Best of all time debate

[PatriotsReign]

Perhaps, but regardless, if NE runs the table to 19-0, then we don't need to qualify this team as the best of "the cap era". They will have proved themselves the greatest of any era, especially if they can add more more Lombardi in the next couple-three years.

That would truly be an incredible accomplishment and place Belichick as the best ever.

 

[TIMEsteelersfan]

That would truly be an incredible accomplishment and place Belichick as the best ever.

I've got to give the nod to Walsh as the best coach ever... nobody has revolutionized the game like he did. A bunch of championships, the father of the now prominent west coast offense... I think Bill Wash is the GOAT... that's probably for another thread though my bad.

 

[40yrpatsfan]

I've got to give the nod to Walsh as the best coach ever... nobody has revolutionized the game like he did. A bunch of championships, the father of the now prominent west coast offense... I think Bill Walsh is the GOAT... that's probably for another thread though my bad.

Walsh could be. He was a great offensive innovator, a big believer in the draft, and translated all that into multiple SB's.

Belichik is obviously strong with x and o's, is a great game coach and a great motivator. But the main reason NE is so successful is because of the organization he has built. In the cap era, he saw that it mattered to get everyone in the organization, from scouts to GM to coaches to ownership to players, all sharing the same philosophy. He created a new model, which coaches of the past really weren't empowered to do.

All I know is that he's only like 55 years old, and if he brings home another 2 or 3 trophies, he'll have to be considered the best ever.

 

[TIMEsteelersfan]

Walsh could be. He was a great offensive innovator, a big believer in the draft, and translated all that into multiple SB's.

Belichik is obviously strong with x and o's, is a great game coach and a great motivator. But the main reason NE is so successful is because of the organization he has built. In the cap era, he saw that it mattered to get everyone in the organization, from scouts to GM to coaches to ownership to players, all sharing the same philosophy. He created a new model, which coaches of the past really weren't empowered to do.

All I know is that he's only like 55 years old, and if he brings home another 2 or 3 trophies, he'll have to be considered the best ever.

I would say if he does that he would deserve strong consideration... what Walsh did for the game of football carries more weight than his championships do IMO. Imagine how different football would be had Walsh never come along, without Belichick the game doesn't change. That's a big one for me when considering the GCOAT. Walsh changed football forever.

 

[makewayhomer]

And it's also why the Patriots are better than all 3 of those teams! I don't get it, what's your point? At this moment, the Patriots have the greatest point differential in NFL history. Therefor, it doesn't matter that the Ravens came close to outplaying us, does it?

you agreed with me. I was saying that it was dumb that the "best team ever" argument somehow depended on the result of the ravens game. they are the same team if rex calls that to or he doesnt

 

[bradmahn]

I would say if he does that he would deserve strong consideration... what Walsh did for the game of football carries more weight than his championships do IMO. Imagine how different football would be had Walsh never come along, without Belichick the game doesn't change. That's a big one for me when considering the GCOAT. Walsh changed football forever.

IMHO, if you want to consider the greatest coach the person who most changed the game, then you should be talking about Paul Brown. If you want to talk about the coach as having the most success in winning championships, I would have to say Vince Lombardi.

Personally, I feel that winning is most important (seeing as how it is the goal of the game). I would also like to add that Belichick may not be the great X's and O's innovator that Bill Walsh was (although, undoubtedly, Belichick is a great X's and O's coach), his mark may come in organizational philosophy, and particularly the build of a team.

 

[TIMEsteelersfan]

IMHO, if you want to consider the greatest coach the person who most changed the game, then you should be talking about Paul Brown. If you want to talk about the coach as having the most success in winning championships, I would have to say Vince Lombardi.

Personally, I feel that winning is most important (seeing as how it is the goal of the game). I would also like to add that Belichick may not be the great X's and O's innovator that Bill Walsh was (although, undoubtedly, Belichick is a great X's and O's coach), his mark may come in organizational philosophy, and particularly the build of a team.

That's true, and we may not know what his mark is until he retires. I just don't think anybody was better than Walsh, you can def make a case for some to be as good, but wow, Walsh was the man.

 

[40yrpatsfan]

That's true, and we may not know what his mark is until he retires. I just don't think anybody was better than Walsh, you can def make a case for some to be as good, but wow, Walsh was the man.

Again, he was great because he won. But I was never a huge fan of the west coast offense. I don't think it was a good thing from a fan's perspective to see Tom Rathman catch 12 passes within 3 yards of the los each game.

My sweetest non-Patriots moment was when the Giants beat the 49ers in the '86(?) NFC Championship game. That was a classic matchup of a more traditional offense against Walsh's wco.

I think most historians do think Paul Brown was the greatest innovator the game has ever had. add: although Don Coryell was something too.

