CHFF/WEEI: Brady vs. Belichick is no contest

[SVN]

this is the most illinformed debates which everyone in the media loves to talk about when everyone knows is BS.bill walsh before joe montana and during montana's first yr were 2-14 and 6-10.
this argument really pisses me, Especially because the media themselves called BB genius - he always said its about the players - and now they themselves call him an average coach.
put tom brady with mike nolan and brad childress or herm edwards and see how many SBs they win.
When teams go bad, everyone fires the coach first so it must mean something to be a good coach right ? Apparently according to these idiots BB was just twiddling his thumbs for the past 7 yrs.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Apparently most of the sports press and sadly some fans here have forgotten about or never understood the concept of synergy. We are extremely fortunate to have been blessed with a decent ownership, good football management in Belioli, and a future HOF QB. But since it's a 53 person plus coaching staff game, even this great combination has daunting challenges ahead in the quest for another SB.

 

[alamo]

How many coaches would have benched their star QB with the largest contract in the league in favor of a 6th round pick?

That's why Brady vs. Belichick is a false dichotomy. Part of the coach's job is to recognize, nurture, and maximize the benefits of talent . Part of the athlete's job is to work hard to get better and learn from the coach.

Both have performed their roles extraordinarily well. Neither would be what they are if the other wasn't just as good. With most QBs, e.g. Bledsoe, Belichick would not likely have won three titles. With most coaches Brady would most likely have been cut his first year or sat on the bench and waited years for someone to get injured to get his big chance.

 

[SVN]

How many coaches would have benched their star QB with the largest contract in the league in favor of a 6th round pick?

That's why Brady vs. Belichick is a false dichotomy. Part of the coach's job is to recognize, nurture, and maximize the benefits of talent . Part of the athlete's job is to work hard to get better and learn from the coach.

Both have performed their roles extraordinarily well. Neither would be what they are if the other wasn't just as good. With most QBs, e.g. Bledsoe, Belichick would not likely have won three titles. With most coaches Brady would most likely have been cut his first year or sat on the bench and waited years for someone to get injured to get his big chance.

as BSM pointed out BB's record with idiots like bledsoe and kosar and vinny T is 42-58 .
I read somewhere that one of the reason BB and charlie like brady was that he did what he was told to instead of bledsoe with him it was not the same case always.

 

[Lifer]

This is the dumbest kind of debate in sports because you can say that about ANY great players and coaches.
Do you honestly think Brady wins 3 Super Bowls WITHOUT Belichick?

Does Vince Lombardi win without Bart Starr? Does Starr win without Lombardi?

Does Montana win without Walsh? Walsh with Montana?

No. No. and No. Its a partnership. And both are great hall of famers.

Would the Beatles have been the Beatles without either Lennon or McCartney?

No way!

 

[JSn]

Would the Beatles have been the Beatles without either Lennon or McCartney?

No way!

I just imagined a Beatles-less world and it really brightened up my day. Thanks!

 

[TheGodInAGreyHoodie]

How many coaches would have benched their star QB with the largest contract in the league in favor of a 6th round pick?

I can think of one other.

Mike McCarthy.

Okay Rodgers isn't 6th rounder. But Bledsoe wasn't half the superstar as Farve.

 

[363839]

It's not like Brady was a high price FA that BB picked up.
He was drafted in the 6th round. #199.
If your going to minimize BB's accomplishments because you believe
Brady is so great, than you have to accredit BB for Tom's
development as a QB.
Besides, every other great coach had a great QB, too.

 

[xmarkd400x]

You do not win in this league without talent.

Take this extreme:
Team 1: patsfans.com members with the best coaching ever.
Team 2: The Lions or 49ers or Bengals without coaching

Who would win? The NFL team. Why? NFL caliber talent.

Now, would a coach make the uncoached team better? Absolutely.

What does this tell you? A great coach, no matter what, needs good players to win. Great players make it easier for a coach to win. Why? Because you have more matchups that favor you and it is easier to take advantage of them. Also, a great player will benefit from a great coach. They will be able to be that much better.

In short, I agree with the sentiment of this board. It is a symbiotic relationship. BB could not have won SBs with crappy players. TB could not have won SBs with crappy coaching.

 

[alamo]

as BSM pointed out BB's record with idiots like bledsoe and kosar and vinny T is 42-58 .

That's a junk statistic, misleading because by taking away Brady, it disproportionately emphasizes Belichick's first seasons with his teams. Good coaches historically don't do nearly as well their first season. Not to mention it includes BB's last season in Cleveland, which was a disaster largely not under his control.

 

[alamo]

I can think of one other.

Mike McCarthy.

Okay Rodgers isn't 6th rounder. But Bledsoe wasn't half the superstar as Farve.

I considered that situation before I posted earlier, and decided I completely disagree with you. The only similarity is that the move was unpopular among fans. Rodgers is a first rounder and the question was NEVER "will he take over for Favre?", it was always "WHEN will Rodgers take over for Favre?"

