For the "Brady made Belichick" crowd

[Patsgofor4]

I think Brady was actually more likeable back then too. Didn’t play favorites. Spread it around, threw it to the open guy instead of only his binkies and it worked well. Worked with his young receivers. Team first player. None of the arrogance that manifested itself in later years. Was not a celebrity wannabe like today. No tantrums or pouty press conferences, no social media BS and no TB12 and fake doctor buddies.

Agree....but you forgot his ridiculous and embarrassing trademark applications (Tom Terrific....rejected...and Tomba Bay, among others). I will always have great respect for Brady as a player, but he has been increasingly less likable off the field in recent years, as Brady the brand became as important as Brady the player. I blame his inner circle for that. The last straw for me was when he introduced his immune boosting product (overpriced vitamins and unproven supplements) in the middle of the Covid peak in the Northeast. This was blatant opportunism, an attempt to profit on the fears and anxieties of the public.

This breakup...


....ultimately lead to this breakup.

 

[Deus Irae]

Bradyites get so emotional defending their binky- as if a) there’s anything to defend him from and b) as if Brady gives two craps about the Brady rump polishers Lmao

You're a troll taking advantage of the reality that this board now prevents people from tearing you a new ******* for your posting, the way they would have before the censorship crackdown. You're a garbage poster who brings nothing to the board.

 

[sb1]

You're a troll taking advantage of the reality that this board now prevents people from tearing you a new ******* for your posting, the way they would have before the censorship crackdown. You're a garbage poster who brings nothing to the board.

Like I said in the post you were replying to.

 

[XLIX]

This is a perfect example of someone purposely using a stat without context and making a ridiculous statement. Especially when you consider that one of the reasons his last season in Cleveland was atrocious was because the OWNER F'ed him over. That owner flat out screwed that entire team by announcing during the season that the team was moving and that very few people in the front office and coaching staff would be back. THAT is a FACT.

People always talk about that final year in Cleveland like that was his only bad year. As I have pointed out time and again, even if you take away that year, he is still below .500 for his career without Brady.

What's Belichick's record with the Patriots without Brady: 5-11, 0-1, 11-5, 3-1 = 19-18. And that first 5-11 year was due to cap hell.. If you so choose to keep putting up statements bastardizing the truth, there are plenty of people here willing to point out your lies of omission.

You know what excuses are like, right?

 

[lancerman]

What 7+ years? In his 5 years with Cleveland, a 3-13 team the year before he got there, he improved each year to get to 11-5 and the playoffs in year 4. Year 5 collapsed after Modell announced they were moving mid-season.

The next time he coached was the 5-11 first year with the Patriots, 2000, wasn't it?

This is misleading.

Cleveland’s record in the the 5 years before a Bill.

1986: 12-4 and went to the AFCCG

1987: 10-6 and went to the AFCCG

1988: 10-6 and made the playoffs

1989: 9-6-1 and made the AFCCG

1990: 3-13 and missed the playoffs

So yes while the year immediately before Bill was a bad year, it also was an anomaly and was largely because they switched coached in 1989 to Bud Carson and then he was flopping and they ditched him for an interim guy before settling on Bill the next year.

Compare those 5 years to the 5 with Bill.

1991: 6-10 and missed the playoffs

1992: 7-9 and missed the playoffs

1993: 7-9 and missed the playoffs

1994: 11-5 and won a wild card game to advance to the divisional round

1995: 5-11 and missed the playoffs.

The Browns were one of the top AFC teams in the 5 years before Bill. No Cleveland fan would have taken Bill over what they had in the period before. He was not well liked in Cleveland and not considered a success there. He actually finished as the worst Browns coach’s before they were brought back that lasted more than 2 years from a win percentage stand point.

Then let’s take the same franchise when they moved to Baltimore

1996: 4-12 and missed the playoffs

1997: 6-9-1 and missed the playoffs

1998: 6-10 and missed the playoffs

1999: 8-8 and missed the playoffs

2000: 12-4 and won the SB.

So the rebuild after Belichick started 1 game better than the team bill inherited and in the same time frame had more .500 or better seasons, their best best season had a better record than Bill’s best, they had the same amount of regular season wins, and they finished accomplishing the ultimate goal of any NFL team. A goal the Browns before Belichick were much closer to than the 5 years he was coach.

Oh and people on this board like to say “well Belichick really set the foundation for that 2000 team”. No.... look at 1995 Browns roster and the 2000 Ravens roster. None of Bill’s offensive players were on the 2000 Ravens. Larry Webster who was suspended that year and only played 5 games was there, Stover the kicker who was really good and then Rob Burnett ego was 2nd team all pro. So Belichick contribute a total of 3 players to that roster and one missed the season. So he gets credit for really good kicker and very good defensive lineman. If you want to count two players as a foundation when they were far from the best players on the team that’s on you I guess.

