BB THE GOAT

[Wozzy]

I am waiting for Belichick and other coaches to prove you right!

Pederson already showed us in Jacksonville in one season, perhaps you didn't see the sht show that was the Jags in 2021. Harbaugh has a ring and has run a winning program for 15 years. Coughlin won wherever he went, he won two rings beating your sacred cow and did it with a completely average/good QB... but you can't explain that... in fact you ignore it whenever it or a comparable example is provided... or worse, you tell us said player found the ability to be generational for five minutes then went back to being normal. Again... really scientific.

You just said Brady and Stafford winning wasnt impressive...Seems like youre the one whos having a struggle with your criteria here.

Stafford's went 12 years without winning a single playoff game. He was on the Rams for five minutes and won a ring.

Stafford's needed a great team a lot more than they needed him, they were in the Super Bowl the season before last. But you don't see the correlation... you just run your gums.

The difference between my take and your take, is mine is backed by factual evidence and yours isnt. Again, I welcome BB to prove me wrong at some point here.

Factual evidence?

Your opinion is that all the average QB's who won a ring in history, two in Eli's case, found a magic tonic that elevated their level of play for a season making them "generational"... then afterwards, it wore off and they went back to being average. That's your factual take. LOL!!!

Tell me how you running the Double Wing in high school correlates to the modern Day nfl and the importance on the quarterback!

So no.... you never played football and have probably never played any team sport.

But you're an expert at it...

 

[All3Phases]

If you watched the documentary, he turned them from a losing franchise to a playoff-calibur team, including beating us, and then it all fell apart when the owner pulled the rug out from underneath him. That's something that gets lost in Cleveland. Again, people keep referring to his record because they think it helps while leaving out the context.

He went to the playoffs once in 5 years Ian, I know the story...The Browns werent exactly a dumpster fire before he got there though. Im also not singling out his Cleveland years, im simply including them.

You keep saying the drop-off without Brady is drastic. They missed the playoffs with Cam Newton in 2020. But they went to the postseason the next year after winning 10 games with a rookie quarterback and they each finished with the same record last year. Again, Brady won with a loaded Bucs team the first season - and I was absolutely happy for him - but the last two years, the results were essentially the same.

Ian, the drop off is drastic. He has 220+ wins, 9 SB appearances, 6 wins, countless divisions titles and AFCCG appearances in 18 years with Brady. In the 10 years without hes under .500, has 0 division titles, made the playoffs twice and has 1 win...Thats drastic. Theres no argument to be made that its not.

Regardless, you're working off the hypothetical that you think Bill would have been a mediocre coach without him. Yet you want to dismiss relevant hypotheticals. Either way, if you're also going to keep throwing in his Cleveland years while ignoring the context to pad this weak argument, this is a dead issue.

Ian, What part of my argument is a Hypothetical? Im not thinking anything, we have 170 games of data.

You want to say Belichick wouldn't have been as successful (duh) but don't want to admit Brady wouldn't have been either. It's absolutely ridiculous.

I dont know what wouldve happened in his career without Brady, never argued that...For some reason you dont want to acknowledge theres real life evidence that he currently is Mediocre without Brady...Thers no hypothetical in that.

As I told another poster, if you're not going to move an inch even though I can tell you agree with part of this, there's no further room for discussion.

Thats fine! If others dont want to have the discussion, I am not forcing anybody to! But like you said, You and I agree that the coaching was important and that together they were outstanding, that was never my argument

 

[Wozzy]

Thats fine! If others dont want to have the discussion, I am not forcing anybody to! But like you said, You and I agree that the coaching was important and that together they were outstanding, that was never my argument

Yeah, you don't want to have this discussion... you just sought me out three days after I walked away from your nonsense because you didn't want to talk about it anymore.

 

[All3Phases]

Pederson already showed us in Jacksonville in one season, perhaps you didn't see the sht show that was the Jags in 2021. Harbaugh has a ring and has run a winning program for 15 years. Coughlin won wherever he went, he won two rings beating your sacred cow and did it with a completely average/good QB... but you can't explain that... in fact you ignore it whenever it or a comparable example is provided... or worse, you tell us said player found the ability to be generational for five minutes then went back to being normal. Again... really scientific.