 

[TIMEsteelersfan]

Again, he was great because he won. But I was never a huge fan of the west coast offense. I don't think it was a good thing from a fan's perspective to see Tom Rathman catch 12 passes within 3 yards of the los each game.

My sweetest non-Patriots moment was when the Giants beat the 49ers in the '86(?) NFC Championship game. That was a classic matchup of a more traditional offense against Walsh's wco.

I think most historians do think Paul Brown was the greatest innovator the game has ever had. add: although Don Coryell was something too.

Whether you liked the west coast system or not, it's the biggest revolution in football history. Totally changed the way the game is played. Until that point the NFL was still primarily a running league. With his system came many more big plays and more points, which brought more fans, which brought more money.

Today over half the teams in the league use it as there base system. Not to mention, the NFL's popularity went through the roof during Walshes tenure in San Francisco, people were tired of the 3 yards and a cloud of dust, insert Walshs west coast offense and 10 years later the NFL became america's sport, surpassing baseball.

Here we are over twenty years later and teams are still desperately trying to mimick the 80's 49ers. Can't say that for any other team or coach. The west coast offense is just about the perfect system to employ, and when executed correctly is unstoppable... however, it's really, really difficult to execute to perfection. So far, only the 9ers have been able to do it perfectly.


BTW, people may have bored of Rathman... but not Jerry Rice.

 

[40yrpatsfan]

I don't know that you can credit the wco with changing the NFL from a running league to a passing league. Air Coryell had more to do with that than the wco, and that was a totally different system that is still around today as well. And Parcells and Belichick, 2 of the most successful coaches of the past 20 years, never used the wco.

It has proliferated because that coaching tree of Walsh's was a great one, similar to the Parcells lineage. I put the wco on the level of the 3-4 defense: important, but not earth shattering.

 

[TIMEsteelersfan]

I respect your opinion, but I think you're wrong. His impact was unmatched. The short/timing passing game never existed before him and you guys along with about 20 other teams make your living off of it... pretty important indeed.

 

[madinsomniac]

Very good arguements so far all the way around.

I would like to add one more question to the mix: If this Patriot Dynasty was solidified with veteran players from outside the organization much of which was in fact through F/A and players cut from previous teams due to Salary cap issues, hasnt F/A made it easier, not harder for the team to maintain it's superiority this decade?

Also, wouldnt it be correct to suggest that before the advent of FA, teams that were great at drafting had a huge advantage over teams that had poor scouting departments, but that there were more top end, deep, and experianced teams throughout the league back then, making it much harder to go undefeated or even come close?

I also think it should be fair to point out that the Patriot Pt Diff per game is outrageously high, but that is actually barely affected by the "running up the score" debate that they have had. all in all this year, there were a total of 4 unreasonable TDs, (AKA, scored late in the fourth with game in hand with realistic opportunity to run out the clock and not by backups) meaning they'd still would have a remarkable 18-19 pt per game diff average.

Maybe, after the dust of history settles on this team, it will end up truly looking like the greatest team of all time, Im just saying at this moment, i think if forced to make that determination, My opinion would be there have been better teams in NFL history.

Having said that, 19-0 would be the greatest single year team achievement in NFL history to date.

 

[PatsSteve1]

First of all, I respect the Pats and think they are clearly the best team in the league this year, however even if they go 19-0, one cannot objectively judge their team as the best of all time or even really close to that.

I don't think you can objectively pick any team as the best ever. Different size players, different rules and different era's. I just look at it as who was best in a decade. The Patriots already lead in this decade and a 19-0 season and 4th SB would be the most dominant team in a particular decade.

 

[madinsomniac]

I don't think you can objectively pick any team as the best ever. Different size players, different rules and different era's. I just look at it as who was best in a decade. The Patriots already lead in this decade and a 19-0 season and 4th SB would be the most dominant team in a particular decade.

there should be no debate about this team being the best so far this decade. I'd have no arguement about that at all.

 

[Fencer]

Since a discussion will inevitably ensue about whether Brady is still clutch, whether he was ever clutch, whether clutchness is real or an illusion, and so on, I'm dredging up a prior discussion solely to remind us how problematic the whole subject of clutchness is.

Let's review that.

1. Choking exists.
2. Some of the anecdotal evidence for clutchness -- e.g., Vinateri bragging endlessly about how clutch he is -- is actually descriptions of not-choking.
3. There are guys who make extra physical effort on big plays they can't sustain through the whole game. I suspect McGinest of being one of those. That's kind of like some distance runners finishing with a strong "kick" and some not having as much of one.
4. There are guys who claim to just focus better in the clutch. I don't know whether they're describing themselves accurately in that way or not. Brady makes such claims.
5. There are deceptive tactics (pass-rush moves, off-speed pitches, etc.) one can inherently use only once in a while, and might save for the clutch.

And so on.

Statistics cast doubt on many claims of clutchness, but I don't think they're all invaldated.