Over a few recent posts, I noted how Bill Belichick was the key man to consider when mulling the ways relationships might break down within the New England Patriots organization. Today, I’ll go through the possible relationship breakdowns, step-by-step, and see what the most likely outcome will be in each case.
To think through what the outcomes of the breakdowns might be, I dug a little bit into my knowledge of game theory. The simple explanation for this branch of economics is that it uses ‘if, then…’ thinking to analyze possible outcomes of certain events.
For these breakdowns, I thought a logical starting point was ‘blame’ – one party ‘blames’ another for starting or contributing to the team’s decline. It matters whether the blame is correct, of course, but not as much as you might think.
Let’s have a look…
Owner-coach relationship breakdowns
1) Kraft correctly blames Belichick
No sense keeping a bad coach around, right?
Outcome: Belichick sacked, Patriots possibly OK since they can hire a better coach
2) Kraft incorrectly blames Belichick
The key here is that Kraft owns the team. This absolves him of the responsibility to be correct in making this (or any) assessment. In a sense, this scenario doesn’t exist because it doesn’t matter whether the owner is right or not, it just matters what the owner thinks. So if Kraft thinks Belichick is the problem, well, that’s the end of it.
Outcome: Belichick sacked, Patriots in decline because they won’t find a better coach
3) Belichick correctly blames Kraft
This means that the owner is hurting the team’s infrastructure with corrosive decisions. It could be as simple as the wage structure and as complex as meddling in helmet football decisions. When the chair starts to buckle, a good manager stands up before he earns a reputation for falling on his rear.
Outcome: Belichick resigns, Patriots in decline because they’ve lost a good coach AND their owner isn't good (which also makes it less likely they’ll find a good replacement coach as well)
4) Belichick incorrectly blames Kraft
This is the subtlest scenario (but also the one I thought the ESPN piece was hinting at when they referenced ownership meddling with trade decisions). As long as the reaction isn’t knee-jerk, there is enough time for Belichick to reassess his evaluation and see that perhaps things are not changing for the worse.
Outcome: No changes (if the initial discomfort does not lead to an impulsive resignation)
Player-coach relationship breakdowns
5) Brady correctly blames Belichick
The player differs from the owner in his lack of direct decision-making power. However, if the player has the right on-field performance metrics to back up an opinion (Brady wins MVPs, so he does) then the owner will almost always side with the player.
Outcome: Belichick sacked, Patriots possibly OK if they hire a better coach
6) Brady incorrectly blames Belichick
This case is the most elementary of the possibilities – it just means the guys don’t get along. Sometimes, this small crack erupts into the fissure that divides the organization. However, I think the Patriots are past this point – no matter how many avocados Brady rubs on his throwing arm, he’s too much of an injury risk to maintain a power struggle against the greatest coach of all time.
Outcome: No changes (unless Brady chooses to demand a trade, refuses to sign, etc)
7) Belichick correctly blames Brady
This one is straightforward – it basically happened in 2001 with Bledsoe. It was possibly happening again a year ago but Belichick tipped his hand and traded Garropolo.
Outcome: No changes (until Brady is moved on for a replacement – Patriots could possibly improve if they find a better player)
8) Belichick incorrectly blames Brady
This one looks like #6 but it would play out just like #7 - to make it fun, let's say Brady then goes on to win another MVP, possibly for the Buffalo Bills. At that point, it would suddenly become clear that Belichick didn’t quite know what he was doing and Kraft might be moved to invoke situation #1 (or #2) from above. It might not be the sole grounds for his dismissal but coaches who make such major misevaluations rarely last very long in the role.
Outcome: Belichick sacked (probably) after Brady proves him wrong, Patriots go into decline
Let’s summarize this admittedly simplified way of looking at the situation:
-In four of the eight cases, Belichick is sacked
-In another case, Belichick resigns
-In the remaining three cases, there are no obvious changes (unless a party gets impatient, Brady decides to move himself on, or a better replacement is identified)
Again, I think the approach above is simplified but I might prefer it over any other that makes too much effort to dig out all the nuance (by separating Kraft from the idea of infrastructure, by adding other parties such as Jonathan Kraft, agents, coordinators, and so on). If it isn’t clear by now – and I’ve written thousands of words on the topic, so it probably is clear – as far as I’m concerned, when Belichick goes, we’ll all know it’s over. But until he does go, any other bit of ‘news’ about the Patriots and their decline can be safely ignored.
Footnotes / meteorology!
0. Breaking news – temperatures falling overnight…
The very broad point of the ESPN piece is that the Patriots’s dynasty will end once the key relationships fall apart – but how is that different from any organization? From my point of view, it really isn’t. I think this explains why the piece was so poorly received by Patriots fans – the story is essentially reporting a truth that is always there with a few well-known details sprinkled in that distract the reader from the fact that the story isn’t really reporting anything at all.
It would be like a meteorologist breathlessly reporting that temperature will drop overnight due to some specific reason like ‘low pressure’. Sure, that’s great, but the temperature almost always drops overnight, right? So does it really matter why?
