Belichick's record without Brady since the Brady era began

[1960Pats]

So much of the discussion during the offseason and early this season was that Belichick has a losing record without Brady. But I just heard on Felger and Mazz (yeah, I know. I know. Why am I listening to them?), a emailer pointed out that Belichick has a winning record in games without Brady since Mo Lewis took out Bledsoe. I think that is a fair way of judging Belichick as a stand alone coach without Brady and not what he did 25 years ago.

So here we go:

2008 - 11-5 (I am counting the game Brady went down since he only played a series)
2018 - 3-1 (two games starting their third string QB)
2020 - 7-9
2021 - 7-4

Total: 28-19 or 59.6% winning percentage.

It isn't as good with Brady obviously, but it isn't all that bad. Odds are decent that that winning percentage will go up by the end of this year the way they are playing. And the only time he didn't win more games than he lost was last year with a mediocre QB and them rebuilding after the Brady era. And even then, they were only one game away from going .500.

Also, note all the seasons he played QBs he drafted, he has winning records.

Any particular reason you started the tally after Mo Lewis' hit on Bledsoe? Oh yeah, you didn't want to include the Pats 5-13 record when Bill first took over.

 

[oldrover]

Unfortunately, apparently I wasn't thinking when I started this thread.

That Rob0729:

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

Oh wow, what a thread.

2000 doesn’t count!

Game 1 of 2008 counts!

Belichick’s record without Brady is IRRELEVANT!!!!..Unless it suits my agenda.

Rob never disappoints.

 

[mike_usagisan]

Any particular reason you started the tally after Mo Lewis' hit on Bledsoe? Oh yeah, you didn't want to include the Pats 5-13 record when Bill first took over.

Let me say that I hate this nonsense so much. Brady is the GOAT. Belichick is one of the greatest coaches of all time. Why do we have to have these stupid arguments back and forth?

That said (and tongue in cheek because I can’t help myself), why does Brady get a pass for the 2000 season and the first games of 2001? He was on the roster. Why didn’t he beat out Bledsoe his rookie season and get us to the Super Bowl that year!?! Some GOAT he is! 2000 and 2001 were both Brady years.

 

[1960Pats]

Sure, but the Belichick haters want to go back to 1993 and use what he did back then against him now to say how he is overrated.

Nobody is saying that Bill is overrated as a HC. He's the GOAT. What I think is becoming more obvious by recent events is that players win the games, not coaches.

 

[Rob0729]

Any particular reason you started the tally after Mo Lewis' hit on Bledsoe? Oh yeah, you didn't want to include the Pats 5-13 record when Bill first took over.

It wasn’t my stat. I heard it on the radio. Again include 2000 he is still .500 even with mostly back ups, a washed up Cam Newton, and rookie.

 

[Rob0729]

Nobody is saying that Bill is overrated as a HC. He's the GOAT. What I think is becoming more obvious by recent events is that players win the games, not coaches.

That isn’t true in the slightest. There are people here including posting in this thread who do not consider Belichick an all time great head coach and believe Belichick was just lucky to have Brady.

 

[1960Pats]

Let me say that I hate this nonsense so much. Brady is the GOAT. Belichick is one of the greatest coaches of all time. Why do we have to have these stupid arguments back and forth?

That said (and tongue in cheek because I can’t help myself), why does Brady get a pass for the 2000 season and the first games of 2001? He was on the roster. Why didn’t he beat out Bledsoe his rookie season and get us to the Super Bowl that year!?! Some GOAT he is! 2000 and 2001 were both Brady years.

I think both are the GOAT and we were blessed to have them together. I just wish Brady got to finish his career here and got his 7th ring with the Pats instead of the Bucs.

 

[sb1]

That isn’t true in the slightest. There are people here including posting in this thread who do not consider Belichick an all time great head coach and believe Belichick was just lucky to have Brady.

Really? Haven't seen any post saying that here. Well except for one poster but he hasn't been here in months.

