How Belichick lost his place in posterity

[FredFromDartmouth]

Horsefeathers. How do you account for the Matt Cassel year? No Brady and BB did very well

 

[Wozzy]

Belichick didn't do anything, **** Rehbein orchestrated the Brady pick

So the QB coach BB hired and who was told by Bill to go scout two QB's from that 2000 draft class made the pick?

Stop sniffing glue.

 

[Wozzy]

Horsefeathers. How do you account for the Matt Cassel year? No Brady and BB did very well

Cassel, Garopollo, Brisset with a torn tendon in his throwing hand... BB has won with any semi decent QB he's had.

He had a better record with Vinnie Testeverde over a washed up Bernie Kosar in Cleveland and Vinnie wasn't great.

Newsflash; coaches do better with better players.

BB drafted and developed Brady... there is no one without the other.

The truth sucks for BB haters.

 

[TheRainMaker]

Bill Walsh had a worse record before Montana became the initial GOAT.

Andy Reid lucked out getting McNabb. He was 5-11 before McNabb took over full time in 2000. Even then, he was known as a terrible game manager who chocked in big games. Alex Smith was competent in KC, but they were never going anywhere until they struck gold with Mahomes. In fact, like Bill, Reid had to be convinced to take him.

Bill has shown they were virtually unbeatable when they had talent, but very mortal without it.

Tom and the Bucs would’ve won 2 straight if it weren’t for major injuries. I don’t what the heck happened year 3. They all looked like they wanted the season to end.

 

[sb1]

Horsefeathers. How do you account for the Matt Cassel year? No Brady and BB did very well

The team didn’t crater but that was the same offensive roster that had a 16-0 season the year before and without Brady they didn’t make the playoffs.

 

[lancerman]

Bill Walsh had a worse record before Montana became the initial GOAT.

Andy Reid lucked out getting McNabb. He was 5-11 before McNabb took over full time in 2000. Even then, he was known as a terrible game manager who chocked in big games. Alex Smith was competent in KC, but they were never going anywhere until they struck gold with Mahomes. In fact, like Bill, Reid had to be convinced to take him.

Kraft and Pioli confirmed the long speculation among us that Bill and the staff were on the hot seat in 2001. What we didn’t know was that it was because of Bledsoe and not that they were 5-13. Had Bill’s Brady experiment failed, Kraft would’ve pulled the plug.

Bill has shown they were virtually unbeatable when they had talent, but very mortal without it.

Tom and the Bucs would’ve won 2 straight if it weren’t for major injuries. I don’t what the heck happened year 3. They all looked like they wanted the season to end.

Bill Walsh coached one season without Montana and it was his first when he was rebuilding the 49'ers. Andy Reid has put up playoff teams in every circumstance he's been in.

Bill Belichick has 5 years in Cleveland and 6 full years in New England without Brady as his starting QB and then some change left over. For posterity, Bill has as many seasons without Brady as Bill Walsh had as a HC in totality. So it's more than a fair sample size to compare. And frankly in that 11 year career without Brady, he has 1 playoff win and 2 playoff appearances.

 

[sb1]

I see the IBWT clowns just won't let go of the fact that BB is a well below .500 coach without Tom Brady...for comparison sake, look at Shula's record without Marino, Parcells without Simms, Jimmy Johnsons record without Aikman, Andy Reids record without Kermit...all above .500, whilst Belichick is in Jeff Fisher territory

What’s funnier is they refuse to acknowledge that GM Bill is 100% responsible for the Mac Jones pick. Jones flamed out in NE so logically that means Bill was “forced” to pick him against his will. Lol

 

[lancerman]

Cassel, Garopollo, Brisset with a torn tendon in his throwing hand... BB has won with any semi decent QB he's had.

He had a better record with Vinnie Testeverde over a washed up Bernie Kosar in Cleveland and Vinnie wasn't great.

Newsflash; coaches do better with better players.

BB drafted and developed Brady... there is no one without the other.

The truth sucks for BB haters.

He has 11 years without Brady as his starter and only made the playoffs twice. 11 years is a huge sample size, it's not cherrypicking. You can maybe argue that one or two seasons is unfair to compare, but 11 is absurd to debate.

 

[lancerman]

What’s funnier is they refuse to acknowledge that GM Bill is 100% responsible for the Mac Jones pick. He flamed out in NE so logically that means Bill was “forced” to pick him against his will. Lol

What's dumber is that they'll claim it's not fair that Brady got to go to a stacked team while Bill had weaker teams without him, yet Bill was the GM who was responsible for building all those teams.

 

[Ian]

He messed up his last two seasons here with personnel and coaching decisions, and landed the wrong QB(s) who both imploded and the guy they had to succeed Brady also wasn’t the guy. Period. Can’t win without a decent QB who is smart with the ball and can make a play.

Also, people talk like they won with blowouts thanks to Brady over 20yrs and Bill played little part in the wins. I don’t know the number of close games they won over that span, but I thought the bit about the Rams game where Bill decided to completely change the defense and run a scheme they hadn’t run all year was a reminder of just how great he really was.

So for those who want to kill the guy over moving on from Brady, I guess it is what it is. But the fact we had them both here at the same time is why they have six rings, albeit they should have seven and I’m also p****d at him about that.

I don’t think Brady wins six with another guy. Maybe he finishes like Manning/Roethlisberger or gets 4, but Bill absolutely made a difference there. Coaches absolutely lose games and I’ve said it before, Dungy didn’t do Manning many favors and there’s no way he should only have one ring during that time in Indy with the players he had.

