Belichick criticism mega-thread

[RobertWeathers]

His record w/o Tom is .462 which is similar to Joe Philbin's .464 but better than the .453 by Kyle Shanahan, who's considered a whizz kid. Please ignoreTed Marchibroda's .470 (upstater1 says he's a bad & poor coach). LMAO

View attachment 30924

Is Chuck Noll a bad coach w/o Terry Bradshaw?

 

[RobertWeathers]

I don't think the point they are making with that example is that he sucks, but that he isn't some mythical coach.

Bill is still clearly a genius coach. When you see his time management skills alone it separates him from coaches like Andy Reid.

Bill still has his flaws, like when he benched Butler for the Superbowl vs the Eagles, but he was the perfect HC for Brady and they are GOAT duo forever.

There is a small faction which believes he plain 'ole sucks and Nike the dog could win 12 games with Brady.

How is benching Butler a flaw when the player admitted he was not mentally ready to play the game? Would your boss want you for the most important job of the year if you told him you were not prepared for it?

 

[Kontradiction]

Yes and no. Context is important.

Yes and no to what?

 

[RobertWeathers]

Yes and no to what?

Yes - record -wise but no they know how to build a winner AND win wherever they go.

Great coaches know what it takes and do it again and again.

****ty coaches don't.

 

[upstater1]

Is Chuck Noll a bad coach w/o Terry Bradshaw?

Just checked into this thread and see venecol is still referring to me from weeks ago. I'm so far i his head it's funny. I was talking about old man Marchibroda in the late 90s who took over the Ravens, not the spry guy from the 1970s, but he excels at twisting and distorting, it's all he does, which is no wonder he is involved in so much drama here.

 

[Kontradiction]

Yes - record -wise but no they know how to build a winner AND win wherever they go.

Great coaches know what it takes and do it again and again.

****ty coaches don't.

Number of titles Landry won without Staubach? Shula without Morrall/Griese and the no-name defense? Noll without Bradshaw? Hell, even the 49ers, after Walsh, needed another all-time great in Young to win one after Montana. These are all no doubt great coaches, but the notion that they do it “again and again” without all-time great QBs is... well, we will just say it’s flawed. Hopefully BB will buck that trend. For one, it obviously means the team will be competitive again. For another, if the team continues to flounder until he ultimately retires, he will hear football historians assert that his ego ended the dynasty early for the rest of his life.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Just checked into this thread and see venecol is still referring to me from weeks ago. I'm so far i his head it's funny. I was talking about old man Marchibroda in the late 90s who took over the Ravens, not the spry guy from the 1970s, but he excels at twisting and distorting, it's all he does, which is no wonder he is involved in so much drama here.

Venecol is a good dude. Sometimes he speaks/types before he thinks. Sometimes he authors a well-thought out opinion. Sometimes he goes to great lengths to screw with other posters. Keeps people off -balance. He's done it to me. I have no issue with it. I just play it up the middle. He and I have known each other long enough and he'll tell me if he's bustin' my balls. I'm ok w/ that.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Number of titles Landry won without Staubach? Shula without Morrall/Griese and the no-name defense? Noll without Bradshaw? Hell, even the 49ers, after Walsh, needed another all-time great in Young to win one after Montana. These are all no doubt great coaches, but the notion that they do it “again and again” without all-time great QBs is... well, we will just say it’s flawed. Hopefully BB will buck that trend. For one, it obviously means the team will be competitive again. For another, if the team continues to flounder until he ultimately retires, he will hear football historians assert that his ego ended the dynasty early for the rest of his life.

Landry got to NFL/NFCCG games with Don Meredith and Danny White. Did they win SBs? No.

Chuck Noll made the AFCCG w/ Mark freaking Malone and should have gone to another in 1989. SB? No.

Shula made the SB with 2 other QBs. Did he win another SB? No.

Once he had his system and a ****load of talent in place, Walsh was well over .500 w/o Montana starting. No SBs w/o Joe.

Lombardi drafted/coached a number of players which were on the 72 Skins SB team. He would have done it had he lived.

Parcells, Gibbs, Brown...They all fall in that category. Great coaches find a way to win regardless of their HoF QB.

The HoF QB puts their teams over the top. There is no debate about that.

 

[upstater1]

Venecol is a good dude. Sometimes he speaks/types before he thinks. Sometimes he authors a well-thought out opinion. Sometimes he goes to great lengths to screw with other posters. Keeps people off -balance. He's done it to me. I have no issue with it. I just play it up the middle. He and I have known each other long enough and he'll tell me if he's bustin' my balls. I'm ok w/ that.

I wouldn't know any of that any more. I just think it's boring and dishonest if you leave a key part of someone's argument out of the rephrasing. It's not busting balls, it's just dishonest. I'd rather ignore posters like that--and I have!

