HEY BRO! WHAT UP?

Phil Jackson>Bill Belichick. It's not even close. Sorry, you can have all the talent in the world, but it doesn't guarantee you a championship. You still have to be able to coach. The Lakers had a talented squad but couldn't do squat in the mid to late 90's until Phil came around.

However, if BB wins two to three more championships, he will easily be considered the best NFL coach of all time. Unfortunately, if he wants Phil Jackson status, he needs at least 10.

Rob0729

The Lakers didn't have Kobe and Shaq before Jackson. You can't really compare the sports and coaching IMHO. The NBA is a talent driven league more so than football (look at the Celtics for evidence). The NFL is stacked against teams to build dynasties. Coaches and their schemes/playcalling play a far bigger roll in the success and failure of a team than in basketball. The salary cap and free agency system makes it harder to keep a team in tact.

You can make a case for Jackson over Belichick, but I don't think it is as clear cut as you make it. Besides, I would put Red over Phil in the NBA category anyway. Nine championships in his 11 years as a head coach for the Celtics is more impressive in my opinion.

Rob0729

Also, I don't know if I would have Shula as the second best NFL coach. He does only have two Super Bowl rings. I would put Paul Brown over him since he has seven championships (3 NFL and 4 AAFC titles).

Schmo

As both a Lakers and Pats fan, it's a tough call between the two. Belichick is obviously smarter, but Jackson is more charismatic with his players and has 7 more championships as a HC. The smarts behind Jackson's coaching came mostly from Tex Winter, inventor of the triangle-O. Belichick controls his entire team to a T, while Jackson teaches his team how to control itself. Totally different coaches, and I don't think I can say one is better than the other.

Jackson knows how to make great players into champions, which contrary to some belief is a very hard thing to do. If I were to choose a coach to start a franchise with though, it's easily Belichick.

HEY BRO! WHAT UP?

Yes they did. I've been a Lakers fan since I was a kid, so here's a free history lesson for you. The Lakers signed Shaq in 1996 and traded Vlade Divac for Kobe Bryant on draft day of the same year. Del Harris was their coach since 1994 but he was fired during the 1998 season where Kurt Rambis took over as interim head coach. Since the Lakers signed Shaq, the team underachieved and were owned by Utah. Finally the Lakers were embarrassed in 1998 against the San Antonio Spurs in the conference semi finals. In 1999 Phil Jackson was the Lakers head coach and won a championship in his first season.

The only reason why I compared the two is because other people on this thread have done the same. I agree that football coaches shouldn't be compared with basketball coaches or baseball coaches. Each sport is run in their own unique way.

PYPER

I've been a huge Bulls fan (and therefore Phil Jackson fan) since the mid-80's so I can definitely appreciate what Jackson brings to the table. If a coach can earn the respect of Jordan (and ultimately Shaq and Kobe) then he deserves everyone's respect. Having said that, there is no comparison between Jackson and Belichick. Football is a coaches driven league. Basketball is not. Both coaches impact the seasons of their respective teams but Belichick impact can be traced back to each individual play in each individual game. There is just simply no comparison.

If you're evaluating their achievements, or resumes, then Jackson's # of titles is hard to argue against. But if we're evaluating on actual coaching/teaching ability, there is nobody better than Belichick. And I don't limit that last statement to only current coaches.

But keep in mind, Belichick isn't done yet. A few more titles and he'll shoot rapidly up that list. You can't really evaluate a guy's career until its complete.

__________________

2012-2013 The Fight for Four Continues

NEW ENGLAND PATRIOTS
SUPER BOWL XXXVI, XXXVIII, & XXXIX CHAMPIONS

eagle eye

Are you saying then that the Bulls would not have won their last 3 titles without Phil Jackson?
Or that Shaq, Kobe, Rick Fox, Samaki Walker and Derek Fisher as a starting five would not have won those titles without Phil Jackson?

Rick Patino would have won with that group of players, never mind any respected NBA head coach.

upstater1

Probably because basketball is a joke when it comes to forming a team. Everyone wants to play for LA. Yeah, there's a salary cap, but look at the multitude of ways you can circumvent it. This is why basketball has more repeat champions than any other sport.

HEY BRO! WHAT UP?

Probably not. Jordan couldn't get over the hump until Phil Jackson came along.

No they wouldn't. In fact, they had even more talent before Jackson was their coach but couldn't do jack. That lineup you gave me is when their team was on the decline and their front office had a hard time improving the roster. Rick Fox was in and out of the lineup and eventually lost his starting job to Devan George. Also, Samaki Walker was just garbage. However, his only highlight is when he made a shot from half court against the Kings in the playoffs which ended up being the difference in that game. Finally, their bench was one of the worst in the NBA.

I highly doubt that.

GroganCountry

If you're going to insult someone's intelligence, it looks a lot better when you spell your insult correctly. It's "clueless". You're welcome.