Can KC go 19-0?

[sb1]

Are you arguing with yourself? Nobody is saying Tom isn't the GOAT. You're so desperate to hate you just manufacture arguments that no one is even having.

Reading comprehension. Try it sometime.

 

[TheRainMaker]

Both things can be true. Bill's coaching was more pivotal to the first run than the second and Tom already well established his place in the HoF.

And way more posters have revisionist history when it comes to Bill. I mean just about everyone loves Brady, Most love both, and then there are the nuts who seem to think you have to pit them vs each other in some sort of sick twisted game that they will seemingly never let end.

Both were already being fitted for their gold jackets by that time.

Saying Bill was “more pivotal” is picking sides. They both were instrumental to the teams success.

Bill without Tom gets fired after the 2001 season. This is not a hot take and this long debated rumor was finally verified in "The Dynasty".

We don't know what would've happened to Tom had Bill not drafted him. My guess is that he would've bounced around the league for a while before finally getting his shot.

 

[Uptown]

 

[signbabybrady]

Both were already being fitted for their gold jackets by that time.

Saying Bill was “more pivotal” is picking sides. They both were instrumental to the teams success.

Bill without Tom gets fired after the 2001 season. This is not a hot take and this long debated rumor was finally verified in "The Dynasty".

We don't know what would've happened to Tom had Bill not drafted him. My guess is that he would've bounced around the league for a while before finally getting his shot.

First I think you misinterpreted what I was saying I never said Bill was more pivotal than Brady I'm saying Bill was more pivotal than himself in the first run compared to the second. The first time around he built it from scratch from then on the unstoppable force was in motion and the Second run got to ride that inertia. Simplistic way to put it as obviously they still needed to put in the work and they still needed Gronk and Jules and Butler and a host of other talent and some crazy breaks too.


Second: The firing of Bill in 01 was never happening. Drew's injury would have saved him had he chose Drew. He chose Brady the rest is history. Had he chose to go back to Drew the injury gets him another year. Yes at 0-2 had Drew stayed healthy and they didn't improve then he was on shaky ground (I think that D was too good not to come around enough to improve on the 5-11 even with the 0-2 start. Then obviously having chose Brady if that failed his job again would be at risk but Brady was a God.

 

[TheRainMaker]

Second: The firing of Bill in 01 was never happening. Drew's injury would have saved him had he chose Drew.

Had he chose to go back to Drew the injury gets him another year.

I don't know. Bob loves to throw people under the bus. I think Bill was facing a double edge sword. He was brought in to get the team back to the playoffs as they still had enough core players, but were on the verge of 3 straight years out of the playoffs.

Yes at 0-2 had Drew stayed healthy and they didn't improve then he was on shaky ground (I think that D was too good not to come around enough to improve on the 5-11 even with the 0-2 start.

I'll preface by saying Drew Bledsoe was my favorite QB growing up when I was a teenager. I loved his unorthodox throwing mechanics and could fling the ball 50+ yards with ease. In 1999, I blamed the rest of the team for not having an OL, RB, aging TE, lack of 2nd option at WR and a poor defense. By 2000, something just didn't look right with Drew and it continued in 2001 when he was on the verge of being 0-2. As much as I was a big fan of Bledsoe, they would've struggled just to get to .500 with him in 2001 and that's where I think Bill would've been fired. With Tom, they were 3-4 against teams .500 and above that season. That record would've been even worse with Drew. In fact, the worst team Tom lost to was a 8-8 Broncos team. Drew lost his first game of the season to an eventual 6-10 Bengals team. He was a high maintenance QB that didn't do well when the talent wasn't surrounding him. Tom took what the defense gave him.

 

[signbabybrady]

I don't know. Bob loves to throw people under the bus. I think Bill was facing a double edge sword. He was brought in to get the team back to the playoffs as they still had enough core players, but were on the verge of 3 straight years out of the playoffs.

I'll preface by saying Drew Bledsoe was my favorite QB growing up when I was a teenager. I loved his unorthodox throwing mechanics and could fling the ball 50+ yards with ease. In 1999, I blamed the rest of the team for not having an OL, RB, aging TE, lack of 2nd option at WR and a poor defense. By 2000, something just didn't look right with Drew and it continued in 2001 when he was on the verge of being 0-2. As much as I was a big fan of Bledsoe, they would've struggled just to get to .500 with him in 2001 and that's where I think Bill would've been fired. With Tom, they were 3-4 against teams .500 and above that season. That record would've been even worse with Drew. In fact, the worst team Tom lost to was a 8-8 Broncos team. Drew lost his first game of the season to an eventual 6-10 Bengals team. He was a high maintenance QB that didn't do well when the talent wasn't surrounding him. Tom took what the defense gave him.

Like I said I base my guess solely on the D. We know what that D would do the rest of the year and the next few years. Even without Brady I don't think they get coach fired that quickly. But they likely were never winning anything meaningful with Drew. There's a very small window where somehow that 4,000 yard season with Buffalo crosses with our D and works but thankfully we got TBGOAT instead.