 

[gobesmug]

There is a small faction which believes he plain 'ole sucks and Nike the dog could win 12 games with Brady.

How is benching Butler a flaw when the player admitted he was not mentally ready to play the game? Would your boss want you for the most important job of the year if you told him you were not prepared for it?

It wasn't a flaw to bench him and if the defense had stepped it up and made plays it would have been brilliant.

The flaw was being stubborn and not allowing Butler to play after the first half when it was apparent the defense was garbage and needed a playmaker.

At that point the in the game, Bill had already made his point and Butler was in tears wanting to help his teammates out.

Butler would have played like a man possessed in the second half had Bill allowed it, and that would have been brilliant as well. Worse case scenario you give up a TD every drive like they did anyways.

 

[RobertWeathers]

I wouldn't know any of that any more. I just think it's boring and dishonest if you leave a key part of someone's argument out of the rephrasing. It's not busting balls, it's just dishonest. I'd rather ignore posters like that--and I have!

I get it.

 

[RobertWeathers]

It wasn't a flaw to bench him and if the defense had stepped it up and made plays it would have been brilliant.

The flaw was being stubborn and not allowing Butler to play after the first half when it was apparent the defense was garbage and needed a playmaker.

At that point the in the game, Bill had already made his point and Butler was in tears wanting to help his teammates out.

Butler would have played like a man possessed in the second half had Bill allowed it, and that would have been brilliant as well. Worse case scenario you give up a TD every drive like they did anyways.

I have way too many posts on this board discussing/debating this issue.

I'm withdrawing from this debate and I should have left your comment alone.

No disrespect intended.

 

[Kontradiction]

Landry got to NFL/NFCCG games with Don Meredith and Danny White. Did they win SBs? No.

Chuck Noll made the AFCCG w/ Mark freaking Malone and should have gone to another in 1989. SB? No.

Shula made the SB with 2 other QBs. Did he win another SB? No.

Once he had his system and a ****load of talent in place, Walsh was well over .500 w/o Montana starting. No SBs w/o Joe.

Lombardi drafted/coached a number of players which were on the 72 Skins SB team. He would have done it had he lived.

Parcells, Gibbs, Brown...They all fall in that category. Great coaches find a way to win regardless of their HoF QB.

The HoF QB puts their teams over the top. There is no debate about that.

Exactly. The QB is eons more important than the coach. The great ones win multiple Super Bowls with great QBs. The less-than-great and bad ones do not. Aside from Lombardi, the coaches you referenced had a longer shelf life in the league without their all time greats than Bill does without Brady. Bill needs to find another QB and have a better plan in place than damaged goods Stidham and the corpse of Cam Newton if he’s going to finish his career over the .500 mark as a HC without Brady. Otherwise, his legacy will take a hit. Make no mistake about it. The media, who he has treated with oozing levels of contempt for years, will not give him the benefit of the doubt if he can’t win without Brady.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Exactly. The QB is eons more important than the coach. The great ones win multiple Super Bowls with great QBs. The less-than-great and bad ones do not. Aside from Lombardi, the coaches you referenced had a longer shelf life in the league without their all time greats than Bill does without Brady.

I tend to agree with this but it'll be close. I think Landry was about ready to hang them up ~3 years before he got axed but he was not helped by Murchinson cutting back on payroll in the early 80s and later filing for bankruptcy in 1985. He sold to Bum Bright who himself ran into financial issues which forced him to sell to Jerry Jones. His ownership situation didn't help him but Landry's drafts after 1980 were not good. That sealed his fate.

Chuck basically went another 10 years without Terry. I don't think Bill has that kind of time.

Marv Levy was done at 72. Oldest coach in NFL history.

Bill needs to nail this draft and FA. Full stop.

Bill needs to find another QB and have a better plan in place than damaged goods Stidham and the corpse of Cam Newton if he’s going to finish his career over the .500 mark as a HC without Brady. Otherwise, his legacy will take a hit. Make no mistake about it. The media, who he has treated with oozing levels of contempt for years, will not give him the benefit of the doubt if he can’t win without Brady.

I couldn't give two ****s what the media thinks. You know that.

If people want to go all "Cancel Bill" from the GOAT discussion then they need to do that with the other GOAT coaches as well.

 

[ralmat55]

Yes - record -wise but no they know how to build a winner AND win wherever they go.

Great coaches know what it takes and do it again and again.

****ty coaches don't.

Here’s the question: Once a great coach; always a great coach? You and so many here just take for granted that the answer is yes. Please give me examples of old, great coaches doing it “again and again”.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Here’s the question: Once a great coach; always a great coach? You and so many here just take for granted that the answer is yes. Please give me examples of old, great coaches doing it “again and again”.

