Belichick criticism mega-thread

[sb1]

Impossible to know what would have happened. But given what Belichick does with Ds and what he did with that defense in specific, I have high confidence they would have turned around the previous year. But again, impossible to know. Drew managed that 2001 AFCCG after coming in rusty. Didn't really do anything other than manage the game.

He was in a similar position before in 1996. Coming off a 6-10 season, they began the year 0-2. And then Drew rode the back of a defense that was largely designed and controlled by Belichick. So 2001 was not the first time this happened.

I have a very hard time figuring out how you guys don't mostly credit Belichick for that 1st Super Bowl season.

Imagine how that Super Bowl would have gone if Parcells wasn't already out the door.

 

[mariomega]

Such a simplistic argument to base this off what happened last year.

Lots of great coaches don't win a Super Bowl their first 4 years as HCs. Heck, there are a bunch of underwhelming coaches who have done it, like Don McCafferty, Tom Flores, Barry Switzer, Mike Ditka, Gary Kubiak, Doug Pederson, etc. What became of these guys? A few of them were laughingstocks. All won it in their first 4 years. And then there are a bunch of all time greats who couldn't do it. Like Belichick, Andy Reid, Tom Coughlin, **** Vermeil, Chuck Noll, Mike Shanahan, Mike Holmgren. Heck, even Tom Landry and Don Shula did not win one in their first 4 years as coaches in the Super Bowl era. You make it sound like Belichick didn't prove his mettle during the 4 years with the Browns by winning a Super Bowl, therefore he wouldn't have afterward with any QB other than Brady.

The argument is very simple.
You are overthinking something that is very simple to understand:

Bill did not win before or after without Brady.
Brady won without BB.

That's it. Ball is in BB's court. Now he can answer and win a SB without Brady or he can die knowing he did not win **** without the GOAT football player. Period.

 

[venecol]

Bill has poor choice in sponsorships. Subway sandwiches suck.

Yet, Jared (the child molester) was a more successful Subway pitchman than Belichick. Something about Bill doing those commercials seems creepy.

 

[upstater1]

The argument is very simple.
You are overthinking something that is very simple to understand:

Bill did not win before or after without Brady.
Brady won without BB.

That's it. Ball is in BB's court. Now he can answer and win a SB without Brady or he can die knowing he did not win **** without the GOAT football player. Period.

You're oversimplying. I already wrote that.

 

[Calhoun44]

The argument is very simple.
You are overthinking something that is very simple to understand:

Bill did not win before or after without Brady.
Brady won without BB.

That's it. Ball is in BB's court. Now he can answer and win a SB without Brady or he can die knowing he did not win **** without the GOAT football player. Period.

I'm pretty sure BB could care less what the media/fans think of his career and I'm am 100% certain that BB could die tomorrow and would be very content with his football life. I bet he is happy for Brady and his success last year seeing how it didn't come at the hands of the Patriots. BB seems like he has a very strong sense of self-confidence and doesn't get caught up in all this type of drama.

 

[mariomega]

You're oversimplying. I already wrote that.

Nope, you are overthinking. I already wrote that.

Tell me BB's record in Cleveland.
Tell me his record without Brady in NE.
Tell me his record last year.

And we can talk about that.

 

[Calhoun44]

You're oversimplying. I already wrote that.

Over-simplifying is an understatement.

 

[mariomega]

I'm pretty sure BB could care less what the media/fans think of his career and I'm am 100% certain that BB could die tomorrow and would be very content with his football life. I bet he is happy for Brady and his success last year seeing how it didn't come at the hands of the Patriots. BB seems like he has a very strong sense of self-confidence and doesn't get caught up in all this type of drama.

I bet he care about Brady winning without him
The man has an ego of the size of his winning career.

He wanted to win without Brady with Jimmy G. He tried to dump Brady's ass since 2014.
So don't tell me he would die very content.
If he does not win without Brady, he is dying a death full of regrets, I can tell you that.

 

[mariomega]

Over-simplifying is an understatement.

Nope, you BB's lovers cannot handle the simple argument that BB cannot win without Brady. Did not win before, nor did he win after.

So, prove me wrong.
Let me ask you again: Did BB have a winning record in Cleveland? Last year?

