The Bill megathread (HC at UNC, girlfriend, etc.)

[Huckleberry1]

The shame is on the members who have turned their backs and belittled so many great Patriots in their lame attempts to pit Bill vs Brady.

Which is ********. Everyone knows that it’s just your excuse for acting like a petulant child.

 

[signbabybrady]

Which is ********. Everyone knows that it’s just your excuse for acting like a petulant child.

Please. I can't post anything about Bill on a Patriots message board without getting 20 hate filled posts.

 

[lancerman]

Please. I can't post anything about Bill on a Patriots message board without getting 20 hate filled posts.

The problem is that you fight against basic realities of football.

And when people point them out you view it as disrespectful and hating.

 

[signbabybrady]

The problem is that you fight against basic realities of football.

And when people point them out you view it as disrespectful and hating.

Problem is you guys think you know what you're talking about and you don't there's no persecution complex you guys a brutal.

 

[lancerman]

Problem is you guys think you know what you're talking about and you don't there's no persecution complex you guys a brutal.

Bro you are the one calling people haters and acting like people have an agenda. You literally have a persecution complex.

And no the problem is that you have a problem acknowledging basic realities and make massive reaches because you hate confronting points people make.

Especially when you love to play dumb and pretend that

1. When people talk about Belichick not winning without Brady they aren't talking about him as a HC.
2. Using rings he has as a coordinator as if it materially changes the point people are making when you know damn well we are talking about his ability as a HC and not a member of Parcells' staff.

It just makes you look desperate and like you are unwilling to actually engage in the facts on the ground and argue something nobody is arguing or even cares about. It's sad. And it's only because it bothers you that you actually don't have much of a response when people point out that Bill coached 11 seasons without Brady and only has one playoff win while Brady has won post seasons games before and after Bill no matter where he was.

AKA: it's a cope and everyone else see's through it and you are dumb enough to keep making a spectacle over it and thinking it proves anything but your desperation.

 

[signbabybrady]

Bro you are the one calling people haters and acting like people have an agenda. You literally have a persecution complex.

And no the problem is that you have a problem acknowledging basic realities and make massive reaches because you hate confronting points people make.

Especially when you love to play dumb and pretend that

1. When people talk about Belichick not winning without Brady they aren't talking about him as a HC.
2. Using rings he has as a coordinator as if it materially changes the point people are making when you know damn well we are talking about his ability as a HC and not a member of Parcells' staff.

It just makes you look desperate and like you are unwilling to actually engage in the facts on the ground and argue something nobody is arguing or even cares about. It's sad. And it's only because it bothers you that you actually don't have much of a response when people point out that Bill coached 11 seasons without Brady and only has one playoff win while Brady has won post seasons games before and after Bill no matter where he was.

AKA: it's a cope and everyone else see's through it and you are dumb enough to keep making a spectacle over it and thinking it proves anything but your desperation.

Lol you guys have to take out his 20 best seasons to make a point and then say I'm the one being desperate.

And yes if we are going to then have any relevant conversation about his time without Brady then his time in NYG is absolutely relevant and it's factual. On the flip side you guys have to remove years and make things.

You guys are so delusional it's rediculous.

 

[lancerman]

Lol you guys have to take out his 20 best seasons to make a point and then say I'm the one being desperate.

And yes if we are going to then have any relevant conversation about his time without Brady then his time in NYG is absolutely relevant and it's factual. On the flip side you guys have to remove years and make things.

You guys are so delusional it's rediculous.

When the comparison is with and without Brady.... yeah you use the seasons he had without Brady as a comparison. This is an example of you being intellectually dishonest because it suits your feelings.

No Belichick was not a HC in NYG, we are discussing him as a HC. He only had control over 1/3rd of a team and he still had to listen to Parcells if he told him to do something.

This is the difference between the two of us. If Brady was absolute trash everywhere he went without Belichick, I wouldn't dumb myself down enough to say "oh one of his teams did well when he was riding the bench". You debase yourself and make stupid arguments everyone see's through because when reality doesn't feel good, instead of dealing with it, you have to try to twist it to feel better.

It's sad and delusional.

 

[XLIX]

Lol you guys have to take out his 20 best seasons to make a point and then say I'm the one being desperate.

Well duh…. If we’re talking about Belichick without Brady then yeah that takes away those years.

And yes if we are going to then have any relevant conversation about his time without Brady then his time in NYG is absolutely relevant and it's factual. On the flip side you guys have to remove years and make things.

You guys are so delusional it's rediculous.

No delusion here: Bill Belichick was a head coach for 10 years without Brady and he sucked.

You can’t even disagree with the statement I just made. All you do is change the subject.

 

[signbabybrady]

Well duh…. If we’re talking about Belichick without Brady then yeah that takes away those years.

No delusion here: Bill Belichick was a head coach for 10 years without Brady and he sucked.

You can’t even disagree with the statement I just made. All you do is change the subject.

I can disagree with it and have go back and you can find my responses. What's the point you guys don't listen to it anyway.

