The Bill Boyz are just as Bad as the Brady Boyz were

[203Pat]

Why? Bill Parcells had a sub 500 record when BB became his DC, within one season they were playing in a Super Bowl on two different teams. But you think that's what... coincidence?

BB made mistakes along the way, like the rest of us humans. You "BB sucks" types are absurd, the premier defensive mind of the 21st century is some witless boob who only won because he got lucky drafting that QB in the 6th round. But the 6th round QB wasn't lucky to have the best defense, special teams, offensive lines around him... that just happened by accident.

This thread is dumb, like most of these anti-BB takes. Stop bumping this witless thread, we're all getting dumber reading it.

Feel free to ignore it.

 

[signbabybrady]

I get that he is proud of his accomplishments, and he should be, but claiming he has more rings than Brady because of two DC ring is laughable. That is like calling Jimmy G a more successful QB than Brett Favre because Jimmy has 2 to Favre's 1.

Except that's not what I'm doing. I'm not using it to claim anything over Brady. I'm using it to refute the dumb claim that Bill did nothing without Tom.

 

[Wozzy]

Feel free to ignore it.

Tell the clowns who keep bumping it to the top of our feed.

It's laughable how someone can be "great" and "terrible" at the same time.

 

[203Pat]

Except that's not what I'm doing. I'm not using it to claim anything over Brady. I'm using it to refute the dumb claim that Bill did nothing without Tom.

Well he didn't. Parcells did.

 

[signbabybrady]

Well he didn't. Parcells did.

Why'd they give him those 2 rings then?

 

[203Pat]

Why'd they give him those 2 rings then?

We can do this all day. It is embarrassing you tried to claim some victory for Bill that he has more rings than Brady.

 

[signbabybrady]

We can do this all day. It is embarrassing you tried to claim some victory for Bill that he has more rings than Brady.

I'll go all day if you want but you might lose count of the hours somewhere around hour 7 or 8.

 

[sb1]

Except that's not what I'm doing. I'm not using it to claim anything over Brady. I'm using it to refute the dumb claim that Bill did nothing without Tom.

.426 coaching record post Tom. It is what it is.

 

[sb1]

I get that he is proud of his accomplishments, and he should be, but claiming he has more rings than Brady because of two DC ring is laughable. That is like calling Jimmy G a more successful QB than Brett Favre because Jimmy has 2 to Favre's 1.

Also Matt Patricia has more Super Bowl rings than Don Shula. Therefore logic says Patricia is better. Lol

 

[sb1]

Why? Bill Parcells had a sub 500 record when BB became his DC, within one season they were playing in a Super Bowl on two different teams. But you think that's what... coincidence?

BB made mistakes along the way, like the rest of us humans. You "BB sucks" types are absurd, the premier defensive mind of the 21st century is some witless boob who only won because he got lucky drafting that QB in the 6th round. But the 6th round QB wasn't lucky to have the best defense, special teams, offensive lines around him... that just happened by accident.

This thread is dumb, like most of these anti-BB takes. Stop bumping this witless thread, we're all getting dumber reading it.

Yup it's team Bill to the rescue!

 

[signbabybrady]

.426 coaching record post Tom. It is what it is.

We've been over this multiple times that number looks bad unless you add context to it. What's the winning percentage of other coaches when you take away the best player they coached?

A couple still have decent records but way more than just Bill fall under .500 too. It's a dumb argument.

 

[XLIX]

8>7

True but 7 in 22 years is far more impressive than 8 in 50.

Bill won 2 without Brady's help.

Not as head coach. I don't think anyone here has ever criticized BB the DC.

Brady won one without Bill but only after 19 years of his coaching.

No matter how hard you guys try you can't erase Bill's 8.

No matter how hard you try, you can't erase the fact that the rest of us are talking about Bill Belichick the HC, and Bill Belichick the HC completely sucks without Brady.

I used to compare Belichick-without-Brady to Jeff Fisher, but I stopped when I realized how unfair that was. Jeff Fisher is far superior to Belichick-without-Brady.

 

[Ring 6]

How much did BB coach Brady on the offensive side of the ball? BB is a guy who thought Phat Matt would be a good offensive coordinator.

Belichick coached Brady heavily early on, with regular one on one sessions about film review, the opponent and evaluation of Brady.
Belichick famously said in 2001 “when Brady comes off the field and I ask him what he sees, he always has a good answer” BB was effectively the QB coach that year.

 

[XLIX]

Why? Bill Parcells had a sub 500 record when BB became his DC, within one season they were playing in a Super Bowl on two different teams. But you think that's what... coincidence?

Well, you think it is just a coincidence how Belichick went from 5-13 in NE to 14-3 once Brady took over..... so maybe you shouldn't speak so loudly here....

BB made mistakes along the way, like the rest of us humans. You "BB sucks" types are absurd, the premier defensive mind of the 21st century is some witless boob who only won because he got lucky drafting that QB in the 6th round.

As a Head Coach, the evidence suggests the above statement is indeed the case.

 

[Wozzy]

Yup it's team Bill to the rescue!

There is no team Bill. It’s a figment of the QB fanboy’s imaginations.

 

[signbabybrady]

True but 7 in 22 years is far more impressive than 8 in 50.

Not as head coach. I don't think anyone here has ever criticized BB the DC.

No matter how hard you try, you can't erase the fact that the rest of us are talking about Bill Belichick the HC, and Bill Belichick the HC completely sucks without Brady.

I used to compare Belichick-without-Brady to Jeff Fisher, but I stopped when I realized how unfair that was. Jeff Fisher is far superior to Belichick-without-Brady.

What's Jeff Fisher without Steve McNair though?

 

[Wozzy]

Well, you think it is just a coincidence how Belichick went from 5-13 in NE to 14-3 once Brady took over..... so maybe you shouldn't speak so loudly here...

It wasn’t just Brady, even though he played a large part in that. Richard Seymour worked his way into a starting position. An entirely new team of free agents started executing better. Football is a team sport, don’t be a fanboy.

As a Head Coach, the evidence suggests the above statement is indeed the case.

He had a better record with Testeverde than a washed up Kosar in Cleveland. He had a better record with JimmyG and Cassel than with Hoyer.

Newsflash: coaches do better with better players…. shocking.

 

[Guts]

Tell the clowns who keep bumping it to the top of our feed.

It's laughable how someone can be "great" and "terrible" at the same time.

Click that little button there
It'll disappear from your feed

 

[sb1]

True but 7 in 22 years is far more impressive than 8 in 50.

Not as head coach. I don't think anyone here has ever criticized BB the DC.

No matter how hard you try, you can't erase the fact that the rest of us are talking about Bill Belichick the HC, and Bill Belichick the HC completely sucks without Brady.

I used to compare Belichick-without-Brady to Jeff Fisher, but I stopped when I realized how unfair that was. Jeff Fisher is far superior to Belichick-without-Brady.

Fisher at least is over .500. If we're talking about Bill’s .426 record post Brady that's down in Todd Bowles territory. Yikes!

 

[sb1]

We've been over this multiple times that number looks bad unless you add context to it. What's the winning percentage of other coaches when you take away the best player they coached?

A couple still have decent records but way more than just Bill fall under .500 too. It's a dumb argument.

Is it though? It's not just winning less it's his coaching ability going completely sideways after Brady left. Case in point: 47-17. Also Matt Patricia and Joe Judge to run his offense.