 

[upstater1]

Nope, you are overthinking. I already wrote that.

Tell me BB's record in Cleveland.
Tell me his record without Brady in NE.
Tell me his record last year.

And we can talk about that.

You know how many stupidly simplistic situations like this we can construct?

Phil Jackson won with Michael Jordan.
Phil Jackson won with Kobe Bryant.
Michael Jordan never won without Phil Jackson.
Therefore, Michael Jordan couldn't win by himself.

It's very simple.

And so so far from the truth.

 

[mariomega]

You know how many stupidly simplistic situations like this we can construct?

Phil Jackson won with Michael Jordan.
Phil Jackson won with Kobe Bryant.
Michael Jordan never won without Phil Jackson.
Therefore, Michael Jordan couldn't win by himself.

It's very simple.

And so so far from the truth.

But the majority of times, the truth is very simple.
And I am asking you facts. BB's record without Brady. In Cleveland. Without him last year.
Just tell me his record, can you?
This is a fact, record is a fact, am I right?

Yes, and because of that I put Lebron over MJ.

Lebron is the system.
Brady is the system.

And I can back this up with facts.

 

[upstater1]

But the majority of times, the truth is very simple.
And I am asking you facts. BB's record without Brady. In Cleveland. Without him last year.
Just tell me his record, can you?
This is a fact, record is a fact, am I right?

Yes, and because of that I put Lebron over MJ.

Lebron is the system.
Brady is the system.

And I can back this up with facts.

Oh the majority of times.

Michael Jordan can't win without Phil Jackson. FACT!!!! Grrrrrgrggrgrgrg.

 

[mariomega]

Oh the majority of times.

Michael Jordan can't win without Phil Jackson. FACT!!!! Grrrrrgrggrgrgrg.

Did he?
Phil is greater than MJ, imho.

If Bill cannot win without Brady, the same logic will be applied here.
Simple.
You can be mad all you want hahaha

We just have to agree to disagree.

 

[Deus Irae]

Stop being silly. Way to miss the point. Brady is the greatest of all time. I am just not willing to rewrite history and deny the fact that he wasn't an elite QB his few years in the league.

I can concur with that. But he was, at the very least, very good.

Brady was a Pro Bowler in his first year as a starter, and had 3 SB wins in his first 4 seasons. His role wasn't as obvious then as it is in hindsight, so it's understandable that people living in the moment might have missed some of what he brought to the table even then. But, looking back on Brady's entire career, the notion that he wasn't an elite player QB in those early years is, to be kind, a product of questionable thinking and analysis.

 

[venecol]

He had one winning season with the Browns in 5 years. The Browns were perrennial playoff contenders and made 3 AFCCG in the 6 years before him. Within 5 years that same team became a SB winner after he left. His tenure with the Browns is the most overrated half assed attempt to prop him up ever. He coached 8 seasons without Brady. He had 2 seasons where he went 11-5 as his highlight, one was with one of the best teams ever sans the QB and he couldn't even make the playoffs on one of the easiest schedules of his life. The other 6 years he didn't win.

Not a small sample size. His 01 team wasn't going anywhere with Bledsoe and everyone knew it. His 2003 team got bailed out by Brady in the Super Bowl despite defense supposedly being a strength of the team.

You are being selective to make your argument. Belichick without Brady maybe wins in 04 depending on who the QB is.

Look, at least Bill's Browns (5-11) were the 1st team in the NFL's modern era to lose twice to a first-year expansion team (Jaguars). That's pretty special.

 

[mariomega]

Brady was a Pro Bowler in his first year as a starter, and had 3 SB wins in his first 4 seasons. His role wasn't as obvious then as it is in hindsight, so it's understandable that people living in the moment might have missed some of what he brought to the table even then. But, looking back on Brady's entire career, the notion that he wasn't an elite player QB in those early years is, to be kind, a product of questionable thinking and analysis.

Yes, for me, he was a top QB.
But I can concur with the notion that he was, at the very least, very good.

But Rob was telling us he was just a GOOD QB, a game manager.
Stop with that **** Rob.

 

[crawhammer]

Eli Manning won two Super Bowls in three years and won two Super Bowl MVP. Does that make him elite?