 

[signbabybrady]

When the comparison is with and without Brady.... yeah you use the seasons he had without Brady as a comparison. This is an example of you being intellectually dishonest because it suits your feelings.

No Belichick was not a HC in NYG, we are discussing him as a HC. He only had control over 1/3rd of a team and he still had to listen to Parcells if he told him to do something.

This is the difference between the two of us. If Brady was absolute trash everywhere he went without Belichick, I wouldn't dumb myself down enough to say "oh one of his teams did well when he was riding the bench". You debase yourself and make stupid arguments everyone see's through because when reality doesn't feel good, instead of dealing with it, you have to try to twist it to feel better.

It's sad and delusional.

It's intellectually dishonest to remove such a large sample size and think it is then statistically representative of anything.

 

[signbabybrady]

For comparison it would be like saying the next 20 years of Vrabel's career means nothing.

It's the period time when you would expect him to be his be most successful even if it were fair to take the Brady years away to replace it with nothing and act like you have some gotcha catch all that trumps everything is absolutely BS.

And this has been covered over and over and your refusal to accept that this renders your math useless is what's intellectually dishonest.

 

[lancerman]

It's intellectually dishonest to remove such a large sample size and think it is then statistically representative of anything.

It's intellectually dishonest to think in a comparison between two people taking a rather large sample size of one without the other is "intellectually dishonest".

11 seasons is a large enough sample size to be relevant. It's not 1 or 2 one offs that you can claim are aberrations because of other factors.

 

[lancerman]

For comparison it would be like saying the next 20 years of Vrabel's career means nothing.

It's the period time when you would expect him to be his be most successful even if it were fair to take the Brady years away to replace it with nothing and act like you have some gotcha catch all that trumps everything is absolutely BS.

And this has been covered over and over and your refusal to accept that this renders your math useless is what's intellectually dishonest.

No it's not even remotely like that lol.

You just can't emotionally handle what Belichick's tenure without Brady is so like @XLIX said you are coping by changing the subject. You can't face reality when it makes you feel bad.

 

[signbabybrady]

No it's not even remotely like that lol.

You just can't emotionally handle what Belichick's tenure without Brady is so like @XLIX said you are coping by changing the subject. You can't face reality when it makes you feel bad.

You can't cope with the fact that you can't just remove 20 years. Evident by your reaction to my suggesting you do it to someone else.

 

[lancerman]

You can't cope with the fact that you can't just remove 20 years. Evident by your reaction to my suggesting you do it to someone else.

You are just changing the argument simply because you don't like it.

It's very intellectually dishonest and it's obvious via 200 pages of this thread that you haven't convinced anybody either with it.

 

[signbabybrady]

You are just changing the argument simply because you don't like it.

It's very intellectually dishonest and it's obvious via 200 pages of this thread that you haven't convinced anybody either with it.

I'm not changing any argument I'm using theatre of the absurd to show how rediculous your argument is.

Imagine telling yourself 25 years ago this guy would coach your team to 6 SB victories and that you would be complaining about his last 2 seasons and his time on the team he coached before he came here more than you cared about his contributions to those 6 and everything else he did.

 

[signbabybrady]

You are just changing the argument simply because you don't like it.

It's very intellectually dishonest and it's obvious via 200 pages of this thread that you haven't convinced anybody either with it.

It's very intellectually dishonest and it's obvious via 200 pages of this thread that you haven't convinced anybody either with it.

But again I'm on defense so anytime you guys want to stop crapping all over the history of this great franchise this can all end.

 

[lancerman]

It's very intellectually dishonest and it's obvious via 200 pages of this thread that you haven't convinced anybody either with it.

But again I'm on defense so anytime you guys want to stop crapping all over the history of this great franchise this can all end.

Oh I have had plenty indicate they agreed with me. You're the one pissing all over this franchise by minimizing the reason for it's success to prop up the object of your lust

 

[signbabybrady]

Oh I have had plenty indicate they agreed with me. You're the one pissing all over this franchise by minimizing the reason for it's success to prop up the object of your lust

I've also had plenty agree with me too. Want a cookie?

I've never done anything to suggest that Brady or Bill weren't each the GOAT nor have I suggested any of the other players weren't valuable. Matty P, RAC, Weis, Josh McD, and numerous other coaches played huge roles too.

As an example we don't win SB38 if Bill Belichick the GM doesn't call on an old friend (nepo baby as you guys would insult) Brian Kinchen when our long snapper got hurt.

You guys run around stating it was all Brady and thus crapping all over everyone else who contributed. End of that debate.

 

[lancerman]

I've also had plenty agree with me too. Want a cookie?

I've never done anything to suggest that Brady or Bill weren't each the GOAT nor have I suggested any of the other players weren't valuable. Matty P, RAC, Weis, Josh McD, and numerous other coaches played huge roles too.

You guys run around stating it was all Brady and thus crapping all over everyone else who contributed. End of that debate.

Nobody said it was all Brady, we did say Brady was disproportionately important as all QB's are.