And could I remind you that in 2001, Bledsoe was the highest paid QB in the game, making more than Favre (who had beaten him in the SB 5 years earlier). Today's Favre and 2001's Bledsoe are NOT far apart, in fact 2001 Bledsoe was quite possibly better than today's Favre.

 

[Leave No Doubt]

How many coaches would have benched their star QB with the largest contract in the league in favor of a 6th round pick?

That's why Brady vs. Belichick is a false dichotomy. Part of the coach's job is to recognize, nurture, and maximize the benefits of talent . Part of the athlete's job is to work hard to get better and learn from the coach.

Both have performed their roles extraordinarily well. Neither would be what they are if the other wasn't just as good. With most QBs, e.g. Bledsoe, Belichick would not likely have won three titles. With most coaches Brady would most likely have been cut his first year or sat on the bench and waited years for someone to get injured to get his big chance.

I think I hear a BINGO

 

[SVN]

That's a junk statistic, misleading because by taking away Brady, it disproportionately emphasizes Belichick's first seasons with his teams. Good coaches historically don't do nearly as well their first season. Not to mention it includes BB's last season in Cleveland, which was a disaster largely not under his control.

what i meant was, that is another way to look at it rather than blame it all on BB.

 

[TheGodInAGreyHoodie]

I considered that situation before I posted earlier, and decided I completely disagree with you. The only similarity is that the move was unpopular among fans. Rodgers is a first rounder and the question was NEVER "will he take over for Favre?", it was always "WHEN will Rodgers take over for Favre?"

And could I remind you that in 2001, Bledsoe was the highest paid QB in the game, making more than Favre (who had beaten him in the SB 5 years earlier). Today's Favre and 2001's Bledsoe are NOT far apart, in fact 2001 Bledsoe was quite possibly better than today's Favre.

Just to be clear. My comment wasn't meant as a dig on BB.

BB trusted his judgment and made a unpopular decision. Same thing with McCarthy. If BB had been wrong and Brady sucked his second HC job would have only lasted 2 or 3 years. If GB doesn't play football in January this year and the Jets do, you can bet there will be very loud chants for the firing of McCarthy. And if the Jets go to the playoffs with Farve and Rodgers sit home two years in a row you can be pretty certain McCarthy will not be HC in 2010.

What they have in common is both had the balls do make the right decision even if unpopular and very risky.

So although the situations have some differences. I would say there are two coaches that would have benched their star QB with the largest contract in the league in favor of a 6th round pick. That is not exactly what McCarthy did. But McCarthy is someone who if he had a 6th rounder he thought was better than the highest paid QB he would play the 6th rounder.

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

How do we know how Brady would do without Belichick?

And it's 3-2, I hate when people act as if Cassel inherited a 14 point lead against the Chiefs or something. He won that game. Why don't people give it a full year before jumping to these conclusions.

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

This is kind of the same argument that idiot Brady haters used in 2005 when the Pats got off to a slow start and Colts were dominant at the beginning. "Brady without a dominating defense can't win while Manning with one finally can". Well as the season unfolded Brady took his team as far as Peyton did. Come back in January and tell me Belichick can't win without Brady.

 

[theONLYJerseypatsfan]

Do you think Belichick could have won three Superbowls with Drew Bledsoe

at quarterback? Highly unlikely!

Was Brady on the field when the D kept peyton manning and his 48 TDs to 3 points in a divisional playoff game? If it wasnt Belichick who masterminds this whole thing do you think that the 20 points we scored that day would have been enough against a team that averaged 32 a game and laid 48 on the chiefs in the wildcard round the week before?

To all the bandwagon pats fans.....we have a bum tire this year...please jump off and join another team's fanbase...you people make it so hard to come on this board sometimes

 

[belichickaholic]

Brett Favre didn't sniff a superbowl after Holmgren left. What ever happened to Kurt Warner? You think Carson Palmer loves being coached by Marvin Lewis? How about Dan Marino? A great QB! No? Great QB's need great coaches and vice-versa.

 

[captadamnj]

Great qb's need great teams to win and GREAT TEAMS are BUILT by GREAT COACHES.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

I considered that situation before I posted earlier, and decided I completely disagree with you. The only similarity is that the move was unpopular among fans. Rodgers is a first rounder and the question was NEVER "will he take over for Favre?", it was always "WHEN will Rodgers take over for Favre?"

And could I remind you that in 2001, Bledsoe was the highest paid QB in the game, making more than Favre (who had beaten him in the SB 5 years earlier). Today's Favre and 2001's Bledsoe are NOT far apart, in fact 2001 Bledsoe was quite possibly better than today's Favre.

Add to that, McCarthy did not "bench" Favre despite numerous opportunities. He and the front office in GB just let the drama queen publicly mull retirement until he finally retired - then they actually grew a pair and locked the back door when he came sneaking back. BB at least had the guts to bench Kosar when he felt a change was needed and later to ride the pony what brought him when Bledsoe was healthy.