What if Brady succeeds elsewhere? Ramifications for BB.

ivanvamp said:

Brady's performance elsewhere will have no effect whatsoever on Belichick. He's by far the greatest HC in the history of the NFL.

His job would only be impacted by what happens with the Patriots. If he fails to produce winners after Brady is gone, then yes eventually he'll lose his job.

Click to expand...

Without Brady, here is BB’s track record. I agree he is a phenomenal coach/GM, but this narrative is crazy.

1991 Cleveland - 6-10 Missed Postseason
1992 Cleveland - 7-9 Missed Postseason
1993 Cleveland - 7-9 Missed Postseason
1994 Cleveland - 11-5 Won Wild Card
1995 Cleveland - 5-11 Missed Postseason
2000 New England - 5-11 Missed Postseason
2008 New England - 11-5 Missed Postseason

That’s 1 postseason appearance/win in 7 seasons.

With Brady, 17 postseason appearances in 18 seasons.

Let’s see him actually succeed without Brady before crowning him best coach ever.

No one has ever controlled the cap like BB. He's the guy you would want to rebuild and we already have him

If we had a bad season, besides being a surprise in itself, i have no doubt BB would start putting in motions a change of plans and start from scratch the team roster (meaning evaluation players with a different perception)

BB is the Goat coach, he has a very large cushion

captain insano said:

hes so gone.

Click to expand...

Montana and other 49ers were not unhappy when Walsh retired...and they played pretty well afterward.

Ice_Ice_Brady said:

Without Brady, here is BB’s track record. I agree he is a phenomenal coach/GM, but this narrative is crazy.

1991 Cleveland - 6-10 Missed Postseason
1992 Cleveland - 7-9 Missed Postseason
1993 Cleveland - 7-9 Missed Postseason
1994 Cleveland - 11-5 Won Wild Card
1995 Cleveland - 5-11 Missed Postseason
2000 New England - 5-11 Missed Postseason
2008 New England - 11-5 Missed Postseason

That’s 1 postseason appearance/win in 7 seasons.

With Brady, 17 postseason appearances in 18 seasons.

Let’s see him actually succeed without Brady before crowning him best coach ever.

Click to expand...

"You know, I think you're fired, man.
Tom stays."

Actual Pats Fan said:

Montana and other 49ers were not unhappy when Walsh retired...and they played pretty well afterward.

Click to expand...

time to go.

Biffins said:

Don’t complain this thread is speculative and full of hyperbole. It’s in the very title.

What if Brady goes elsewhere, has a hugely successful season and meanwhile Patriots’ season flops as Stidham or whatever other QB throws pick after pick and has a full blown meltdown and Pats finish 4-12 or something or worse. What repercussions does that have to BB’s job, if any, as both a GM and HC? Will we then see Kraft split the GM and HC roles in that scenario to avoid any other obvious GM blunders. Thoughts?

Click to expand...

Biffins said:

Then why click on it?

Click to expand...

Good point, I guess to see some dreamer is thinking. Also to post "I hate these what if" posts so you can post " Then why click on it"

Biffins said:

Don’t complain this thread is speculative and full of hyperbole. It’s in the very title.

What if Brady goes elsewhere, has a hugely successful season and meanwhile Patriots’ season flops as Stidham or whatever other QB throws pick after pick and has a full blown meltdown and Pats finish 4-12 or something or worse. What repercussions does that have to BB’s job, if any, as both a GM and HC? Will we then see Kraft split the GM and HC roles in that scenario to avoid any other obvious GM blunders. Thoughts?

Click to expand...

None

Actual Pats Fan said:

Stabler does not belong there.

Sure, he could have won say, in the 1977 season, but we'll never know.

Grogan belongs on that list. 5th round choice. Dreith robbery.

Click to expand...

Stabler actually did go on to win XI -- although I agree that 76 Pats team should have been the ones to do that and Grogan would then indeed replace Stabler on that list. But alas...

Ice_Ice_Brady said:

Without Brady, here is BB’s track record. I agree he is a phenomenal coach/GM, but this narrative is crazy.

1991 Cleveland - 6-10 Missed Postseason
1992 Cleveland - 7-9 Missed Postseason
1993 Cleveland - 7-9 Missed Postseason
1994 Cleveland - 11-5 Won Wild Card
1995 Cleveland - 5-11 Missed Postseason
2000 New England - 5-11 Missed Postseason
2008 New England - 11-5 Missed Postseason

That’s 1 postseason appearance/win in 7 seasons.