Stafford's went 12 years without winning a single playoff game. He was on the Rams for five minutes and won a ring.

Stafford's needed a great team a lot more than they needed him, they were in the Super Bowl the season before last. But you don't see the correlation... you just run your gums.

Its crazy that you have no idea what my argument is and you still respond.

Factual evidence?

80-90 is in the record books, is it not?

Your opinion is that all the average QB's who won a ring in history, two in Eli's case, found a magic tonic that elevated their level of play for a season making them "generational"... then afterwards, it wore off and they went back to being average. That's your factual take. LOL!!!

Wrong again. Not my take at all.

So no.... you never played football and have probably never played any team sport.

But you're an expert at it...

Not an expert at anything, never claimed to be. You can continue to belittle me though because you played Pop warner

 

[All3Phases]

Yeah, you don't want to have this discussion... you just sought me out three days after I walked away from your nonsense because you didn't want to talk about it anymore.

I am having the discussion, reread my post...If others (Like you) dont want to, feel free to not respond.

I also didnt seek you out, I was reading the thread from the start, since I jumped in around 25 pages, and responded to one of your arguments

 

[Ian]

I dont know what wouldve happened in his career without Brady, never argued that...For some reason you dont want to acknowledge theres real life evidence that he currently is Mediocre without Brady...Thers no hypothetical in that.

You won't admit that the last two years, it's not as dramatic as you're making it out to be. They each made the playoffs, and they each got bounced in 2021. Last year, they both finished with the exact same record.

Again, if your overall point is that Belichick is a mediocre coach, I don't know what to tell you, other than I guess I feel a little bit bad for you and that you should flip off the TV for a few more seasons until he's gone.

But you keep working off how you believe he would have been hypothetically without Brady, yet you won't acknowledge how Brady would have been without him, or how he might have fared over a 20-year span with another competent QB. I'd bring up the Matt Cassel argument - which you and I have already talked about - yet you feel like the 2008 season was a loss because they won fewer games than 2007. Another ridiculous take, so I'm trying to stick to the current argument.

Either way, you can't make one argument without the other. You can't ponder Belichick's career without Brady without pondering Brady's career without Bill. If you're not willing to do that, it's not a fair discussion.

 

[RobertWeathers]

He went to the playoffs once in 5 years Ian, I know the story...The Browns werent exactly a dumpster fire before he got there though. Im also not singling out his Cleveland years, im simply including them.

The Browns were 3-13 the year before he arrived and inherited an old roster and an owner looking to shoot his way out of town. That is the very definition of a dumpster fire. Without the benefit of a salary cap, zero budget for big-ticket free agents he improved their talent base and went to the playoffs 3 years later. Do you disagree?

Ian, the drop off is drastic. He has 220+ wins, 9 SB appearances, 6 wins, countless divisions titles and AFCCG appearances in 18 years with Brady. In the 10 years without hes under .500, has 0 division titles, made the playoffs twice and has 1 win...Thats drastic. Theres no argument to be made that its not.

Ian, What part of my argument is a Hypothetical? Im not thinking anything, we have 170 games of data.

Your determinations do not factor in context and the situations he inherited. With a good roster he went 11-5 without Tom in 2008. 11-5 in CLE in 1994 and 10-7 in 2021. It's not like the guy went 1-15 every year without Tom.

I dont know what wouldve happened in his career without Brady, never argued that...For some reason you dont want to acknowledge theres real life evidence that he currently is Mediocre without Brady...Thers no hypothetical in that.

Thats fine! If others dont want to have the discussion, I am not forcing anybody to! But like you said, You and I agree that the coaching was important and that together they were outstanding, that was never my argument

My issue is you view it as a negative BB he went through 3 rebuild iterations (1991, 2000, 2020). Once he implemented his program, he went 3 for 3 taking said franchises to the playoffs. That means something.

Sure, Tom won without BB. He left NE and went to a 7-9 TB team with a very good coach, great young talent and a ton of cap space. Credit to him for picking a great situation but let's be clear, that is not team-building...that is being an opportunist.

