Belichick criticism mega-thread

[TomPatriot]

You talking out of both sides of your mouth AGAIN. In Super Bowl 49 the coaching staff had confidence Malcolm could make a difference on one play but in Super Bowl 52 the coaching staff didn't think he could make a difference for 60 minutes. LOL! that's half-witted IBWT logic at it's finest.

Iirc, Brandon Browner put Butler in position to make that play in SB 49. I don’t know why Butler played only one play in SB 52, but your comparison between what the coaches did in SB 49 and 52 seems to be a comparison of two very different situations with some information missing.

 

[Kargetina]

Belichick with Brady:

249 wins-75 losses, no losing seasons, missed the playoffs once in 19 seasons, 30 playoff wins.

Belichick without Brady:

63 wins-73 losses, 6 losing seasons, made the playoffs once in 8 years, one playoff win.

The proof is in the pudding. You can twist yourself into a pretzel all you want, Belichick is sub-50% coach both in his overall career and in his Pats career as a coach without Brady.

45% in 5 seasons in Cleveland.

48% in 3+ seasons in New England.

77% with Brady.

I guess 8 seasons, 2 different teams, a dozen other QB’s are not enough sample size.

 

[Rob0729]

Hello! Kraft owns the team. If Brady wanted to stay, which he did, and Kraft did whatever he could to keep him, then the Patriots would have won the division for the 18th time in 19 seasons. Brady didn't void his contract either... what kind of a buffoonery comment is that?


Holy sh*t man, Mark Rypien? What are we doing here?

Did you read the criteria? I ask for any other quarterback in the history of the league who was a game manager yet won multiple Super Bowls and you give me Mark Rypien. A slob. Firstly, he won 1 Super Bowl, so you couldn't even get the multiple right. Secondly, he had more postseason turnovers than touchdowns. Brady had one less postseason win this year (4) alone then Rypien had in his entire career (5).

Doug Williams made for a nice episode of A Football Life but again he won 1 Super Bowl, where he had one magical quarter, otherwise he had a forgettable career and a postseason passer rating of 53.6, which is atrocious.

To your other points (regarding 2001-2003)...

Peyton Manning wasn't good in 2001, or really 2002, unless you think a quarterback can have a good season with 21 turnovers. He was co-MVP in 2003 but he ended Indy's season with 4 picks in the AFCCG. He was not better than Brady 2001-2003.

Brett Favre was a turnover machine most of his career. 2001-2003 he had 75 turnovers (in 53 games). I know that sounds made up but look it up, he actually did that. He was 2-3 in the postseasons with 11 turnovers (including a record 6 INT's in one game). So we can knock him off the list.

Kurt Warner had only 7 starts in 2002 and 2003 combined... he was 0-7 with 4 TD's and 12 INT's. Do I need to say anything else?

Rich Gannon 2001-2003 lost to Brady in a playoff game (2001) and set a Super Bowl record with 5 INT's (2002). He missed half of the 2003 season with a shoulder injury and wasn't any good in the games he played.

You failed.

First, Mark Rypien was a slob. That was my point. Do you even know what you are arguing. You questioned if a team could win multiple Super Bowls with JUST A GAME MANAGER. I pointed out that Joe Gibbs won two Super Bowls in a short period of time with two of the worst QB in NFL history to win Super Bowl. But hey, thanks for conceding that point and admitting you were wrong. Now who is failing?

Second, Brett Favre is in the Hall of Fame. Now he is just a scrub? Brett Favre was a great QB in the early 2000s. He was a gunslinger which caused a lot turnovers.

Third, Rich Gannon may have lost the Snow Bowl, but he lost because of bad rule that turned a Brady strip sack into an incompleted forward pass. Let's call it what it is. Even Brady will admit he had no intention of throwing the ball and his arm wasn't coming forward.

Fourth, Manning was the league MVP 2003. He had similar passing numbers to Brady in 2002 although a much higher completion percentage and more yards (one less TD and 4 more INTs). If you are going to tout Brady elite for 2002 for his total TDs and passing yards, then so is Manning.

Fifth, Warner was the best QB in football in 2001. I forget he dropped off after that. I will give you that.

Sixth, the late 90s and early 2000s were devoid of great QBs. Any given year a QB could play elite and then drop off to average the next like say Jeff Garcia and Kordell Stewart. So we can go each and point out the QBs better, but that will take time. And not something I am going to do now.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Belichick with Brady:

249 wins-75 losses, no losing seasons, missed the playoffs once in 19 seasons, 30 playoff wins.

