Parcells can't win without Belichick who can't win without Brady

[TheGodInAGreyHoodie]

Well, Clarence the Angel, you just don't know that, nobody ever will, so why not drop it?

That's my only point. They are two of the greatest football men of our generation.

If people want to hate parcells for what he did, that's fine, but it doesn't diminish his accomplishments. Anymore than it made Chuck Fairbanks less of a football mind.

Parcells is almost done. Anyone could find that he never won on rainy Saturdays while Belichick did. It doesn't matter, its just stupid.

Cassel hasn't won anything yet either but, apparently, he's done enough to keep the Belichick without Brady people away.

Belichick is a great enough coach in his own right. he doesn't need revisionist historians diminishing the accomplishments of other talented people.

No you assertion was that this season would stop people from saying those two things.

Now while I personally don't subscribe to either theory, at maximum only one of those theories will be firmly placed to bed and that is conditioned on the an AFCE team winning the SB, if neither team wins the SB neither theory will at all be weakened by this season.

 

[RayClay]

Fine. But it was you who brought it up with this thread. I hadnt thought about this for a long time. Dont post a thread like this if you dont want to dredge up the arguement again.

Its like someone posting a thread that Drew Bledsoe got a raw deal in New England. You'll get the old Bledsoe haters pouncing.

I did want to bring it up again to ridicule it.

I'm only sorry we didn't get any Belichick can't win without Brady posters in here. Its not like Cassel has even won a playoff game yet.

I don't pretend to have the power to rewrite history and remove one of Parcells coaches and say with certainty he couldn't win. Maybe he would have made Romeo Crennel the defensive coordinator. He participated in as many super bowl wins as Belichick.

As a matter of fact, neither Belichick nor Parcells has won a Super Bowl without Crennell.

Wow. That's amazing.

When you start rewriting history it sure gets complicated trying to judge which factors are most important.

 

[belichickaholic]

A lot of people seem to forget that Charlie Army was also in the personnel dept. with the pats in the early 90's up through about 95' or 96'. The same Charlie Army that built the Rams greatest show on turf teams. Remember Parcells couldn't shop for the groceries. If he couldn't shop. Who was shopping? The possibility exists that Parcells is just a fraud. We don't know who's really drafting these players.

Tony Sporano is the dolphins coach. Not Parcells. How long before Sporano feels like his work is being overshadowed by Parcells? I would imagine not too long. It's possible that within a couple or a few years Parcells could be viewed the same way as Jerry Jones is right now. An overbearing jerk who's meddling in his teams affairs.

Who knows. Maybe he really is a great coach or maybe he is just a smart charismatic manipulative fraud. As far as I'm concerned, if he stays with Miami for at least five years and is sucessful consistently then I'll give him his due.. But until then...

 

[Deus Irae]

I did want to bring it up again to ridicule it.

I'm only sorry we didn't get any Belichick can't win without Brady posters in here. Its not like Cassel has even won a playoff game yet.

I don't pretend to have the power to rewrite history and remove one of Parcells coaches and say with certainty he couldn't win. Maybe he would have made Romeo Crennel the defensive coordinator. He participated in as many super bowl wins as Belichick.

As a matter of fact, neither Belichick nor Parcells has won a Super Bowl without Crennell.

Wow. That's amazing.

When you start rewriting history it sure gets complicated trying to judge which factors are most important.

Unfortunately for your efforts at ridicule, your arguments have only served to point out the validity of the statements you tried to deride. Correlation ≠ causation, but this thread brought out plenty of correlation in the case of the Parcells argument, and that will only serve to reinforce the reality of Parcells' failure to get to the Super Bowl without Belichick.

 

[RayClay]

No you assertion was that this season would stop people from saying those two things.

Now while I personally don't subscribe to either theory, at maximum only one of those theories will be firmly placed to bed and that is conditioned on the an AFCE team winning the SB, if neither team wins the SB neither theory will at all be weakened by this season.

I made no assertion, I asked a question. It would be great if people could just admit that all three are greats in their fields, who have benefited from relationships with each other.

It certainly makes more sense than trying to go back in history and pluck people out of positions, assuming they were completely indispensable or forgetting what they learned and owed to others.

Of course arguing about something that has already happened gives you at least some grounding. Find out the statistical anomaly, then build a "theory" (misuse of the word here) to explain it.