 

[Zarozzor]

Yes. When you're being compared to Joe...that's what I'd call GOAT-level play.

On top of the 3 championships in 4 years, Brady was already at an MVP level by 2004 (31.6% DVOA) throwing to Givens, Patten, Branch, Graham.

And FWIW, the Patriots offense was ranked higher than the defense in 16/18 seasons. The only two seasons where the defense ranked higher was 2003 and 2019.

 

[sb1]

Just found out our old buddy Mercury Morris passed away in September. Was just gonna say it’s almost time for him to start chirping again….

 

[1960Pats]

When you look at the Chiefs statistically this year they are fairly pedestrian in most categories. There are a couple that stands out and one in particular is on 3rd down they lead the league with 52% of the time converting. That's just huge when you consider the fact they are 10th in total offense, 9th in passing and 21st in rushing. I think the two things that make them so good on 3rd down is the play calling and Mahomes. The other two things that stands out is on the defensive side of the ball. They rank 3rd against the rush and are 5th for points allowed. Spagnuolo is just a good coach, no arguing that.

The question is does this team go undefeated. No they will not. Why do I say this you may wonder , because of history. Is the 2024 Chiefs better than the 2007 Pats, I think we all can agree on the answer being unequivocally no. If that is a fact then the Chiefs will not run the tables, period. I know that folks will say its comparing apples to oranges, different era in football, different teams blah blah blah. But believe in what the eye test has shown you. This team has won only 2 games by more than 7 points this season. I have seen luck, the refs and implosions by other teams tip the scales to a Chiefs victory more than once this season. The probability of snatching a victory from the jaws of defeat weekly is diminishing. And when the playoffs starts there will be no more games with the bottom of the league.

I don't think they will finish the regular season undefeated and I don't believe they win the Super Bowl. Time will tell how well this post ages and I am sure plenty of people on here will remind me if it doesn't age well

Screw those people. The purpose of the question is to have a discussion about the possibility. The odds are that they won't go undefeated but if they beat Buffalo this week it get's a lot more possible and would likely mean the top seed.

Statistically they're in the middle of the pack of the top 6 AFC teams overall, with run defense and points against being their top stats.

 

[1960Pats]

On top of the 3 championships in 4 years, Brady was already at an MVP level by 2004 (31.6% DVOA) throwing to Givens, Patten, Branch, Graham.

And FWIW, the Patriots offense was ranked higher than the defense in 16/18 seasons. The only two seasons where the defense ranked higher was 2003 and 2019.

I knew the defense was better in the first part of the dynasty than in the second half but I didn't realize the numbers were that dramatic.

 

[1960Pats]

You mean 20-0? They can. I'd lean towards no. But after they beat Buffalo, they will have maybe one more tough game remaining. @Steelers maybe?

Yes, 20-0.

That's the way I see it too. This week will be the key.

 

[1960Pats]

Again both things can be true players game and Bill's coaching was more important to the first run than the second. Some day you might realize that you're always going to be the clown in these debates because you hate Bill and I love both Bill and Brady so things like your quote above just make me smile because Bill knows how good Bill is and has no problem giving Brady all the credit he deserves. It's not some cudgel for your made up debate. It's just the GOAT coach bragging about the GOAT player that he developed and coached into a player capable of winning 7 SBs.

I'm a player's guy and truly believe that all coaches are overrated, though some are better than others. If Bill was such a great player developer how the hell did he lose so many games without Brady, including here with the same players? There's probably a few coaches who could have won as many SBs with Brady. Bill was just the lucky one who got him.

 

[1960Pats]

Maybe they'll go 19-1 and feel the same thing that we felt in 2007. I wouldn't mind that.

 

[signbabybrady]

I'm a player's guy and truly believe that all coaches are overrated, though some are better than others. If Bill was such a great player developer how the hell did he lose so many games without Brady, including here with the same players? There's probably a few coaches who could have won as many SBs with Brady. Bill was just the lucky one who got him.

Comparing players to coaches is dumb they are completely different jobs. And regardless of who's good or not players can play without coaches and coaches can't do anything without players. So it's a pointless comparison.

For coaches it's about what coaches can do with the players they get to coach. No one's done more than Bill in this regard.

 

[Santi]

Hmm surprise surprise, KC has a tough matchup and the zebra fix is in.

Hopefully Allen can blow them away so fast the refs can’t make a difference.

 

[ScottishPatriots]

They will lose today and that will be a good thing for their prospects of a three peat, the pressure of going undefeated is crippling.

 

[TinhWoodhead]

the streak stops at 9

 

[PATSNUTme]

No!

 

[Steve102]

 

[amfootball]

NOPE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Did not even get to 10.

What Brady/Pats did in 2007 will never ever ever be repeated!