But the point is Bill gets no excused for his performance in Cleveland. They were clearly not above building up and he was a very poor road bump on that team ultimately becoming one of the more successful franchises.

Then once the Ravens went on to have 10 winning seasons in the next 14 years along with multiple playoff runs, two AFCCG appearances and another SB.

So contextually Bill had the worst stretch that franchise had in a 30 year period. Really we are closing in on 35 years right now.

 

[XLIX]

What 7+ years? In his 5 years with Cleveland, a 3-13 team the year before he got there, he improved each year to get to 11-5 and the playoffs in year 4. Year 5 collapsed after Modell announced they were moving mid-season.

Cleveland went to the AFCCG in 3 of the 5 years prior to his arrival. So simply winning a single WC game in the 5 years he was there was not some sort of drastic turnaround and return to glory.

The next time he coached was the 5-11 first year with the Patriots, 2000, wasn't it?

As far as being HC, yes.

 

[lancerman]

Agree....but you forgot his ridiculous and embarrassing trademark applications (Tom Terrific....rejected...and Tomba Bay, among others). I will always have great respect for Brady as a player, but he has been increasingly less likable off the field in recent years, as Brady the brand became as important as Brady the player. I blame his inner circle for that. The last straw for me was when he introduced his immune boosting product (overpriced vitamins and unproven supplements) in the middle of the Covid peak in the Northeast. This was blatant opportunism, an attempt to profit on the fears and anxieties of the public.

This breakup...
View attachment 28560

....ultimately lead to this breakup.
View attachment 28562

They got together in 07. Brady was on the team 13 years with Giselle as his SO and went to 6 SB’s and won 3 along with all 3 of his MVP seasons. That’s as long as Manning was with the Colts and Montana with the 49’ers

Oh and from 2004-2006 he was dating another celebrity in Moynahan. And before that he was lined to celebrity disaster of the early 2000’s Tara Reid.

So this idea is kinda silly. He played here a ridiculously long time even post Giselle and he was always a celebrity dater.

It’s more likely he was just in his 40’s and his priorities changed and post football and legacy that was staring him down became increasingly important.

 

[Tony2046]

Like I said in the post you were replying to.

Are you twelve?

 

[luuked]

Omg dude, please lol. You quoted my post, the post was part of a broader discussion with someone else. You nit picked one part of it and then claimed I was “obsessed” with shutouts. You are a joke and deliberately misleading, bye.

I quoted specifically only one sentence of your entire post to make a point about you talking about "shutouts" in a game where all of the 3 QBs were either injured or suspended. You responded with a wall of text that had nothing to do with anything I was saying. If you are not able to respond with reason to specific points raised then just don't reply and don't move the conversation to something that is entirely irrelevant.

 

[luuked]

This is misleading.

Cleveland’s record in the the 5 years before a Bill.

1986: 12-4 and went to the AFCCG

1987: 10-6 and went to the AFCCG

1988: 10-6 and made the playoffs

1989: 9-6-1 and made the AFCCG

1990: 3-13 and missed the playoffs

So yes while the year immediately before Bill was a bad year, it also was an anomaly and was largely because they switched coached in 1989 to Bud Carson and then he was flopping and they ditched him for an interim guy before settling on Bill the next year.

Compare those 5 years to the 5 with Bill.

1991: 6-10 and missed the playoffs

1992: 7-9 and missed the playoffs

1993: 7-9 and missed the playoffs

1994: 11-5 and won a wild card game to advance to the divisional round

1995: 5-11 and missed the playoffs.

The Browns were one of the top AFC teams in the 5 years before Bill. No Cleveland fan would have taken Bill over what they had in the period before. He was not well liked in Cleveland and not considered a success there. He actually finished as the worst Browns coach’s before they were brought back that lasted more than 2 years from a win percentage stand point.

Then let’s take the same franchise when they moved to Baltimore

1996: 4-12 and missed the playoffs

1997: 6-9-1 and missed the playoffs

1998: 6-10 and missed the playoffs

1999: 8-8 and missed the playoffs

2000: 12-4 and won the SB.

So the rebuild after Belichick started 1 game better than the team bill inherited and in the same time frame had more .500 or better seasons, their best best season had a better record than Bill’s best, they had the same amount of regular season wins, and they finished accomplishing the ultimate goal of any NFL team. A goal the Browns before Belichick were much closer to than the 5 years he was coach.