Since I just realized (no reason to think of it before) Romeo Crennel was a coach on all 5 Belichick/Parcells teams, I am crediting the employment of Crennel as the essential element of both teams Championships.

Its as logical. Actually, since neither coach has won without Crennel, it is statistically twice as valid as the other "theory".

 

[RayClay]

Unfortunately for your efforts at ridicule, your arguments have only served to point out the validity of the statements you tried to deride. Correlation ≠ causation, but this thread brought out plenty of correlation in the case of the Parcells argument, and that will only serve to reinforce the reality of Parcells' failure to get to the Super Bowl without Belichick.

Or without Crennel.

Or Belichicks failure to get to the Super bowl without Crennel.

Who's to say Parcells wouldn't get to the Super Bowl with Crennel as coordinator?

Considering that Belichick thought so highly of him he waited a year without a DC until he became available.

Wow. That's unprecedented. Belichick must have thought he was a great Defensive Coordinator. Being objective (ha ha) there are lots of factors to a championship team. Belichick, by going without a DC waiting for Crennel proved he thought he was great. Parcells seemed to think so.

OK. Romeo Crennel DC of the Parcells Giants. Why not?

 

[RayClay]

A lot of people seem to forget that Charlie Army was also in the personnel dept. with the pats in the early 90's up through about 95' or 96'. The same Charlie Army that built the Rams greatest show on turf teams. Remember Parcells couldn't shop for the groceries. If he couldn't shop. Who was shopping? The possibility exists that Parcells is just a fraud. We don't know who's really drafting these players.

Bobby Grier didn't get there until 95-96. That's why Parcells left.

Funny, Armey doesn't seem to have a title that sounds like he was in charge.

Prior to joining the Rams, Charley was with the New England Patriots, 1991-97, as Assistant Director of Player Operations, negotiating with and signing drafted players and free agents. He also held the title of Director of College Scouting.

Charles Armey personal appearances, football, pittsburgh steelers, representation, charles armey

It seems quite obvious who made up the "shopping list".

But what did concern Parcells was that he would be part of a management team, which he never was with the Giants, where Young ultimately makes the key personnel decisions. With the Patriots, Parcells reports only to the owner.

Parcells, saying that he was now part of a management team but stressing that "this wasn't about power," nevertheless made a telling point when asked about picking players:

"I think I have the most experience at this table in picking talent."

Orthwein said: "As far as who's going to pick whom, we haven't gone to the expense of picking Bill Parcells not to use his expertise."

PRO FOOTBALL; If Some Ignore Parcells, The Patriots Surely Don't - New York Times

 

[RayClay]

Remember Parcells couldn't shop for the groceries. If he couldn't shop. Who was shopping? The possibility exists that Parcells is just a fraud. We don't know who's really drafting these players.

I guess we do know. And its clearer why he left.

If he was a fraud, he was the fraud who built the 1996 and the best of the 2001 teams.

 

[IcyPatriot]

I guess we do know. And its clearer why he left.

If he was a fraud, he was the fraud who built the 1996 and the best of the 2001 teams.

I think Parcells has realized in his old age that he is a far better organizational man than he is a coach.

 

[RayClay]

I think Parcells has realized in his old age that he is a far better organizational man than he is a coach.

To be quite honest, he's best at turning situations around. That's a pretty good skill. Lots of coaches could do a decent job once the hatchetman has cleared the deadwood and shaken things up.

He can be an @hole and seems to wear out his welcome, or get sick of situations. I think Belichick is better in most ways because of the last two reasons. Belichick has also proved he can turn a situation around.

Parcells is better at directing his feelings outward and dealing with the press, two areas that I think Bellichick tends to fume and get resentful.

 

[Deus Irae]

Or without Crennel.

Or Belichicks failure to get to the Super bowl without Crennel.

Who's to say Parcells wouldn't get to the Super Bowl with Crennel as coordinator?

Considering that Belichick thought so highly of him he waited a year without a DC until he became available.

Wow. That's unprecedented. Belichick must have thought he was a great Defensive Coordinator. Being objective (ha ha) there are lots of factors to a championship team. Belichick, by going without a DC waiting for Crennel proved he thought he was great. Parcells seemed to think so.

OK. Romeo Crennel DC of the Parcells Giants. Why not?

