Tom Curran: Today's NFL has no patience for 'Next Belichick'

[IcyPatriot]

This is a great article by Tom ... he may be 100% correct ... Belichick may very well be the last.

Curran: Today's NFL has no patience for 'Next Belichick'

FOXBORO – Know why there won’t ever be a run of dominance in the NFL like the one Bill Belichick’s presided over since 2001?

Because nobody will have the stomach to allow a head coach to implement a program that is as taxing, focused, ruthless, unapologetic, dictatorial, unsentimental and efficient as the one here in New England.

No owner, group of players or media contingent will be able to countenance an approach like Belichick’s from a coach who hasn’t done what Belichick’s done. And not only has nobody done what he’s done, nobody will ever get the same chance he did.

 

[The Gr8est]

This is a great article by Tom ... he may be 100% correct ... Belichick may very well be the last.

Curran: Today's NFL has no patience for 'Next Belichick'

If the NFL* wants another BB so bad, why are they trying so hard to destroy and discredit the one they already have?

 

[shmessy]

It had to be said - and Curran is the perfect writer to say it.

Bob Kraft's don't grow on trees.

I remember how the Boston media were absolutely ripping him in September 2001 - - the "Parcells' Magic Touch" had been run out of town and it was all "Amos Alonzo Kraft's fault". The Great Parcells had been replaced by Pete the Poodle and this (at the time) 5-13 misanthrope Belichick.

It is what it is.

 

[oldrover]

If the NFL* wants another BB so bad, why are they trying so hard to destroy and discredit the one they already have?

They don't want another BB... BB throws off their "parity" goal of 32 teams at 8-8.

 

[shmessy]

In fact, to this day, Kraft feels he screwed up and did not given Carroll the control he should have given him (Grier and the back steps).

 

[shmessy]

In BB's Thursday presser, the most illuminating moment came 2/3's of the way through when someone asked him when he felt this was really "his team". He didn't blink and said "2003".

 

[DefenseRules]

If the NFL* wants another BB so bad, why are they trying so hard to destroy and discredit the one they already have?

Because the NL is being run by a moron.

 

[flasox27]

In fact, to this day, Kraft feels he screwed up and did not given Carroll the control he should have given him (Grier and the back steps).

While I am a critic of Kraft's relationship with Goodell and how it has impacted the Pats since 2007, I have to salute Kraft for learning from his mistakes and giving the GOAT coach the ability to run his team.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

Interesting, and probably true. We live in an age of 24-7 media on the Internet and a relentless Twitter-verse that can demand a Coach's head overnight. Not much time to "prove yourself." I think this means that we're going to see more and more coaches who have to "fail" at one place, take a few years away from the sidelines as HC and then return "chastened and wiser."

The history of the HC's on most "greatest" list is mixed:

BB, of course, was 41-55 in his first six seasons as HC, including one 11-5 year in Cleveland (without that season, he was 30--50).

Bill Walsh was 8--24 in his first two seasons but then won his first SB the next year, which, I guess kind of made up for things in the minds of fans and the media.
Tom Landry didn't have a winning season until his seventh year and was 25-33 before that.

On the other hand:
Don Shula had one losing season in his entire 33 years as HC and went 63-18 in his first six seasons, including his first NFL Championship in 1968.
Vince Lombardi never had a losing season but, as I am always surprised when I remember it, was only an HC for 11 years. He went 26-12 in his first three seasons, including his first NFL Championship in 1961.

 

[RelocatedPatFan]

It helps when the HC wins a SB in his 2nd year. the thing is, BB had a plan that Kraft agreed with and the 2 were on the same page. It's in no small part to BB's success that has driven other owners made because they think they either deserve or can manufacture the same success,

And he was slammed by the owner/media in Cleveland (which is probably where his disdain or non-use for the media comes from. not to mention, nothing they ever do will help him with his 1 main goal. Winning football games/championships).

 

[Ross12]

They don't want another BB... BB throws off their "parity" goal of 32 teams at 8-8.