Oh and people on this board like to say “well Belichick really set the foundation for that 2000 team”. No.... look at 1995 Browns roster and the 2000 Ravens roster. None of Bill’s offensive players were on the 2000 Ravens. Larry Webster who was suspended that year and only played 5 games was there, Stover the kicker who was really good and then Rob Burnett ego was 2nd team all pro. So Belichick contribute a total of 3 players to that roster and one missed the season. So he gets credit for really good kicker and very good defensive lineman. If you want to count two players as a foundation when they were far from the best players on the team that’s on you I guess.

But the point is Bill gets no excused for his performance in Cleveland. They were clearly not above building up and he was a very poor road bump on that team ultimately becoming one of the more successful franchises.

Then once the Ravens went on to have 10 winning seasons in the next 14 years along with multiple playoff runs, two AFCCG appearances and another SB.

So contextually Bill had the worst stretch that franchise had in a 30 year period. Really we are closing in on 35 years right now.

This might be the most misleading post in this thread.

Starting with the fact that you seem to live in a universe where players don't get older which is exactly what happened to that Browns team BB took over. You are making it sound like he took over some kind of stacked team when it reality it was a trainwreck.

Each of the individual units got better through this rebuilt which is how you should measure how well a coach is doing and not using something as pointless as win/loss record. A couple of bounces one way or the other and you shift 2-3 wins. Outcome and performance are not the same thing and one should really not be used as a proxy for the other. One of the most reasonable way to cut through all the noise and randomness is looking at trends instead.

And that Browns team was a true contender before they got shipped off over night to another city.

 

[TheRainMaker]

I posted this in another thread but this seems to be where everyone is at. It still might be overlooked since there many people arguing with each other.

For the Brady haters for last year: Peter King revealed that during their 14 years grading NFL players, PFF has said the 2019 Pats WR's/TE's were the WORST group they've ever graded since their inception in 2006. Not just for the Patriots, but the for every team since 2006. Yet, the immobile Brady still threw for over 4,000 yards, 24 TD's and only 8 INT's with a bad O-line, no running game and his pathetic supporting cast at WR/TE. But blame is put on Brady for terrible year?

Starts at 4:14



It's going to be comical watching Brady with his new team tearing it up on Sundays.

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

Who gives a crap when Brady was drafted? You really think he never would have caught on? I take it many of you are unaware of all-time great/notable QBs were drafted:

Late rounds: Tom Brady, Bart Starr, Johnny Unitas, Roger Staubach

Mid-rounds: Joe Montana, Russell Wilson, Dan Fouts, Fran Tarkenton

Undrafted: Warren Moon, Kurt Warner, Tony Romo

 

[lancerman]

Who gives a crap when Brady was drafted? You really think he never would have caught on? I take it many of you are unaware of all-time great/notable QBs were drafted:

Late rounds: Tom Brady, Bart Starr, Johnny Unitas, Roger Staubach

Mid-rounds: Joe Montana, Russell Wilson, Dan Fouts, Fran Tarkenton

Undrafted: Warren Moon, Kurt Warner, Tony Romo

The thing is.... it doesn’t matter. He did catch on. You can’t fake 3 MVP’s, top 2 in all volume stats, extremely high efficiency stats, the longevity, all the winning, the 6 Super Bowls, the game winning drives, etc. Regardless of who drafted him and what opportunities he was given he accomplished what he did

 

[TheRainMaker]

Who gives a crap when Brady was drafted? You really think he never would have caught on? I take it many of you are unaware of all-time great/notable QBs were drafted:

Late rounds: Tom Brady, Bart Starr, Johnny Unitas, Roger Staubach

Mid-rounds: Joe Montana, Russell Wilson, Dan Fouts, Fran Tarkenton

Undrafted: Warren Moon, Kurt Warner, Tony Romo

Yes, that argument is embarrassing. There were plenty of teams in need of a QB in the early 2000's who he could've beat out.

Oh and check this out: Apparently he was beating out the newly signed $100M QB in Bledsoe. It's comical to think he couldn't do it elsewhere.

To Bill Belichick, Tom Brady beat out Drew Bledsoe for QB job in summer 2001

Excerpt from "The Dynasty:" Belichick would have chosen Brady as his starter before Bledsoe's injury if the decision had been solely his.

theathletic.com

 

[Triumph]

So you admit you're actually hoping for the team's failure to prove you right? You have become a troll. What the pro-Belichick crowd has gong for them is that they're actually Patriots fans, not Brady fans.

I have to admit the insane anti-Belichick hatred here makes it impossible to root for Brady. You won't enjoy your popcorn much when your 43 year old QB fails to complete the season, will you...

 

[Patsgofor4]

1989: 9-6-1 and made the AFCCG
1990: 3-13 and missed the playoffs
So yes while the year immediately before Bill was a bad year, it also was an anomaly and was largely because they switched coached in 1989 to Bud Carson and then he was flopping and they ditched him for an interim guy before settling on Bill the next year.
The Browns were one of the top AFC teams in the 5 years before Bill.