Sorry but even though you say BB is a great coach, basically everything you say runs counter to that statement.

 

[Steve102]

 

[All3Phases]

You won't admit that the last two years, it's not as dramatic as you're making it out to be. They each made the playoffs, and they each got bounced in 2021. Last year, they both finished with the exact same record.

I am comparing Belichick with TB to without TB. I am not sure why you keep distorting this?

Again, if your overall point is that Belichick is a mediocre coach, I don't know what to tell you, other than I guess I feel a little bit bad for you and that you should flip off the TV for a few more seasons until he's gone.

I havent called him a mediocre coach, again not my argument.

But you keep working off how you believe he would have been hypothetically without Brady, yet you won't acknowledge how Brady would have been without him, or how he might have fared over a 20-year span with another competent QB. I'd bring up the Matt Cassel argument - which you and I have already talked about - yet you feel like the 2008 season was a loss because they won fewer games than 2007. Another ridiculous take, so I'm trying to stick to the current argument.

Ian--Nothing hypothetical with anything im arguing...Just that the same exact coach has a 10 year sample without and an 18 year sample with...The results of the two are drastically different.

Either way, you can't make one argument without the other. You can't ponder Belichick's career without Brady without pondering Brady's career without Bill. If you're not willing to do that, it's not a fair discussion.

Im not pondering anything, I am glad BB coached Brady and helped bring tons of success

 

[Ian]

I am comparing Belichick with TB to without TB. I am not sure why you keep distorting this?

You're back in 1995 and want to keep harping on that while ignoring the rest. Again, nothing more to talk about.

 

[All3Phases]

The Browns were 3-13 the year before he arrived and inherited an old roster and an owner looking to shoot his way out of town. That is the very definition of a dumpster fire. Without the benefit of a salary cap, zero budget for big-ticket free agents he improved their talent base and went to the playoffs 3 years later. Do you disagree?

They werent good, but the Browns made the playoffs 5/6 years before he took over...As an organization, they werent a dumpster fire. The team was bad.

Your determinations do not factor in context and the situations he inherited. With a good roster he went 11-5 without Tom in 2008. 11-5 in CLE in 1994 and 10-7 in 2021. It's not like the guy went 1-15 every year without Tom.

I agree, hes had some pretty good years in there, they are all included in his 80-90 record without Brady.

My issue is you view it as a negative BB he went through 3 rebuild iterations (1991, 2000, 2020). Once he implemented his program, he went 3 for 3 taking said franchises to the playoffs. That means something.

Of course, hes a great coach...Never argued otherwise. Again, my argument must have been misconstrued or misworded somewhere along the lines. Just like I think Reid is a great coach, or Shanahan is a great coach, or McVay is a great coach, etc

Sure, Tom won without BB. He left NE and went to a 7-9 TB team with a very good coach, great young talent and a ton of cap space. Credit to him for picking a great situation but let's be clear, that is not team-building...that is being an opportunist.

Sorry but even though you say BB is a great coach, basically everything you say runs counter to that statement.

Again, my argument is that the quarterback elevates the coaching....Never said that BB was a poor coach, hes just had poor results without Brady. Its really an emphasis on how important I think the QB is

 

[All3Phases]

You're back in 1995 and want to keep harping on that while ignoring the rest. Again, nothing more to talk about.

I am not ignoring anything Ian, 80-90 includes Cleveland, NE pre Brady, NE without Brady while Brady was on the roster, and NE post Brady...I have included everything

 

[Steve102]

Mid thread poll. Would you rather:

• Have dental work without Novocain
• Have 300 more pages of Malcolm Butler
• Discuss Tom v Bill some more
• RLKAG, M2

 

[RobertWeathers]

They werent good, but the Browns made the playoffs 5/6 years before he took over...As an organization, they werent a dumpster fire. The team was bad.

We'll have to disagree on what a dumpster fire means. Going 3-13, a QB in decline, firing the coach mid-season and a cheap owner seems pretty dumpster fire to me.

I agree, hes had some pretty good years in there, they are all included in his 80-90 record without Brady.

It's a number which needs context.

