Report: Brady almost left after SB 52 loss to Eagles...

[sb1]

You realize your "GOAT NFL Coach" never accomplished a damn thing as an HC without that geriatric QB, right?

.700 win pct in the last 15 years without Brady. That’s not too shabby.

 

[PatsBoy12]

.700 win pct in the last 15 years without Brady. That’s not too shabby.

Interesting how people like to point to these numbers and 11-5, but how many playoff appearances and/or wins were there in that timespan without Tom? I'll wait... These numbers are cherry picked and give no definite conclusion one way or the other. It's just not a big enough sample to says overwhelmingly BB can win without Tom at the level he won with Tom.

 

[sb1]

Interesting how people like to point to these numbers and 11-5, but how many playoff appearances and/or wins were there in that timespan without Tom? I'll wait...

I think JG if he stayed healthy would have gotten them to the playoffs and maybe a deep run if he went the distance that season. As for 11-5- compare that to what happened to the Colts when they had a subpar coach and they lost Manning.

 

[XLIX]

.700 win pct in the last 15 years without Brady. That’s not too shabby.

whuh whuh huh whuh..?!?? Belichick doesn't even have 15 years as an HC without Brady, let alone a .700 winning percentage. (EDIT: ohhhhhhhhh.... I think I see what you mean.... nice cherry picking!!)

FACT: In 7+ years without Brady as a starter, Bill Belichick is 9 games under .500 and 1-1 in the playoffs. (This is the part where people come up with all the usual excuses about his final year in Cleveland but even if you take that final year away, he's still under .500 with all of 1 playoff win)

 

[sb1]

whuh whuh huh whuh..?!?? Belichick doesn't even have 15 years as an HC without Brady, let alone a .700 winning percentage.

FACT: In 7+ years without Brady as a starter, Bill Belichick is 9 games under .500 and 1-1 in the playoffs. (This is the part where people come up with all the usual excuses about his final year in Cleveland but even if you take that final year away, he's still under .500 with all of 1 playoff win)

14-6 in the last 15 years without Brady. Fact.

If someone has to go back two or three decades to make an argument that Belichick isn’t all that then they don’t have much of an argument. Brady was a game manager QB 20 years ago I guess that’s all he ever will be.

 

[XLIX]

I think JG if he stayed healthy would have gotten them to the playoffs and maybe a deep run if he went the distance that season.

As soon as you start playing make believe, you've lost the argument.

As for 11-5- compare that to what happened to the Colts when they had a subpar coach and they lost Manning.

What happened to the Colts is they deliberately tanked so they could get Luck. They were better their first year with Luck than they were their last year with Manning.

But we are not talking about the Colts here, we are talking about Brady and Belichick,

 

[XLIX]

14-6 in the last 15 years without Brady. Fact.

If someone has to go back two or three decades to make an argument that Belichick isn’t all that then they don’t have much of an argument. Brady was a game manager QB 20 years ago I guess that’s all he ever will be.

Um, newsflash: The discussion is Bill Belichick's coaching abilities without Tom Brady. Fact is the majority of that experience took place in the 90's.

If someone has to completely throw away 6 years from a 7.3 year sample size to make their argument then they don't have much of an argument.

 

[sb1]

As sooon as you start playing make believe, you've lost the argument.

What happened to the Colts is they deliberately tanked so they could get Luck. They were better their first year with Luck than they were their last year with Manning.

But we are not talking about the Colts here, we are talking about Brady and Belichick,

No they didn’t tank. they were really that bad without Manning. The Patriots were competitive without Brady. Facts.

Teams don’t tank. Never have, never will.

 

[sb1]

Um, newsflash: The discussion is Bill Belichick's coaching abilities without Tom Brady. Fact is the majority of that experience took place in the 90's.

If someone has to completely throw away 6 years from a 7.3 year sample size to make their argument then they don't have much of an argument.

like I said if you have to go back 2 or 3 decades to say Belichick ain’t all that then you don’t have an argument. Belichick is just as entitled to get the benefit of the doubt that he is a much better coach today as Brady is that he’s a better QB. Well at least until last year anyway.

 

[PatsBoy12]

I think JG if he stayed healthy would have gotten them to the playoffs and maybe a deep run if he went the distance that season. As for 11-5- compare that to what happened to the Colts when they had a subpar coach and they lost Manning.

Means nothing... that's not what actually happened. As far as your Colts comparison, that is a completely different discussion for many reasons. I could use your logic and say I think the Pats make a deep playoff run that year with Brady. But that's not what happened. Facts are facts and conjecture is conjecture.

The fact is BB has not reached the heights without Brady that he reached with Brady... ever to this point. If you want to look at that as an indictment on BB, be my guest. I'm just pointing to facts. BB will have ample opportunity to show he and his system had more to do with the past 20 years than did Brady. And as a Pats fan, I'll be rooting for him to do so with all my heart. But you know what, I will also be rooting for Brady in Tampa with all my heart as well. I'm not one of these people who is particularly interested in the discussion of who was more responsible for the success. They both played very important parts and gave the team and its fans more than we could have dreamed of.

 

[XLIX]

like I said if you have to go back 2 or 3 decades to say Belichick ain’t all that then you don’t have an argument.

Like I said.... if you have to throw away 6 years from a 7.3 year sample size, then you don't have an argument.

