teams contacting him
- From Cam to RGIII, and the weird psychology of draft analysis
- UCLA comes down with a case of Tebowmania
- Ellen tries to get Kate Upton to confirm Mark Sanchez is her boyfriend
- Sore loser Bully Ray spits beer in the face of Brandon Jacobs
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