Belichick without Brady:

63 wins-73 losses, 6 losing seasons, made the playoffs once in 8 years, one playoff win.

The proof is in the pudding. You can twist yourself into a pretzel all you want, Belichick is sub-50% coach both in his overall career and in his Pats career as a coach without Brady.

45% in 5 seasons in Cleveland.

48% in 3+ seasons in New England.

77% with Brady.

I guess 8 seasons, 2 different teams, a dozen other QB’s are not enough sample size.

So BB doesn't get any consideration for taking over a 3-13 team and worked for the cheapest, slimiest owner in sports history? Same owner who chased Paul and Jim Brown out of the org and made them into an 11-5 team before his own boss submarined his team in 1995?

How about inheriting a 8-8 team which was over the cap, flooded with bad contracts and a horrible culture? What happened there? Hint? He developed a 6th round draft pick, surrounded him with talent and kinda did ok.

Context is important

 

[Rob0729]

The contract was automatically voided at the end of the year. Brady wanted it that way. I should have explained that better.

 

[Rob0729]

I think his misery stemmed from the crappy team around him in addition to the ridiculous contract Bill offered in August of 2019. Brady knew he was done and he had to play out the string playing with Bill’s busts and misfits. Bill failed Brady. I don’t know why he gets such a staunch defense.

I am not saying Brady didn't have legitimate reasons to be upset, but it seemed pretty clear that his attitude sucked his final year here. He deserves some blame there. I put more blame on the divorce on Belichick, but Brady wasn't just an innocent victim.

 

[SHOWTIME15]

Belichick with Brady:

249 wins-75 losses, no losing seasons, missed the playoffs once in 19 seasons, 30 playoff wins.

Belichick without Brady:

63 wins-73 losses, 6 losing seasons, made the playoffs once in 8 years, one playoff win.

The proof is in the pudding. You can twist yourself into a pretzel all you want, Belichick is sub-50% coach both in his overall career and in his Pats career as a coach without Brady.

45% in 5 seasons in Cleveland.

48% in 3+ seasons in New England.

77% with Brady.

I guess 8 seasons, 2 different teams, a dozen other QB’s are not enough sample size.

The Tom Brady cult now meet here...

Bucs Forum

Tampa Bay Buccaneers News and Discussion

buczone.com

 

[RobertWeathers]

I am not saying Brady didn't have legitimate reasons to be upset, but it seemed pretty clear that his attitude sucked his final year here. He deserves some blame there. I put more blame on the divorce on Belichick, but Brady wasn't just an innocent victim.

I think there is universal agreement BB was the catalyst for Tom's exit. He's the GM. He had decisions to make. Cap. Rebuild. Tom's age, etc.

Fans act like BB kicked Tom out of the house, changed the locks and threw his clothes on the front lawn.

That is the furthest thing from the truth.

 

[Rob0729]

So BB doesn't get any consideration for taking over a 3-13 team and worked for the cheapest, slimiest owner in sports history? Same owner who chased Paul and Jim Brown out of the org and made them into an 11-5 team before his own boss submarined his team in 1995?

How about inheriting a 8-8 team which was over the cap, flooded with bad contracts and a horrible culture? What happened there? Hint? He developed a 6th round draft pick, surrounded him with talent and kinda did ok.

Context is important

There seems to be an oversimplification for a lot of the Belichick haters argument. They are argue Brady took over from Bledsoe and the team turned good overnight even though that isn't what happened. The team struggled when Brady first got in there going 2-2 in his first four games and 4-3 in his first seven. It wasn't until the defense gelled that they went on a winning streak that lasted the rest of the season and through the playoffs.

 

[Rob0729]

I think there is universal agreement BB was the catalyst for Tom's exit. He's the GM. He had decisions to make. Cap. Rebuild. Tom's age, etc.

Fans act like BB kicked Tom out of the house, changed the locks and threw his clothes on the front lawn.

That is the furthest thing from the truth.

They also act like making a multi-year commitment to a 42 year old Brady especially after he had a subpar season in 2019 is this no brainer. Brady is defying the odds. If it was such a sure bet that Brady could be a top QB in the league and lead his team to a Super Bowl win, he would have been in a 49er or Bear uniform last year. By most reports, Tampa was not Brady's first choice.

 

[1960Pats]

How is it a miscue to manage the roster properly?

I'm a fan of the Patriots. I don't really care about poor millionaires getting their feelings hurt. I want my team to WIN.

IMHO letting the GOAT QB and the GOAT TE go over money, while taking the most of any other HC/GM for yourself, is not even close to proper management.