Exactly... One team dominating the league for years runs counter to what Goodell wants - the "every team has a shot every year" mantra.

 

[JJDChE]

I disagree. This has been an issue for like 30 years. The coaching carousel is not new. There will always be a few owners with foresight and willingness to buck popular opinion. It's a trait of strong leaders.

Belichick won't be the last great coach, i guarantee that.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Lets remember history here folks.

2000 was a reboot. BB has some slack.

In 2001 BB started 0-2. If they duplicated 2000, there were rumors that Bob was going to can him at the end of the year but I did not believe them. What did seem solid was that BB needed to make the playoffs in 2002 to keep his job.

 

[Froob]

Was BB defacto GM in Cleveland as well?

 

[PP2]

And he was slammed by the owner/media in Cleveland (which is probably where his disdain or non-use for the media comes from. not to mention, nothing they ever do will help him with his 1 main goal. Winning football games/championships).

He doesn't actively hate the media- he just recognizes that the media isn't there to support or facilitate him or portray him in a positive light. Their bottom line is to generate hits or interest (e.g., generate or incite drama where there is none/making mountains out of molehills), and if that means throwing him under the bus, so be it. It's worse today than it ever was because the amount of hits or interest they are able to generate is nowadays tied into their income level, their ability to go up the ladder, or their job security in general.

Consequently, he gives them very little in the way of ammo.

Occasionally he gets asked a purely football question, and that's when you see him happily chatter away, non-stop.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Was BB defacto GM in Cleveland as well?

Yes

 

[RelocatedPatFan]

He doesn't actively hate the media- he just recognizes that the media isn't there to support or facilitate him or portray him in a positive light. Their bottom line is to generate hits or interest (e.g., generate or incite drama where there is none/making mountains out of molehills), and if that means throwing him under the bus, so be it. It's worse today than it ever was because the amount of hits or interest they are able to generate is nowadays tied into their income level, their ability to go up the ladder, or their job security in general.

Consequently, he gives them very little in the way of ammo.

Occasionally he gets asked a purely football question, and that's when you see him happily chatter away, non-stop.

So we're in agreement?

I see disdain as being different than hate. I tried to match it up with non-use or more to the definition, their agenda isn't worthy of his consideration. As you mention, the media's interest and what I stated as BB's main interest don't have a correlation.

We've seen BB as a very affable person. It's when they are asking him about something he is passionate about (while at the podium) or when he's in his work environment. When he's at the podium and answering those "other type" of questions where he goes into non-information/no sound bite mode (which is a brilliant routine in my opinion).

 

[Zeus]

Lets remember history here folks.

2000 was a reboot. BB has some slack.

In 2001 BB started 0-2. If they duplicated 2000, there were rumors that Bob was going to can him at the end of the year but I did not believe them. What did seem solid was that BB needed to make the playoffs in 2002 to keep his job.

Yet he just said this week he didn't feel the team/culture was fully committed to his vision until 2003.

I just said this earlier this week in another thread - 2000 was his best coaching/personnel management job. He had to jettison a bunch of name players with big contracts - Curran listed them in his article. It took guts to pull that off because the press, the fans and especially the guys in the locker room were not going to cut him any slack.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Even with a sentient, far sighted owner, it's tougher to replicate today than in 2001. Social media where every yahoo communicates their every half-baked, first to come to "mind" unconsidered opinion to everyone with a resultant chain reaction of amplified idiocy. Combine technology with the intrinsic human joy of witch hunting and you get stuff like Deflategate and riding Josh McD out of Denver on a rail.

 

[Ivan]

It had to be said - and Curran is the perfect writer to say it.

Bob Kraft's don't grow on trees.

I remember how the Boston media were absolutely ripping him in September 2001 - - the "Parcells' Magic Touch" had been run out of town and it was all "Amos Alonzo Kraft's fault". The Great Parcells had been replaced by Pete the Poodle and this (at the time) 5-13 misanthrope Belichick.

It is what it is.

Kraft both deserves a great deal of credit and a great deal, of blame. He brought us both Belichick and Goodell.