Here you go again..... Belichick DID get to the Super Bowl without Crennel.

 

[RayClay]

Here you go again..... Belichick DID get to the Super Bowl without Crennel.

You must have brainwashed me. Of course I meant win the Super Bowl.

You're the only one that thinks going to the Super Bowl and losing is a big deal.

In fact, I only mentioned the time Parcells went to the Super Bowl and lost because the core of that team he picked went on to become the core of the 2001 Patriots Super Bowl winners.

I never diminish the feat of going to the Super Bowl and winning like Parcells did twice, by mentioning it in the same breath as appearing and losing, as both coaches did once.

 

[Deus Irae]

You must have brainwashed me. Of course I meant win the Super Bowl.

You're the only one that thinks going to the Super Bowl and losing is a big deal.

In fact, I only mentioned the time Parcells went to the Super Bowl and lost because the core of that team he picked went on to become the core of the 2001 Patriots Super Bowl winners.

I never diminish the feat of going to the Super Bowl and winning like Parcells did twice, by mentioning it in the same breath as appearing and losing, as both coaches did once.

No, I'm the one who realizes that getting to the Super Bowl is getting to the Super Bowl, and not winning a single playoff game is NOT getting to the Super Bowl.

Look, I'm sorry your argument has no merit, I really am. It would make for much better discussions and debates about who's better if Parcells had achieved postseason success without Belichick. Unfortunately for the discussion, however, that didn't happen. So, rather than trying to shade the reality about the Super Bowl, and having to throw last season's fluke loss under the bus in order to use the absurd "Romeo" argument, just note that Parcells didn't have all that many years where he was without Belichick and stick with the "not enough years to make an honest decision on the issue" argument.

 

[RayClay]

No, I'm the one who realizes that getting to the Super Bowl is getting to the Super Bowl, and not winning a single playoff game is NOT getting to the Super Bowl.

Look, I'm sorry your argument has no merit, I really am. It would make for much better discussions and debates about who's better if Parcells had achieved postseason success without Belichick. Unfortunately for the discussion, however, that didn't happen. So, rather than trying to shade the reality about the Super Bowl, and having to throw last season's fluke loss under the bus in order to use the absurd "Romeo" argument, just note that Parcells didn't have all that many years where he was without Belichick and stick with the "not enough years to make an honest decision on the issue" argument.

But you see, Parcells gave Belicheck most of his nost important positions. He mentored him from mostly an assistant to assistants, to position coach, coordinator and assistant head coach.

How in the world is it possible to go back in a time machine and eliminate him from those two Super Bowl winning teams?

Its a ridiculous proposition and any sensible person knows that.

Between the two coaches they've won five Super Bowls. By calling Romeo's indispensable contributions to both coaches ultimate success absurd, you only show your own argument to be absurd.

The only difference is that Belichick was responsible for only two victories by one coach, while Romeo was responsible for five by two different coaches.

Pretty damned impressive.

 

[Frezo]

I wonder how many of those teams Mangini was on.

 

[RayClay]

I wonder how many of those teams Mangini was on.

Unless you can make that relevant, I ain't looking it up.

But since I'm here, Belichick was responsible for both Super Bowl wins, right? Isn't that the theory?

Well the score of the 1987 game was 39 to 20. That's a lot of offense. Belichick didn't coach the offense too, did he?

Apparently some thought there were other reasons than the defensive coordinator for the successful season.

* Bill Parcells, National Football League Coach of the Year Award
* Phil Simms, Super Bowl Most Valuable Player
* Lawrence Taylor, AP NFL MVP
* Lawrence Taylor, PFWA NFL MVP
* Lawrence Taylor, Bert Bell Award
* Lawrence Taylor, AP NFL Defensive Player of the Year
* Lawrence Taylor, NEA NFL Defensive Player of the Year
* Lawrence Taylor, UPI NFC Defensive Player of the Year
* Lawrence Taylor, NFC Defensive Player of the Year

 

[Deus Irae]

But you see, Parcells gave Belicheck most of his nost important positions. He mentored him from mostly an assistant to assistants, to position coach, coordinator and assistant head coach.

Belichick's most important positions would be his first position, given to him by Marcibroda, and his head coaching positions in Cleveland and New England. Parcells didn't give him any of those positions.