With Brady, 17 postseason appearances in 18 seasons.

Let’s see him actually succeed without Brady before crowning him best coach ever.

Click to expand...

Only a Brady homer would credit him with carrying the early dynasty teams. Those were great teams and would have been winning teams without Brady.

It's a freaking insult to Tedy, Rodney, Willie, Ty, Vince and Richard to suggest Brady was the reason those teams were good.

Kasmir said:

Only a Brady homer would credit him with carrying the early dynasty teams. Those were great teams and would have been winning teams without Brady.

It's a freaking insult to Tedy, Rodney, Willie, Ty, Vince and Richard to suggest Brady was the reason those teams were good.

Click to expand...

What does that have to do with the fact that Belichick has one playoff win in seven seasons without Brady? QB reign supreme in the modern NFL. I’m not saying Bill cannot be successful without Brady or that it’s 100% Brady, but this is overwhelming evidence that Bill, not Brady, is the one with something to prove.

Ice_Ice_Brady said:

Without Brady, here is BB’s track record. I agree he is a phenomenal coach/GM, but this narrative is crazy.

1991 Cleveland - 6-10 Missed Postseason
1992 Cleveland - 7-9 Missed Postseason
1993 Cleveland - 7-9 Missed Postseason
1994 Cleveland - 11-5 Won Wild Card
1995 Cleveland - 5-11 Missed Postseason
2000 New England - 5-11 Missed Postseason
2008 New England - 11-5 Missed Postseason

That’s 1 postseason appearance/win in 7 seasons.

With Brady, 17 postseason appearances in 18 seasons.

Let’s see him actually succeed without Brady before crowning him best coach ever.

Click to expand...

He did succeed without Brady. He kicked Parcells ass in the playoffs with a very weak Browns team. And trying to ignore that fact that the last season with the Browns was entirely on the owner and the first season with the Pats was him getting rid of the garbage suits your narrative I suppose, but it's disingenuous.

rochrist said:

He did succeed without Brady. He kicked Parcells ass in the playoffs with a very weak Browns team. And trying to ignore that fact that the last season with the Browns was entirely on the owner and the first season with the Pats was him getting rid of the garbage suits your narrative I suppose, but it's disingenuous.

Click to expand...

Seven seasons, one playoff win for Bill without Brady. It’s disingenuous to split hairs and point to ONE win during that tenure as a counter argument. Browns moving was a distraction? Oh okay, so that’s one playoff win in six legitimate seasons then. What a brutal rebuttal. But there’s very little room to spin here. Bill has a lot to prove. There’s this degree of certainty that Bill will be a highly successful coach without Brady. I’m pointing out that this isn’t supported by actual evidence.

Ice_Ice_Brady said:

What does that have to do with the fact that Belichick has one playoff win in seven seasons without Brady? QB reign supreme in the modern NFL. I’m not saying Bill cannot be successful without Brady or that it’s 100% Brady, but this is overwhelming evidence that Bill, not Brady, is the one with something to prove.

Click to expand...

********. Coincidence is not causality.

It's just as reasonable to point out that Brady was nothing before Belichick. He couldn't beat out Drew Henson at Michigan, and barely got himself drafted. The NFL thought so little of him coming out of college that he might never have gotten a chance to develop if he had gone to the wrong team and sat behind an established and successful starter. Hell, he might have been cut.

He needed the playing time to show he was better than his measurables, and he needed time to learn and develop as well. Belichick gave him that time to develop, bet on him over Bledsoe, and built a great team around him, including a defense that had players that refused to lose. And it was years before Brady became the GOAT.

I'm not saying Brady didn't make a huge contribution early on, and was truly great in the later years of the dynasty. But to credit him with making Belichick a winning coach is an insult not only to BB, but all the other great players on those early dynasty teams.

Kasmir said:

********. Coincidence is not causality.

It's just as reasonable to point out that Brady was nothing before Belichick. He couldn't beat out Drew Henson at Michigan, and barely got himself drafted. The NFL thought so little of him coming out of college that he might never have gotten a chance to develop if he had gone to the wrong team and sat behind an established and successful starter. Hell, he might have been cut.