 

[1960Pats]

That isn’t true in the slightest. There are people here including posting in this thread who do not consider Belichick an all time great head coach and believe Belichick was just lucky to have Brady.

Well, Bill was lucky to have Brady. The only criticism of Bill that I've seen is as a GM, not as a HC. He had a bad streak as a GM but has done well recently.

 

[mike_usagisan]

I think both are the GOAT and we were blessed to have them together. I just wish Brady got to finish his career here and got his 7th ring with the Pats instead of the Bucs.

I like to think all real Pats feel that way. I get that loyalties were torn when Brady went to the Bucs. But even Bill and Brady have both said their successes are because of each other. That seems like where the arguments should end. But I guess they’ll never end.

 

[Rob0729]

Well, Bill was lucky to have Brady. The only criticism of Bill that I've seen is as a GM, not as a HC. He had a bad streak as a GM but has done well recently.

Of course he was lucky. But that isn’t what I said. I am saying there are people (or at least a person) in this thread who have said in the past that without Brady, Belichick would have been fired after the 2001 season.

 

[1960Pats]

Umm...Bledsoe was not a 3rd string QB, neither was Cam, neither was Cassel, neither was JG. When was the 3rd string QB here? Look dude, if you want to throw out entire seasons go ahead. I know everyone wants to make it so Brady didnt mean **** and Bill could have won 20 titles with a kid out of highschool. Who cares, its a stupid fan discussion points that media stirred up beause its too hard for people to just frekaing say, hey Bill was a great coach and brady is a great QB, nope, cant do that, someone has to win out. So all of the sudden the pats win some games in a row and the argument has to come up again. Its almost like clockwork.

They also came to to the Brady thread that they had moved to a sub-forum. You could set your watch by them.

 

[Rob0729]

I like to think all real Pats feel that way. I get that loyalties were torn when Brady went to the Bucs. But even Bill and Brady have both said their successes are because of each other. That seems like where the arguments should end. But I guess they’ll never end.

That is the way I feel about the two. I really wasn’t thinking when I started this thread and realizing that it would start a many page argument. I just heard it on the radio and I thought it was an interesting fact. Personally, I thought after this five game winning streak, the anti-Belichick crowd would have given it a rest at least until the next time the Pats lost.

 

[Skyflarie]

Nobody is saying that Bill is overrated as a HC. He's the GOAT. What I think is becoming more obvious by recent events is that players win the games, not coaches.

I mean I feel like BB would be the first to say players win games. They are the ones actually on the field after all.

 

[Rob0729]

They also came to to the Brady thread that they had moved to a sub-forum. You could set your watch by them.

Don‘t lump me in with that. I don’t go to the Brady forum nor did I complain to anyone to have it moved.

 

[1960Pats]

I like to think all real Pats feel that way. I get that loyalties were torn when Brady went to the Bucs. But even Bill and Brady have both said their successes are because of each other. That seems like where the arguments should end. But I guess they’ll never end.

It seems like this type of thing has happened with other players but not nearly to the extent it's happening with Brady. I don't know why but it didn't help for Brady to go to another team and win it all like he did while here.

 

[1960Pats]

I mean I feel like BB would be the first to say players win games. They are the ones actually on the field after all.

He has said that many times.

 

[sb1]

I mean I feel like BB would be the first to say players win games. They are the ones actually on the field after all.

Actually he did say that.

Bill Belichick is now the only NFL coach to win a game in 50 different stadiums

After guiding the Patriots to a stress-free and decisive 45-0 victory over the Los Angeles Chargers on Sunday, head coach Bill Belichick became the first coach in the Super Bowl […]

www.boston.com

And he didn't say "One of the reasons"...he said "The ONLY reason". Right from the man himself.

 

[Skyflarie]

He has said that many times.

So I wasn't just thinking that - I wasn't sure if it was just in my head! Players win games and coaches lose them or something like that