How in the world is it possible to go back in a time machine and eliminate him from those two Super Bowl winning teams?

Its a ridiculous proposition and any sensible person knows that.

I may have missed a post, but I haven't seen even one person eliminate Parcells from "those two Super Bowl winning teams". Unless I've missed something, this is just a false argument.

Between the two coaches they've won five Super Bowls. By calling Romeo's indispensable contributions to both coaches ultimate success absurd, you only show your own argument to be absurd.

1.) I didn't call Romeo's contributions absurd, I called the "Romeo" argument absurd.

2.) Neither you nor I know whether or not Romeo's contributions were indispensable in any particular season. Clearly Belichick is capable of getting to the Super Bowl without Romeo, however, so that pretty much destroys the argument that he's essential to Belichick's success.

The only difference is that Belichick was responsible for only two victories by one coach, while Romeo was responsible for five by two different coaches.

Pretty damned impressive.

Not at all, since you're deliberately and knowingly making a completely ridiculous argument. I mean, you do realize that you're arguing that a special teams/defensive line coach is responsible for 2 Super Bowl victories, right?

 

[RayClay]

Belichick's most important positions would be his first position, given to him by Marcibroda, and his head coaching positions in Cleveland and New England. Parcells didn't give him any of those positions.

Wow, you're grasping at straws. He was a gopher. He used to break down film and drive people to the airport. Not even close to the responsibility and advancement under Parcells.

Thomas was going to hire a cousin to break down the offensive film, but that plan fell through.

Meanwhile, young Belichick had been put in touch with Marchibroda. Belichick offered to do the job for nothing.

Marchibroda hired him for training camp, doing whatever tasks the coaching staff required. Belichick did so well that his $25-a-week salary soon jumped to $50.

Belichick Is Anointed As the Latest Genius - New York Times

I may have missed a post, but I haven't seen even one person eliminate Parcells from "those two Super Bowl winning teams". Unless I've missed something, this is just a false argument.

That's the whole argument, that even with Simms, L.T., Crennel and whoever else he could have hired he "couldn't win without Belichick".

Look up, its in the title.

1.) I didn't call Romeo's contributions absurd, I called the "Romeo" argument absurd.

You're right, it is absurd. Yet its the same logic, therefore both arguments are absurd.

2.) Neither you nor I know whether or not Romeo's contributions were indispensable in any particular season. Clearly Belichick is capable of getting to the Super Bowl without Romeo, however, so that pretty much destroys the argument that he's essential to Belichick's success.

You have proven Belicheck can get to the Super Bowl and lose without Crennel. If there's an argument about that in the future, you'll win.

Not at all, since you're deliberately and knowingly making a completely ridiculous argument. I mean, you do realize that you're arguing that a special teams/defensive line coach is responsible for 2 Super Bowl victories, right?

I've told you its a ridiculous argument. The same as the argument that Parcells would have lost both super bowls with a different coordinator.

I don't believe an old man who's already Hall of Fame bound should have to disprove an argument requiring a time machine.

Parcells was head coach for two Super Bowl wins, he had great players and a great coaching staff.

 

[wdkantro2]

Last I checked, the Cowboys made an absurd improvement their first year under Parcells, went 10-6 and made the playoffs...and Belichick wasn't there.

 

[Lifer]

Or without Crennel.

Or Belichicks failure to get to the Super bowl without Crennel.

Who's to say Parcells wouldn't get to the Super Bowl with Crennel as coordinator?

Considering that Belichick thought so highly of him he waited a year without a DC until he became available.

Wow. That's unprecedented. Belichick must have thought he was a great Defensive Coordinator. Being objective (ha ha) there are lots of factors to a championship team. Belichick, by going without a DC waiting for Crennel proved he thought he was great. Parcells seemed to think so.

OK. Romeo Crennel DC of the Parcells Giants. Why not?

a major flaw in your theory, or ridiculing, whatever.....that Belichick cant win without Brady. He won a playoff game with Cleveland, over Parcells, without Tom Brady. And he is possibly going to win another this year ( hey if you can claim a playoff spot for Miami this year that hasnt happened......)

thats one more playoff win than Parcells ever had without Belichick

And again, Belichick has gotten to a Super Bowl without Crennel, Parcells hasnt won one playoff game without BB.