Belichick #2 ?

[mikey]

http://www.realfootball365.com/nfl/articles/2006/07/nfl-head-coaches180706.html


.

 

[Mike the Brit]

Wow! Guys get PAID for writing this stuff?

(I knew a magazine journalist once who told me that there were two infallible things to do if you were really stuck for something to write -- publish a questionnaire or a list. Readers would quarrel with you but that was OK: it kept them happy!)

 

[Patsfanin Philly]

<<<< it'd be hard to imagine Dungy not winning one soon, especially with a
vastly talented Colts roster. (Regular season record: 102-58; playoffs: 5-8).>>>>
No, not really and I think with Edge and others gone, it a vastly less talented team than even last year..

<<<10.) John Fox (Carolina Panthers ) - The only reason Fox is so low on this list stems from his youth as a head coach. As more time passes for the 51-year-old and more accomplishments roll in, he'll join the elite in the top five. Fox's Panthers are thought of by many as the favorites to win a title this year, and that's thanks in no small part to the cool and collected coach. (Regular season record: 36-28; playoffs: 5-2).>>>>

Huh?? He ought to be higher as he has as many playoff wins as Dungy (and six less losses) with much less talent.

I keep thinking of Bobby Knight's famous putdown of reporters, " we all learn to write in first grade. Most of us move on to other things."

 

[desi-patsfan]

I would have no problem with BB ranked number 2 if the reasons had any sense at all. But from top to bottom this writer is terrible.

 

[Tunescribe]

I would have no problem with BB ranked number 2 if the reasons had any sense at all. But from top to bottom this writer is terrible.

Well, Gibbs is already in the Hall of Fame so I can give 'em a pass on that one. He's the only coach on the list you can make any kind of argument for being ahead of BB. Otherwise, I have no huge problem with the writer's list. There are other considerations that come into it other than won-loss record, though that of course is the bottom line.

 

[I'm Ron Borges?]

Well, Gibbs is already in the Hall of Fame so I can give 'em a pass on that one. He's the only coach on the list you can make any kind of argument for being ahead of BB. Otherwise, I have no huge problem with the writer's list. There are other considerations that come into it other than won-loss record, though that of course is the bottom line.

I agree with everything you said. In a list of coaches, I'm fine if someone ranks Gibbs #1 and Belichick #2. That's just someone's opinion and you can argue that both coaches should be on top. You can't argue with either one of these guys at #1 because they are two of the best coaches in NFL history in my opinion.

 

[pats1]

I love how writers and fans conviently bounce around with the Brady/Belichick issue.

When they want to knock Belichick down a notch, they use the Cleveland example, and how it was Brady who brought the success.

When they want to knock Brady down a notch, they say it was the team, and Belichick who brought the success.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

I agree with everything you said. In a list of coaches, I'm fine if someone ranks Gibbs #1 and Belichick #2. That's just someone's opinion and you can argue that both coaches should be on top. You can't argue with either one of these guys at #1 because they are two of the best coaches in NFL history in my opinion.

Yeah. If you restate the question as "Where does BB rank among his HOF peers?," then you can have a reasonable, if premature, debate as to whether he belongs ahead of or behind Joe Gibbs at this time (with the emphasis on "at this time" and "premature"). I don't care to waste time on the discussion since the jury is still out. The author's contention that Gibbs is better because he worked with multiple QB's is silly since Gibbs also coached pre cap and parity.

If the question is who has done a better job in the NFL over the past five years, then, hands down, the answer is Belichick (and I'm sure Gibbs would agree).

So, a silly and badly framed question and a more or less meaningless debate. BUT, just imagine how Parcells feels to be ranked number five? Couldn't happen to a nicer guy.

Now, let's get Training Camp started so we can have some real discussions and arguments out here!

 

[Brady-To-Branch]

I see no problem with these rankings. I think they are very reasonable.

1.) Joe Gibbs (Washington Redskins ) - Gibbs won a pair of Super Bowls in the 1980s and another in the 1991 season. He famously did so with three veteran quarterbacks who were never premier players - Joe Theismann, Doug Williams and Mark Rypien. Gibbs, who returned in 2004 from a 13-year hiatus, led the 'Skins back to relevance last season, going 10-6 and earning a playoff bid. With more talent now on the roster, look for Gibbs to contend for a fourth championship. It's certainly fitting that Gibbs will rely on 35-year-old QB Mark Brunell in 2006, since the signalcaller has been dismissed by many lately, much like Williams and Rypien years ago. (Regular season record: 140-76; playoffs: 17-6).