You are so full of sh*t. BB absolutely did not inherit one of the top teams in the AFC. That is just blatantly false. First of all, he inherited the corpse of Bernie Kosar at QB. Despite getting killed by the press and by the Browns fan base, he had the balls and the smarts to reject the NFL version of Weekend at Bernie's.

The 1990 Brown team was not an anomaly. Their run of being an AFC contender was abruptly over (yes, they went over a cliff). AFC team, huh? Let's go to the record:

The 1990 Browns surrendered 462 points, the most points of any NFL team in the 1990s. Their −234 point differential is the third-worst total of any team in the '90s, even worse than the 1999 Browns expansion team.

Please stop trying to bolster your argument with lies.

 

[lancerman]

You are so full of sh*t. BB absolutely did not inherit one of the top teams in the AFC. That is just blatantly false. First of all, he inherited the corpse of Bernie Kosar at QB. Despite getting killed by the press and by the Browns fan base, he had the balls and the smarts to reject the NFL version of Weekend at Bernie's.

The 1990 Brown team was not an anomaly. Their run of being an AFC contender was abruptly over (yes, they went over a cliff). AFC team, huh? Let's go to the record:

The 1990 Browns surrendered 462 points, the most points of any NFL team in the 1990s. Their −234 point differential is the third-worst total of any team in the '90s, even worse than the 1999 Browns expansion team.

Please stop trying to bolster your argument with lies.

I posted facts and numbers and common rosters. Sorry it doesn’t look good when you run the numbers.

 

[Wozzy]

2018: 19th in defensive DVOA/ 5th Offense

2017: 31st in defensive DVOA/ 1st Offense

2016: 16th in defensive DVOA/ 2nd Offense

2015: 11th Defense/ 5th Offense

2014: 13th Defense/ 6th Offense

2013: 20th/ 4th Offense

2012: 17th Defense/ 1st Offense

2011: 30th Defensive DVOA/ 2nd Offensive DVOA

2010: 23rd Defensive DVOA/ 1st Offensive DVOA

2009: 14th Defensive DVOA/ 1st Offensive DVOA

The notion that BB supports Brady with a great defense every year is simply a inaccurate narrative and has been since 2007. The offense carried that team for the last decade

I'll take two years they won the Super Bowl (2016, 2018) and some simple stats to highlight why "defensive DVOA" and these analytics are garbage.

In 2018 the Patriots defense was 7th best in points allowed (per drive) and 7th in total points allowed... any stat that ranks them 19th is crap. They were 8th in offensive points scored per drive... the D also held the Rams to a historically low Super Bowl score of three points.

In 2016 the Patriots defense was 2nd best in points allowed (per drive) and 1st in total points allowed... any stat that ranks them 16th is total horse s**t.

Bill's opinion on analytics...

Belichick, during his weekly Friday press conference, was asked how big of a role analytics plays into the Patriots' day-to-day operations. "Less than zero," Belichick said, via ProFootballTalk.com. "Analytics is not really my thing."Belichick essentially said the same thing in 2016 when asked about analytics. "You could take those advanced websites and metric them wherever you want," Belichick said less than three months before winning his fifth Super Bowl, an overtime win over Atlanta in Super Bowl LI. "I don't know. I have no idea. I've never looked at one. I don't even care to look at one. I don't care what they say ... All the metric pages and all of that, I mean I have no idea. You'd need to ask that to a smarter coach than me."

Stop letting PFF or whomever tell you what is good, go by records and point differential instead. They judge win/loss based off points, not analytics.

Bill Belichick says he puts 'less than zero stock' into analytics during Patriots' presser

Belichick's way of building championship teams has nothing to do with science

www.cbssports.com

 

[Kasmir]

Sure somewhat of a system quarterback but a system quarterback that when they needed a clutch drive would just about always come through. I remember the talk very well back then. Though he didnt lead the league in stats people saw something special in him. He had "it", is what I heard from a lot of analysts back then.

Almost everyone thought Peyton Manning was the best QB in that time. The Brady homers were saying "But Brady is a winner!". Belichick built a very strong team then, with players who refused to lose. It really upsets me to hear Rodney Harrison, Richard Seymour, Tedy Bruschi, Ty Law, Vince Wilfork, Troy Brown, Kevin Faulk, Matt Light and Bill Belichick dismissed as would be losers if Brady weren't on the roster in those days. Brady homers here actually act as if those teams would have had losing records with any other QB. Utter squalid nonsense. Those were great teams with great coaching and a promising young QB.

 

[TheRainMaker]

What the pro-Belichick crowd has gong for them is that they're actually Patriots fans, not Brady fans.

Wouldn't that just make you then.......a BB fan?