Great coaches win games without a HoF QB. Do they win the SB? More often than not they don't, but they still get their teams in a position to win one.

Thats why I think a guy like Shottsie is a great coach. Everywhere he went he got his team in a position to contend for a Super Bowl. Just never had a HoF QB to do it.

I think Andy Reid is a great coach. He got a HoF-caliber talent at Qb and voila! He wins the Super Bowl.

BB took a 3-13 team and went 11-5 in 1994. Went to the divisionals. Did he win, nope but once he partnered with a financially-stable, level-headed owner and his HoF QB the record speaks for itself.

**** Vermeil rebuilt Philly, the Rams and KC. Great coach.

Chuck Knox- Rams, BUF and SEA

George Allen - Rams and WASH

...and Tuna

I've also listed a few other examples in another post.

 

[Tony2046]

Exactly. The QB is eons more important than the coach. The great ones win multiple Super Bowls with great QBs. The less-than-great and bad ones do not. Aside from Lombardi, the coaches you referenced had a longer shelf life in the league without their all time greats than Bill does without Brady. Bill needs to find another QB and have a better plan in place than damaged goods Stidham and the corpse of Cam Newton if he’s going to finish his career over the .500 mark as a HC without Brady. Otherwise, his legacy will take a hit. Make no mistake about it. The media, who he has treated with oozing levels of contempt for years, will not give him the benefit of the doubt if he can’t win without Brady.

I agree with this but would add that the media can just blow me. Media these days are just a bunch of "who has the hottest hawt take" blowhards.

BB should be, by all standards, considered the greatest coach. That is if we're judging all great coaches by the same standard.

 

[Kontradiction]

I agree with this but would add that the media can just blow me. Media these days are just a bunch of "who has the hottest hawt take" blowhards.

BB should be, by all standards, considered the greatest coach. That is if we're judging all great coaches by the same standard.

I don’t disagree but there are a lot of mouth breathers out there who get their talking points from the media.

 

[Hyped]

After reading parts of this thread here and there....(I never read all the posts....who the hell has the time for that, LOL)...

1.) I think Belichick is the greatest NFL coach...and probably the greatest coach in North American sports. I believe that if we sent Belichick off to say...Jacksonville....he would have the Lawrence Jaguars 8-8 by December...and likely 11-5 next year.

2.) What Brady is doing...I have said this like 100 times this season....IS UNPRECEDENTED ....there has never been a QB who played in 10 SB's, won 7 SB's, been to the conference title game 14 times, and etc...etc... I mean people are now name dropping "Otto Graham" into Brady arguments nowadays!!! And Otto Freaking Graham played without a facemask until he got hit.....that is HOW FAR BACK anyone needs to dig to find someone "better" than Brady. If he wins one more SB...he will have as many as Bradshaw and Montana combined....

3.) Yes, Belichick would be the first to tell you that PLAYERS are the ones who do it and that he does nothing on Sundays. So...yeah Brady > Belichick for the share of the collective success of the Patriots. BUT the formula for me really is: Brady + Players > Belichick. And Belichick brought in all of those players...to pretend otherwise would be ignorant and offensive to anyone who played for the Patriots the last 20 years. We have had a lot of HOF worthy players like:

Rob Gronkowski (IMO, the greatest TE to ever play)
Richard Seymour (Kicked ass all day along! And remember the burst he gave us in 2005 when he returned?)
Adam Vinatieri (That 46 yarder in blizzard conditions...best single FG in league history)
Randy Moss (Nuff' said)
Ty Law (One of the best CB's I have seen play....maybe top 15)
Vince Wilfork (Probably won't make it to the HOF, but he was great)
Wes Welker (Greatest slot receiver I have ever seen)
Logan Mankins (Held out 10 games...and BB just plugs him right back in...also played on a torn ACL)
Rodney Harrison (One of the greatest safeties to ever play the game)
Matt Slater (He has a shot at the HOF, IMO)
Then more like Edelman, DMac, McGinest, Mayo, Troy Brown etc...etc....

*Yea, I know Vinatieri, Law, McGinest, and Brown were Parcells guys....

The cupboard wasn't bare during the Brady era...maybe slightly so the offensive skill positions...but we had a lot of good-not-great receivers like Amendola, Hogan, Givens, Patten, Mitchell, etc...etc....

4.) At the end of the day...I do not want anyone other than Belichick coaching us....same goes for him being our GM. Sure he will have as many misses as hits, but the man is operating from a standpoint of making economically justified educational decisions.

 

[Deus Irae]

BB should be, by all standards, considered the greatest coach. That is if we're judging all great coaches by the same standard.

Why on Earth should that be anything automatic? One can make solid arguments in favor of several HCs as the best ever. And, before you point to the rings as something definitive, remember that Brady got Arians a ring in year one, at age 43.