I've seen examples given here as Bill's successful strategy of letting players go early, Seymour was one of those. The truth is that it took years to overcome his loss, even with Brady at the helm.

As Bill always tells us, it's a players game. Well, letting the best players walk for any reason has been a failure, not an example of success. This latest blunder epitomizes that failure to the highest degree.

 

[RobertWeathers]

There seems to be an oversimplification for a lot of the Belichick haters argument. They are argue Brady took over from Bledsoe and the team turned good overnight even though that isn't what happened. The team struggled when Brady first got in there going 2-2 in his first four games and 4-3 in his first seven. It wasn't until the defense gelled that they went on a winning streak that lasted the rest of the season and through the playoffs.

Yep.

Tom deserves a lot of credit for 01. There is no doubt about that. His urgency, decision-making and energy was a catalyst for that offense.

However after Tom's crap game vs DEN to go 3-4, the D went on to allow only 14ppg over their last 12. At the same time the O produced 20ppg (minus defensive TDs and ST scores).

 

[RobertWeathers]

They also act like making a multi-year commitment to a 42 year old Brady especially after he had a subpar season in 2019 is this no brainer. Brady is defying the odds. If it was such a sure bet that Brady could be a top QB in the league and lead his team to a Super Bowl win, he would have been in a 49er or Bear uniform last year. By most reports, Tampa was not Brady's first choice.

Yep. He wanted to go to SF.

 

[1960Pats]

Hello! Kraft owns the team. If Brady wanted to stay, which he did, and Kraft did whatever he could to keep him, then the Patriots would have won the division for the 18th time in 19 seasons. Brady didn't void his contract either... what kind of a buffoonery comment is that?


Holy sh*t man, Mark Rypien? What are we doing here?

Did you read the criteria? I ask for any other quarterback in the history of the league who was a game manager yet won multiple Super Bowls and you give me Mark Rypien. A slob. Firstly, he won 1 Super Bowl, so you couldn't even get the multiple right. Secondly, he had more postseason turnovers than touchdowns. Brady had one less postseason win this year (4) alone then Rypien had in his entire career (5).

Doug Williams made for a nice episode of A Football Life but again he won 1 Super Bowl, where he had one magical quarter, otherwise he had a forgettable career and a postseason passer rating of 53.6, which is atrocious.

To your other points (regarding 2001-2003)...

Peyton Manning wasn't good in 2001, or really 2002, unless you think a quarterback can have a good season with 21 turnovers. He was co-MVP in 2003 but he ended Indy's season with 4 picks in the AFCCG. He was not better than Brady 2001-2003.

Brett Favre was a turnover machine most of his career. 2001-2003 he had 75 turnovers (in 53 games). I know that sounds made up but look it up, he actually did that. He was 2-3 in the postseasons with 11 turnovers (including a record 6 INT's in one game). So we can knock him off the list.

Kurt Warner had only 7 starts in 2002 and 2003 combined... he was 0-7 with 4 TD's and 12 INT's. Do I need to say anything else?

Rich Gannon 2001-2003 lost to Brady in a playoff game (2001) and set a Super Bowl record with 5 INT's (2002). He missed half of the 2003 season with a shoulder injury and wasn't any good in the games he played.

You failed.

It's my belief that Favre cost the Pats a 19-0 season in 2007. If he doesn't throw one of his patented dumbass picks vs the Giants to lose the NFCCG, then the Pats face the Slackers in the SB and there's no way BrINT Favre beats that 2007 team.

 

[PatsWSB47]

First, Mark Rypien was a slob. That was my point. Do you even know what you are arguing. You questioned if a team could win multiple Super Bowls with JUST A GAME MANAGER. I pointed out that Joe Gibbs won two Super Bowls in a short period of time with two of the worst QB in NFL history to win Super Bowl. But hey, thanks for conceding that point and admitting you were wrong. Now who is failing?

Second, Brett Favre is in the Hall of Fame. Now he is just a scrub? Brett Favre was a great QB in the early 2000s. He was a gunslinger which caused a lot turnovers.

Third, Rich Gannon may have lost the Snow Bowl, but he lost because of bad rule that turned a Brady strip sack into an incompleted forward pass. Let's call it what it is. Even Brady will admit he had no intention of throwing the ball and his arm wasn't coming forward.

Fourth, Manning was the league MVP 2003. He had similar passing numbers to Brady in 2002 although a much higher completion percentage and more yards (one less TD and 4 more INTs). If you are going to tout Brady elite for 2002 for his total TDs and passing yards, then so is Manning.