 

[sb1]

Means nothing... that's not what actually happened.

what happened was Belichick coached this team to 3-1 with JG and Brissett. Then Brady came back. So it’s silly to use that against Bill.

As far as your Colts comparison, that is a completely different discussion for many reasons. I could use your logic and say I think the Pats make a deep playoff run that year with Brady. But that's not what happened. Facts are facts and conjecture is conjecture.

Not that different. The Pats and Colts were missing their superstar QBs for a season. The Pats with Belichick finished 11-5. The Colts without a decent coach went to 2-14. So clearly a) Manning meant more to his team than Brady meant to his and b) Belichick’s coaching had and still has a lot of value. Brady hasn’t done a thing without Belichick. So we don’t know what it would be like the other way around.

The fact is BB has not reached the heights without Brady that he reached with Brady... ever to this point. If you want to look at that as an indictment on BB, be my guest. I'm just pointing to facts. BB will have ample opportunity to show he and his system had more to do with the past 20 years than did Brady. And as a Pats fan, I'll be rooting for him to do so with all my heart. But you know what, I will also be rooting for Brady in Tampa with all my heart as well. I'm not one of these people who is particularly interested in the discussion of who was more responsible for the success. They both played very important parts and gave the team and its fans more than we could have dreamed of.

Fair enough and i agree. I have no plans to go out of my way to cheer for Brady’s team unless his team winning benefits my team directly or if they’re playing a team I hate. No different than how it is for any other rival QB.

 

[PatsBoy12]

what happened was Belichick coached this team to 3-1 with JG and Brissett. Then Brady came back. So it’s silly to use that against Bill.


Not that different. The Pats and Colts were missing their superstar QBs for a season. The Pats with Belichick finished 11-5. The Colts without a decent coach went to 2-14. So clearly a) Manning meant more to his team than Brady meant to his and b) Belichick’s coaching had and still has a lot of value. Brady hasn’t done a thing without Belichick. So we don’t know what it would be like the other way around.


Fair enough and i agree. I have no plans to go out of my way to cheer for Brady’s team unless his team winning benefits my team directly or if they’re playing a team I hate. No different than how it is for any other rival QB.

This response shows me that you just don't get it and you'll argue just because you want to hold your viewpoint and that's cool with me. I don't care beyond this post. By your flawed logic, the past 20 years would have been exactly three same without Tom. Okay, you win. Bye.

 

[sb1]

This response shows me that you just don't get it and you'll argue just because you want to hold your viewpoint and that's cool with me. I don't care beyond this post. By your flawed logic, the past 20 years would have been exactly three same without Tom. Okay, you win. Bye.

What part is untrue or you disagree with?

 

[Deus Irae]

like I said if you have to go back 2 or 3 decades to say Belichick ain’t all that then you don’t have an argument. Belichick is just as entitled to get the benefit of the doubt that he is a much better coach today as Brady is that he’s a better QB. Well at least until last year anyway.

Brady was the QB1 for almost all of that time. Of course you'd have to go back far in order to get a full picture. Your trolling on this subject is embarrassingly weak.

 

[sb1]

Brady was the QB1 for almost all of that time. Of course you'd have to go back far in order to get a full picture. Your trolling on this subject is embarrassingly weak.

Not nearly as weak as having to going back 30 years to try and say Belichick is not a great coach today. That's just laughable.

If Brady is entitled to be better than he was years ago, so is Bill.

 

[Deus Irae]

Not nearly as weak as having to going back 30 years to try and say Belichick is not a great coach today. That's just laughable.

If Brady is entitled to be better than he was years ago, so is Bill.

To repeat: Brady was the QB for so long that people have no choice but to go back far. You know this, yet you're still playing the fool.


However, even just during the BB-Patriots time, the Patriots missed the playoffs 3 times. One miss was in Brady's second season as the starter, following the first Super Bowl. The other two were in the two seasons where Brady was not the starter. So, even just during the BB-Patriots era, It's been Brady or bust.

 

[TheRainMaker]

What's intriguing about Brady leaving is we'll find out how good of a coach BB really is. We argue about how good or bad he is at drafting/team building when Brady was around. Now his picks will be on full display and can't hide behind Brady's greatness. I think a lot of draft picks got it pretty easy on the criticism by the media throughout the years because they were a winning team. Now that nothing is guaranteed, these draft picks will be expected to do more and the biggest spotlight will be on Michel/Wynn/Harry for starters.

It feels like the year 2000 is reset again but with a better team. This will be a fun season and I'm excited to see the Pats post Brady.

 

[TheRainMaker]

One miss was in Brady's second season as the starter

Out of 18 years as a "starting QB", his only blemish was in 2002. And he's made the playoffs 17 straight years! Those are amazing stats.

 

[Deus Irae]

What's intriguing about Brady leaving is we'll find out how good of a coach BB really is. We argue about how good or bad he is at drafting/team building when Brady was around. Now his picks will be on full display and can't hide behind Brady's greatness. I think a lot of draft picks got it pretty easy on the criticism by the media throughout the years because they were a winning team. Now that nothing is guaranteed, these draft picks will be expected to do more and the biggest spotlight will be on Michel/Wynn/Harry for starters.

It feels like the year 2000 is reset again but with a better team. This will be a fun season and I'm excited to see the Pats post Brady.

BB caught a break with Newton available. If Newton is healthy, that really changes the likely trajectory of this team in 2020. It also gives the team a chance to hang on to Newton if it works out.