Of course, hes a great coach...Never argued otherwise. Again, my argument must have been misconstrued or misworded somewhere along the lines. Just like I think Reid is a great coach, or Shanahan is a great coach, etc.

Again, my argument is that the quarterback elevates the coaching....

Agree

Never said that BB was a poor coach, hes just had poor results without Brady.

Hes also had exceptional results because hes an outstanding team builder and coach.

Its really an emphasis on how important I think the QB is

Thats fine. My issue is your position lacks balance in assigning equal importance to the teambuilder/coach

 

[Ian]

I havent called him a mediocre coach, again not my argument.

Then tell us. What is your argument? Because all you can continue to harp on is his record in Cleveland. That means, you believe he would have been a terrible coach without Brady - ie: he would have been a terrible coach for 20-years without Brady. Meanwhile, Brady would have still been Brady without him.

The last three years since the divorce:

Tampa Bay: 13-4
New England: 7-9

Tampa Bay: 11-5
New England: 10-7

Tampa Bay: 8-9
New England: 8-9

Literally a one-game difference the last two years.

And again, you and I have already argued the fact he won 11 games with Cassel in 2008 - which you dismissed. He won 10 games and went to the postseason with Mac, and won 11 games and won a playoff game with Testeverde.

Yet you'll say "But Cleveland!"

Terrible - and ridiculous - argument.

Belichick without Brady. "But Cleveland!"

Brady without Belichick: [crickets].

 

[sb1]

I am not ignoring anything Ian, 80-90 includes Cleveland, NE pre Brady, NE without Brady while Brady was on the roster, and NE post Brady...I have included everything

His Browns days are undoubtedly part of his track record but I don't think it's a stretch at all to say he's a much better HC now than he was then. I also don't think his problems there were all that related to coaching ability... there were other issues in play that led to his firing. For one thing BB today has a much better understanding of the need to build good relationships in the organization and with his players.

 

[All3Phases]

We'll have to disagree on what a dumpster fire means. Going 3-13, a QB in decline, firing the coach mid-season and a cheap owner seems pretty dumpster fire to me.

That certainly doesnt help, but lets put it this way...Marty took over the 84 Browns as they were 1-7, finished the season 4-4 and then made the playoffs 4 years straight. It was not an impossible feat for a good coach.

It's a number which needs context.

Sure, youd agree though that a some point, a sample as large as that tells a story though?

Agree

Hes also had exceptional results because hes an outstanding team builder and coach.

With Brady on the roster 100%, hes still a great coach and team builder....Again, the success doesnt show it though

Thats fine. My issue is your position lacks balance in assigning equal importance to the teambuilder/coach

I dont think they deserve equal importance, thats probably why. Thats also not me saying, one deserves all the credit and one deserves none as well.

 

[Ian]

His Browns days are undoubtedly part of his track record but I don't think it's a stretch at all to say he's a much better HC now than he was then. I also don't think his problems there were all that related to coaching ability... there were other issues in play that led to his firing. For one thing BB today has a much better understanding of the need to build good relationships in the organization and with his players.

Doesn't matter. He's stuck in 1995 and won't let it go.

 

[Ian]

With Brady on the roster 100%, hes still a great coach and team builder....Again, the success doesnt show it though

This is getting weaker and weaker by the minute.

 

[Wozzy]

Its crazy that you have no idea what my argument is and you still respond.

80-90 is in the record books, is it not?

Wrong again. Not my take at all.

Not an expert at anything, never claimed to be. You can continue to belittle me though because you played Pop warner

Your opinion only changes when someone calls you out on your hypocrisy by pointing out the thousand examples that prove it wrong. Then and only then do you waver and tell us Tom doesn’t deserve all the credit for success.

Belichick’s win/loss is in the record books alright. There’s zero delineation between when Brady was there and when he wasn’t.

BB drafted Brady. He didn’t just appear out of thin air and he was nowhere near a complete player when he arrived. He was developed by great coaches.

Only BB-haters feel the need to tell us Bill’s record without Tom, as if it matters. That’s you… now tell us again how you aren’t.

Your opinion is insulting to everybody who didn’t play QB, it’s insulting to anyone who played any team sport. It’s clueless nonsense… and Tom Brady would be the first to tell you that.