2.) Bill Belichick (New England Patriots ) - To many, Belichick is the game's greatest head coach. It's difficult to argue that point, as the 54-year-old has won three Super Bowls over the last five seasons in an era of pro football known mostly for its parity. At the same time, though, it's easy to point out that Belichick was a sub-.500 coach before quarterback Tom Brady entered the Patriots' fray early in the 2001 season. Still, the legendary defensive coordinator for the Giants will be a Hall of Famer, and he deserves it. (Regular season record: 99-77; playoffs: 11-2).

As HCs, both Gibbs and BB have won 3 SBCs, However, Gibbs has HC'd in one more SB than BB. I think the gist of these rankings need clarfying. Based on the comments of each coach, the writer is ranks the HCs by career rather than the last 5 years. I have no qualms with Gibbs over BB. Gibbs has won just as many SBCs and has more SB appearances than BB. Moreover, a 17-6 postseason record is nothing to laugh at. Since the rankings are career based, BB's Cleveland record breaks the tie in Gibbs' favor.

Another thing I like about these rankings is that it ranks Nick Saban #21st...

21.) Nick Saban (Miami Dolphins ) - Saban's only been a head coach at the pro level for one year, but he showed some great signs last season. After stumbling out to a 3-7 record in 2005, the former Michigan State and LSU head man rallied a mediocre Dolphins roster to six straight victories. Many are calling Saban a Super Bowl-caliber head coach, but judgment should be reserved until he can consistently win in South Florida. (Regular season record: 9-7; playoffs: N/A).

This is the most clear-headed opinion I've ever read about Saban. While the rest of the national media is in love with this guy. RF365 is saying Saban did a nice job getting a 9-7 season from a team that went 4-12 the previous year. However, no higher ranking for him unless he can show more.

I'm not big on opinionated rankings and subjective letter grades, but this article contains the most objective analysis I've seen in any rankings from ESPN/Sportsline/FOX Sports/Yahoo/etc.

So BB's not #1? Big deal. If RF365 holds true to their formula, if BB wins another SBC in '06, BB will sit atop their rankings a year from now.

 

[godef]

Well, Gibbs is already in the Hall of Fame so I can give 'em a pass on that one. He's the only coach on the list you can make any kind of argument for being ahead of BB. Otherwise, I have no huge problem with the writer's list. There are other considerations that come into it other than won-loss record, though that of course is the bottom line.

That's like saying the Cowboys are the best team in pro football because they have won the most Super Bowls (OK, tied with the Steelers now). However, the article asks "who the best head coaches in the league are" which implies they're talking about right now, which means you should only be going back to very recent history to make this judgment, not 10 or 20 years ago. And despite the Skins winning a Wild Card game last year, I feel Gibbs still has much to prove to the modern NFL as to how good a coach he is. And for the same reasons, the writer shouldn't be harking on Belichick's record from more than 10 years ago.

 

[satz]

the thing going for gibbs is winning with 3 different qb`s which is hard to do for any coach.I also have a feeling that he will be the only 1 for a while as BB is in mid 50s and even if he finds another qb 2 more will be near to impossible.

NFL films did a top 10 coaches ever and Bill was #2 behind lombardi ...i am sure now someone is going to argu.btw , last night top 5 qb scale tom was rated 1 and peyton 2 .It was cool.

 

[AzPatsFan]

I agree witjh Bill Belichick. The best pro coach in history was Paul Brown, hands down. Brown created a team and a league and then dominated both the AAFC and NFL before doing it all over again with his own creation, the Cinncinatti Bengals. Vince Lombardi and Bill are good candidates for #2, and Gibbs and Shula certainly have to be considered in the top five.

Lombardi went to a club with a decade of first rounds picks, sorted through them and drove them to champions. He never did it twice, and I consider that a necessity and proof it was not a lucky fluke. Shula did it twice, Brown did it twice, and Bellichick participated in three rebuilding winning situations, with the Giants, Patriots, and Patriots and just missed withthe 98 Jets. And He righted the Browns but left amidst the chaos of the Brown move.