My God, pay attention. We're talking about the very beginning of Brady's career. You know what Eli Manning did in the first four years of his career? Absolutely nothing. Eli's first playoff game he had 0 TD's, 3 INT's and a fumble... the Giants lost 23-0. He lost his second playoff game too.

You realize of course Eli was the 1st overall pick of his draft? The expectations were sky high for Eli. Brady was taken with pick 199... he went from that to a 3x Super Bowl winner by year four. Eli was a huge disappointment in his first four seasons.

Eli also never won 2 Super Bowls in 3 years so you're making that up.

I'll put it to you this way... combined the best seasons of Peyton and Eli into one career and Brady's career is still far better.

14 TDs in 11 games even if you don't throw INTs is going to lose you a lot of games unless you have a great running game or a great defense. I don't know why you keep going to that stat. That is a stat that shows Brady is efficient, but not elite. That is 1.3 TDs a game.

Firstly, you can't say "even if you don't throw INT's you're going to lose games" because I'm not talking about a hypothetical, which is what you're doing all over the place. Brady didn't throw any picks and they won all of those games. That actually happened. And I'm not stating it in a vacuum either, I listed a number of Brady's achievements and accolades from the 2003 season.

It would be a lot easy to have a discussion with you if you would just stop with all of the hypotheticals about "all these other quarterbacks being able to replicate Brady's accomplishments" because 1) Brady's accomplishments are unprecedented and unmatched and 2) we don't have a time machine so there's no redoing the Patriots Dynasty with another quarterback.

I don't get why people don't get this and why is so controversial to say. People are recreating "The Patriot Way" to it was all about Brady. That was what made the early Dyansty Patriots so special. There were no stars. Everyone just did their role and worked for the team and didn't look for personal glory.

The Patriot Way? That means about as little as In Bill We Trust.

By the way, Brady is the biggest "star" in the history of the NFL. That Brady won all those divisions, playoff games and Super Bowls without elite talent around him just makes his accomplishments all the more impressive (if that's even possible anymore).

The "do your job" and "what's best for the team" got flushed down the toilet by Belichick in Super Bowl 52.

Rob0729,

Name a quarterback in the NFL who was elite by your standards 2001-2004. One, two, ten... list the elite quarterbacks 2001-2004.

When you're done with that, other than Brady or Montana, name all other quarterbacks who were elite for a 4-year span at any other time in the history of the league.

 

[upstater1]

Did he?
Phil is greater than MJ, imho.

If Bill cannot win without Brady, the same logic will be applied here.
Simple.
You can be mad all you want hahaha

We just have to agree to disagree.

OK, got you. It was Phil Jackson, not Michael Jordan, who was largely responsible for those championships.

Hey, you're consistent with this line of thinking. I'm sure we can do it over and over and over. Secretariat never won without her trainer, but her trainer won many without Secretariat. We can go on and on and on with this.

Michael Jordan: downgraded!

 

[mariomega]

OK, got you. It was Phil Jackson, not Michael Jordan, who was largely responsible for those championships.

Hey, you're consistent with this line of thinking. I'm sure we can do it over and over and over. Secretariat never won without her trainer, but her trainer won many without Secretariat. We can go on and on and on with this.

Michael Jordan: downgraded!

You do not need to be sarcastic.

MJ: not downgraded.

Just Phil is a god and he is a demi-god, am I right?
Demi-god and a top 2 NBA player is still amazing.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Look, at least Bill's Browns (5-11) were the 1st team in the NFL's modern era to lose twice to a first-year expansion team (Jaguars). That's pretty special.

The BB cancel culture point to 1995 as a way to show how Bill sucks without a good QB need to revisit history and account for what really happened in 1995.

On Week 4 they spanked an eventual 13-3 Chiefs team 35-17 to run their record to 3-1. Up to that point Modell kept his conversations with the Browns minority owners and John Moag head of the MD Stadium Authority in secret.

Because Modell did not want to be in a situation where he would need to move a very good, possible Super Bowl team, he purposely sabotaged their morale and focus and leaked news of the move to the press and asked select players and front office personnel (see Ozzie Newsome) behind BB's back about about a move to Baltimore.

Art Modell is a piece of **** and folks need to cut Bill some slack with what happened in 1995.

There is a really good A Football Life on the 1995 Browns produced by the NFL Network.