But be glad it happened during our lifetimes and we can tell our grandkids about it. Because it definitely won’t happen again. It’s just odd we keep getting caught in this cycle. Most of you guys all saw it in real time, you saw the turnovers, you watched and listened to guys like Bruschi, Law, Harrison, etc. it wasn’t exactly all Brady and the offense.

 

[sb1]

He has 11 years without Brady as his starter and only made the playoffs twice. 11 years is a huge sample size, it's not cherrypicking. You can maybe argue that one or two seasons is unfair to compare, but 11 is absurd to debate.

… with one of those playoff appearances being a one and done via a total embarrassment of a game

 

[Ian]

What's dumber is that they'll claim it's not fair that Brady got to go to a stacked team while Bill had weaker teams without him, yet Bill was the GM who was responsible for building all those teams.

That’s a fair point. But the 2006 team is the only one that I recall being so badly constructed that it was absurd. 2019 is maybe the other, but I don’t recall a lot of years I went into a year feeling like they were badly undermanned other than those years.

 

[lancerman]

That’s a fair point. But the 2006 team that I recall being so badly constructed that it was absurd. 2019 is maybe the other, but I don’t recall a lot of years I went into a year feeling like they were badly undermanned other than those years.

I felt they were undermanned offensively going into last year based on performance the prior year and the players we lost in the off season

 

[Ian]

I’ll also say it’s disappointing that so many people here took context into account in terms of his records during those years in Cleveland where he turned the franchise around and then had the rug pulled out by what happened. We all saw the documentary and viewed it differently back then. Now the talk radio/media people pile that into the totals to pad their argument with this.

It’s not hard to see what happened, and Belichick bears blame for his decisions over his final two seasons and I would absolutely argue he’s responsible for his departure here. But to discount the rest is frustrating.

 

[Ian]

I felt they were undermanned offensively going into last year based on performance the prior year and the players we lost in the off season

Oh, absolutely. I felt the same way. I was just referring to Brady’s tenure here.

 

[Ian]

He has 11 years without Brady as his starter and only made the playoffs twice. 11 years is a huge sample size, it's not cherrypicking. You can maybe argue that one or two seasons is unfair to compare, but 11 is absurd to debate.

Again, the Cleveland years lack some context. And we all know the reasons behind 11 losses in 2000. I love Drew Bledsoe as much as the next guy (only jersey I’ve ever bought), but he didn’t do Belichick any favors that year.

 

[Stu Pidassle]

Now that their careers are over, and we have enough games and data of them playing without the other, it's ok to do an objective assessment.

Bill Belichick's record without Tom Brady: How legendary former Patriots coach has fared before, after divorce with QB | Sporting News United Kingdom

Bill Belichick is one of the greatest coaches in NFL history, but his record without Tom Brady isn't too pretty.

www.sportingnews.com

Tom Brady	Wins	Losses	Winning %	Super Bowl titles
With Bill Belichick	249	75	.769	6
Without Bill Belichick	37	20	.649	1

While Brady did win a Superbowl in Tampa Bay, his winning percentage did drop from 76.9% to 64.9% demonstrating that Belichick did have an impact on Brady's game and ability and helped Brady go up very good, to stratospheric, and best all time.

And we have the data the other way around as well as BB also seems to have benefitted from Brady

Bill Belichick	Wins	Losses	Winning %	Super Bowl titles (as HC)
With Tom Brady	249	75	.769	6
Without Tom Brady	84	103	.449	0

Without Brady, Belichick likely cannot hold on to a HC job for more than 3-4 years with a garbage 44.9% win percentage, which is exactly what happened to him both at the Browns, or at the Patriots after Brady left, and he was fired both times. So Brady seems to have elevated Belichick from below average, or mediocre at best, to in the discussion for best all time.

But it seems people have elevated Brady's contribution to the run far above Belichick's. e.g. when people mention Paul Brown and Otto Graham (10 titles), they seem to revere Brown more. And when they mention Lombardi and Starr, it's no doubt the credit is heavily favoured towards Lombardi (likely due to run heavy era). But Belichick and Brady debate has only gone one way recently. With press, media, fans, and overall history seems to firmly be in the camp that Belichick rode Brady's coattails to success. How did this happen so quickly? He seems to have helped Brady on the margins as well.

How does someone lose his place in posterity? BB will be remembered by future generations regardless of your feelings about BB vs TB12. Hopefully after the new QB wins 6 super bowls, posts like this will be lost to posterity.

 

[Ian]

I think this argument sort of is what it is. To me, and maybe I’m alone in this, but the last two years (the decision to make Patricia/Judge in charge, the personnel decisions) will be how I’ll remember Bill’s faults. But from 2001-2018, it was an unreal run.

2019 was disappointing because we all heard Brady was likely done and I hate how badly Harry turned out, which crushed them. Had he turned out to be what other teams have landed at receiver over the years, maybe it goes differently. That and had AB not been a nutcase.

Again, is what it is. But no point in torturing ourselves over it.

 

[h0c2000]

I’ll also say it’s disappointing that so many people here took context into account in terms of his records during those years in Cleveland where he turned the franchise around and then had the rug pulled out by what happened.

Sure, Bill turned around the franchise. Kinda like how Josh turned around the Broncos franchise... The other myth is the rug pulled out myth. It's okay to admit Bill sucked in Cleveland.

 

[TheRainMaker]

That’s a fair point. But the 2006 team that I recall being so badly constructed that it was absurd. 2019 is maybe the other, but I don’t recall a lot of years I went into a year feeling like they were badly undermanned other than those years.

I'd say 2013. First you had Hernandez leaving the team to the WR's being 2006 and later 2019 esque.

Dobson showed some promise and Thompkins had moments like the Saints game, but they wern't enough to compete with Denver.