Fifth, Warner was the best QB in football in 2001. I forget he dropped off after that. I will give you that.

Sixth, the late 90s and early 2000s were devoid of great QBs. Any given year a QB could play elite and then drop off to average the next like say Jeff Garcia and Kordell Stewart. So we can go each and point out the QBs better, but that will take time. And not something I am going to do now.

And Rogers was the best quarterback in 2020. You just dont get it.

 

[Rob0729]

And Rogers was the best quarterback in 2020. You just dont get it.

For the entire season, yes Rodgers was. I get it fine. And wait, people argued Brady got MVP consideration in 2003 as proof that he is elite. Now Rodgers winning the MVP doesn't mean anything?

There is a difference between who was the best and who stepped up at the the right time. I have said that Brady played elite in 2001 and 2003 at key times in the Super Bowls. But that doesn't make him elite. It means he was getting there and not there yet to be able to do it consistently. An elite player steps up on a consistent basis throughout the season. Why can't you get that?

The Bucs defense in the playoffs played like an elite defense. I would never classify the 2020 Bucs defense an elite defense though. They just stepped up at the right time. If they played all season the way they played in the Super Bowl, I they would have been considered among the best defenses of all time. But they didn't. So they will be considered a good defense, not an elite defense.

I am diminishing Brady by saying this. I bet even he would give Belichick and the defense more credit than him for 2001 and 2003. He deserves tons of credit for what he did in those seasons. He stepped up and played like an elite QB when the Pats needed him to, but not on a weekly basis. Part of it was by design and not his talents. That isn't diminishing Brady as much of you guys think it is.

And being an elite QB doesn't guarantee playoff success. Some of the best QBs ever don't Super Bowl rings like Marino, Fran Tarkenton, Warren Moon, or Jim Kelly.

 

[1960Pats]

Anyone. Brady would take us to the promised land.

That's the most obvious part of this "discussion" that even Bill has admitted to many times. It's a players game. Bill has even apologized after some losses and said that he could have coached better.

Also, Brady just won a SB with coaches that have been constantly ridiculed here. There couldn't be more proof that players in general and Brady in particular are the key to any team's success. That's not meant as a knock on Bill, but it's right there in front of us in plain sight.

 

[lancerman]

So BB doesn't get any consideration for taking over a 3-13 team and worked for the cheapest, slimiest owner in sports history? Same owner who chased Paul and Jim Brown out of the org and made them into an 11-5 team before his own boss submarined his team in 1995?

How about inheriting a 8-8 team which was over the cap, flooded with bad contracts and a horrible culture? What happened there? Hint? He developed a 6th round draft pick, surrounded him with talent and kinda did ok.

Context is important

Aside from the year directly before Belichick, that team was a perrennial playoff contender and went to 3 AFCCG's in the 6 years before him. Then Belichick left and within 5 years that team was in Baltimore winning a Super Bowl.

Belichick was in Cleveland 5 yeaars. He had 1 winning season. People want to pretend he wasn't considered a disaster in Cleveland and act like he performed a miracle taking 4 years to get to 11-5 before losing the team. Somehow other coaches were able to succeed with Art Modell

 

[1960Pats]

Holy cow. ROFL!! This is like some lame message board for old bored guys. Not worth all this.

Personally, I don't care to see folks push people's buttons on purpose. I remember having a discussion with a bartender about that many years ago. She thought it was a sign of weakness to avoid those kind of confrontations. That's when I let her know that if I wanted to I could have had her in tears if I chose to go in that direction. When she pushed me on it I let her know that I was told by someone who knew (true) that her breasts were fake and that baggy jeans were the only ones that would get by her thighs. She got my point and quit with the nonsense.

 

[patsfaninpa]

I wanted to keep Tom. I don’t feel we’d be much better than 10-6 even with him. IE No Super Bowls. I just didn’t want to see him play elsewhere.

The analogy I use is BB was the successful guy who kinda took his great wife for granted. The business was his idea but he didn’t appreciate how she enabled him to make it successful. TB12 was obviously much better than that. But, I feel that’s why BB lost him.Essentially, BB chose Joe Thuney over Tom. SMH. He had to pay Thuney 13m and eat Tom’s dead-money. Incredible that such a smart guy made that decision without an option at QB
like Jimmy G.

As for the Gronkies. He’s a goof. Great player. But, he did retire while TB12 was still here.

I don’t hate BB like many. But, I’m curious to see our off-season