He needed the playing time to show he was better than his measurables, and he needed time to learn and develop as well. Belichick gave him that time to develop, bet on him over Bledsoe, and built a great team around him, including a defense that had players that refused to lose. And it was years before Brady became the GOAT.

I'm not saying Brady didn't make a huge contribution, particularly in the later years of the dynasty. But to credit him with making Belichick a winning coach is an insult not only to him, bit all the other great players on those early dynasty teams.

Click to expand...

I’d love to see the math proof that 1 for 7 without Brady and 17 for 18 with him is a coincidence.

I’m not here to crap on Belichick, but you are very unaware of how the early 2000s was built. And if you find facts insulting to Patriots players, that’s on you. Plenty of phenomenal NFL players never won SBs or many playoff games due to having a bad QB.

Ice_Ice_Brady said:

Without Brady, here is BB’s track record. I agree he is a phenomenal coach/GM, but this narrative is crazy.

1991 Cleveland - 6-10 Missed Postseason
1992 Cleveland - 7-9 Missed Postseason
1993 Cleveland - 7-9 Missed Postseason
1994 Cleveland - 11-5 Won Wild Card
1995 Cleveland - 5-11 Missed Postseason
2000 New England - 5-11 Missed Postseason
2008 New England - 11-5 Missed Postseason

That’s 1 postseason appearance/win in 7 seasons.

With Brady, 17 postseason appearances in 18 seasons.

Let’s see him actually succeed without Brady before crowning him best coach ever.

Click to expand...

Belichick was turning the Browns around when that douche Modell decided to move the team after 1995. Many thought the Browns would get to the Super Bowl - but the 1995 season collapsed for them once Modell announced the team was leaving. Remember, it was Belichick's scouting department in Cleveland that targeted a guy named Ray Lewis, who by the way was selected by the Ravens in the 1996 draft. Guess who drafted Lewis? Ozzie Newsome, who was with Belichick in 1995. Think that was a coincidence?

Kasmir said:

Only a Brady homer would credit him with carrying the early dynasty teams. Those were great teams and would have been winning teams without Brady.

It's a freaking insult to Tedy, Rodney, Willie, Ty, Vince and Richard to suggest Brady was the reason those teams were good.

Click to expand...

Wow! That 2001 team suddenly became "good" after Brady took over. Before that, they were trending in the wrong direction as they were 0-2 in 2001 and 5-13 the last two seasons. So your saying that team would've miraculously turned it around with anybody other than Brady?

That's an insult to Brady. 2003 doesn't even occur without Brady saving the season in 2001.

Ice_Ice_Brady said:

I’d love to see the math proof that 1 for 7 without Brady and 17 for 18 with him is a coincidence.

I’m not here to crap on Belichick, but you are very unaware of how the early 2000s was built. And if you find facts insulting to Patriots players, that’s on you. Plenty of phenomenal NFL players never won SBs or many playoff games due to having a bad QB.

Click to expand...

Probability is not your strong suit. There's no statistical significance to your argument. Or would rather explain why Brady having 0% wins without Belichick isn't even more compelling by your logic.

TommyBrady12 said:

Belichick was turning the Browns around when that douche Modell decided to move the team after 1995. Many thought the Browns would get to the Super Bowl - but the 1995 season collapsed for them once Modell announced the team was leaving. Remember, it was Belichick's scouting department in Cleveland that targeted a guy named Ray Lewis, who by the way was selected by the Ravens in the 1996 draft. Guess who drafted Lewis? Ozzie Newsome, who was with Belichick in 1995. Think that was a coincidence?

Click to expand...

In five years in Cleveland he drafted a Hall of Fame player and had the team playing with high expectations before the move. Big whoop. That’s nothing that stands out. If the criteria for greatness is drafting a superstar player in the first round and building a theoretical contender in 4-5 years, I guess we have a heck of a lot of great coaches.

Bill is known for his postseason and SB success. That’s what separates him from the Andy Reids and Tony Dungys of the world.

Kasmir said:

Only a Brady homer would credit him with carrying the early dynasty teams. Those were great teams and would have been winning teams without Brady.

It's a freaking insult to Tedy, Rodney, Willie, Ty, Vince and Richard to suggest Brady was the reason those teams were good.

Click to expand...

One more time.



Cometh the hour, cometh the man.