fair catch fryar
In the Starting Line-Up
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2007
- Messages
- 4,716
- Reaction score
- 2,339
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.Without Tom Brady, with massive injuries to key starters all across the team, and with a backup QB who last started in high school, the Patriots finished 11-5 with the NFL's 2nd highest scoring offense and a top 10 defense, and were destroying teams in December for a strong potential playoff run. Any of the above factors (top QB down, numerous starter injuries, grooming an inexperienced QB and lots of other rookies to boot) would have crippled most other franchises' chances.
Tom Brady is my favorite football player ever, but the most recent season has ended the debate:
William Belichick is the only indispensable part when it comes to long term Patriot success.
Even if Brady's knee never heals, even if Pioli and the entire coaching staff leaves, the Patriots will continue to roll, over time, as long as William Belichick is the head coach of the team.
Who the HECK is WILLIAM Belichick??????
What team's did they destroy in December and what were the circumstances?
12/7 Seahawks
One of the worst teams in the league with just as many decimating injuries as the Patriots minus the hall of fame quarterback. Oh and they almost lost the game.
12/14 Raiders
Once again one of the worst teams in the league, maybe the worst team of the decade, who made no effort to tackle at any point during the game.
12/21 Cardinals
I have been watching football since the mid 90's and I have never seen a team give such a pathetic performance in my entire life. They gave up before they met at center field for the coin toss. And yes I am counting preseason football in my statement.
12/28 Bills
A tough division game and the only one that gives credence to your argument. BB outcoached **** all over the field and was probably the major difference in the game.
Bottom line is BB did great this year with what he had to deal with but to dismiss Brady and his accomplishments along with all the other players and what they contribute is homerism at best. The Pats win because of the players they assemble on the field and the way they respond to coaching. Seriously go back and look at their scheduale this year if Brady is their QB they are pushing 16-0 again.
Without Tom Brady, with massive injuries to key starters all across the team, and with a backup QB who last started in high school, the Patriots finished 11-5 with the NFL's 2nd highest scoring offense and a top 10 defense, and were destroying teams in December for a strong potential playoff run. Any of the above factors (top QB down, numerous starter injuries, grooming an inexperienced QB and lots of other rookies to boot) would have crippled most other franchises' chances.
Tom Brady is my favorite football player ever, but the most recent season has ended the debate:
William Belichick is the only indispensable part when it comes to long term Patriot success.
Even if Brady's knee never heals, even if Pioli and the entire coaching staff leaves, the Patriots will continue to roll, over time, as long as William Belichick is the head coach of the team.
Saying they missed the playoffs is true but stupid given that they're the second team since the merger to miss the playoffs with 11 wins. Regarding the schedule, their opponents had a .480 winning %, not a tough schedule but a representative one.
It's not though, its the purpose of the regular season. The team had opportunities to get in, and they didn't come through. Wasn't Belichick's fault (Dave Thomase, Gaffney drop, turnovers vs Steelers, 3rd & 15 v Jets), but its what happened. It doesn't matter how many wins you have, if you don't win your division, and you don't have the best record and tiebreakers out of non-division winners, you didn't do enough to make the playoffs. The 11-5 record is more indicative of the iffy competition across the NFL this season than anything else.
For instance, do you think Miami or Baltimore are truly dangerous teams? Miami went 1-15 last season and we handled them with ease the second time we faced them. This is the same Baltimore team that a year ago was a complete and utter disaster. I'm not trying to take anything away from what the Pats accomplished, but it was a weird NFL season, and I think if we had gotten into the playoffs, we probably would've destroyed some of these teams. As it is, I think the "well, we were 11-5, we deserved to get in" stuff is way off the mark. It is what it is, BB would say.
My whole point is this "is it Brady or is it Belichick" stuff is pointless. It's both, and then the other 52 players, and the coaches, and the trainers, and the Krafts and the scouts, etc., etc. It's a complete disservice to all the other talented players on the team and people in the organization to even have this discussion.
Nobody is disputing that Brady is a top 5 all time QB. I stated in the first post he is my favorite player ever. But to say without Brady we would have no Superbowl championships is unfair. Perhaps we wouldn't have three but I think there's a good chance we would still have one or two.
Based on Cassel's amazing development this year (anyone remember what he looked like from August through September?), I have no doubt that Belichick would have discovered and developed someone to become at worst a Phil Simms type of game-manager QB who played smart, did not make many mistakes, and could generate first downs and control the clock.
One way to look at this is a slight comparable, the 49ers dynasty. Joe Montana was one of the best ever but the 49ers were still great after he left and won a championship largely based on Walsh's blueprint. Montana made the Chiefs exciting for a few years but even with a great Chiefs team, couldn't get to the Superbowl in any year.
I don't think we have to "choose" one or the other. We can like both. What I am trying to dispel is the idea that so long as we have both Belichick and Brady, that we will be contenders, that both are necessary. I think that we really only need Belichick. I love Brady, but pretty much any player or coach or personnel guy on the Patriots is expendable except for Belichick. And based on the comments here, that seems like a hard thought to swallow.
My gut disagrees. I think Bill Belichick is replaceable, but Ernie Adams is the real mastermind and is the indispensable part. BB is just the conduit by which Ernie's thoughts are turned to action.
Whoa! That's quite a claim. I read The Education of a Coach, where Adams certainly gets his due, but I didn't come away with that sense at all. Do you have another source or sources for that?
Happy New Year, BTW
I don't think we have to "choose" one or the other. We can like both. What I am trying to dispel is the idea that so long as we have both Belichick and Brady, that we will be contenders, that both are necessary. I think that we really only need Belichick. I love Brady, but pretty much any player or coach or personnel guy on the Patriots is expendable except for Belichick. And based on the comments here, that seems like a hard thought to swallow.
This year, with an arguable more talented roster (going in) we slide 5 games to 11-5 and miss the players altogether. If last years Super Bowl Champions (Giants 10-6) did that this year and went to 5-11, Coughlin would have been out on his ass.
Excuse me if I'd just as soon have my TFB back next year. He ain't no system QB.