Belichick criticism mega-thread

[Tony2046]

Why on Earth should that be anything automatic? One can make solid arguments in favor of several HCs as the best ever. And, before you point to the rings as something definitive, remember that Brady got Arians a ring in year one, at age 43.

Ok. Fine. Arians is the second best coach of all time.

 

[Tony2046]

Why on Earth should that be anything automatic? One can make solid arguments in favor of several HCs as the best ever. And, before you point to the rings as something definitive, remember that Brady got Arians a ring in year one, at age 43.

Seriously though, why is Joe Gibbs not in the conversation? I honestly don't know.

Three rings with three different "scrub" QBs? That seems to be, on the surface, pretty remarkable.

By the way, Brady's accomplishments forced me to ask that question.

Is it possible that Gibbs is the greatest?

 

[Joker]

Gibbs came back years later and couldn't coach a runny nose. Up until then, he WAS considered if not the top, top two or three at least. After his 2nd go round the media began spinning the dominant RB/O line narrative. Gibb's team during that first run was obnoxious though...lined up and beat the shyts out of you

 

[RobertWeathers]

Is it possible that Gibbs is the greatest?

Gibbs is in my Top 5 with Bill, Lombardi, Noll and Landry. Vastly underrated.

4 appearances and 3 SBs with 3 different QBs during the 49ers, Giants, Cowboys, Eagles, Bears NFC-kick ass era is amazing.

Then he came back and made the playoffs a couple of times with a Snyder-owned Skins team- unheard of.

His critics will point to 2 of his SB wins were during shortened/scab strike seasons.

 

[1960Pats]

Gibbs came back years later and couldn't coach a runny nose. Up until then, he WAS considered if not the top, top two or three at least. After his 2nd go round the media began spinning the dominant RB/O line narrative. Gibb's team during that first run was obnoxious though...lined up and beat the shyts out of you

One of Gibbs' best moves was bringing back Riggins (John, not Tim from Friday Night Lights)
I miss those smash mouth days.

 

[1960Pats]

After reading parts of this thread here and there....(I never read all the posts....who the hell has the time for that, LOL)...

1.) I think Belichick is the greatest NFL coach...and probably the greatest coach in North American sports. I believe that if we sent Belichick off to say...Jacksonville....he would have the Lawrence Jaguars 8-8 by December...and likely 11-5 next year.

2.) What Brady is doing...I have said this like 100 times this season....IS UNPRECEDENTED ....there has never been a QB who played in 10 SB's, won 7 SB's, been to the conference title game 14 times, and etc...etc... I mean people are now name dropping "Otto Graham" into Brady arguments nowadays!!! And Otto Freaking Graham played without a facemask until he got hit.....that is HOW FAR BACK anyone needs to dig to find someone "better" than Brady. If he wins one more SB...he will have as many as Bradshaw and Montana combined....

3.) Yes, Belichick would be the first to tell you that PLAYERS are the ones who do it and that he does nothing on Sundays. So...yeah Brady > Belichick for the share of the collective success of the Patriots. BUT the formula for me really is: Brady + Players > Belichick. And Belichick brought in all of those players...to pretend otherwise would be ignorant and offensive to anyone who played for the Patriots the last 20 years. We have had a lot of HOF worthy players like:

Rob Gronkowski (IMO, the greatest TE to ever play)
Richard Seymour (Kicked ass all day along! And remember the burst he gave us in 2005 when he returned?)
Adam Vinatieri (That 46 yarder in blizzard conditions...best single FG in league history)
Randy Moss (Nuff' said)
Ty Law (One of the best CB's I have seen play....maybe top 15)
Vince Wilfork (Probably won't make it to the HOF, but he was great)
Wes Welker (Greatest slot receiver I have ever seen)
Logan Mankins (Held out 10 games...and BB just plugs him right back in...also played on a torn ACL)
Rodney Harrison (One of the greatest safeties to ever play the game)
Matt Slater (He has a shot at the HOF, IMO)
Then more like Edelman, DMac, McGinest, Mayo, Troy Brown etc...etc....

*Yea, I know Vinatieri, Law, McGinest, and Brown were Parcells guys....

The cupboard wasn't bare during the Brady era...maybe slightly so the offensive skill positions...but we had a lot of good-not-great receivers like Amendola, Hogan, Givens, Patten, Mitchell, etc...etc....

4.) At the end of the day...I do not want anyone other than Belichick coaching us....same goes for him being our GM. Sure he will have as many misses as hits, but the man is operating from a standpoint of making economically justified educational decisions.

1) Belichick is indeed a great HC and if Lawrence is the real deal Bill would definitely help the Jags improve.
2) What Brady has done has been unprecedented, but it was when Belichick decided to move on from him. Bill should have seen how special Brady was then and kept him here.
3) The funny thing about the list of players you provided is that most of them from the top group, Gronk the GOAT TE, Big Sey, Adam, Big Vince, Wes and Logan, were also let go, just as Brady was.
4) I agree that Bill is the GOAT HC but he's not the GOAT GM, and his biggest blunder and the reason for my frustration with him is that he let the GOAT QB leave and had no other option in place. I still don't understand why.

 

[Ring 6]

1) Belichick is indeed a great HC and if Lawrence is the real deal Bill would definitely help the Jags improve.
2) What Brady has done has been unprecedented, but it was when Belichick decided to move on from him. Bill should have seen how special Brady was then and kept him here.
3) The funny thing about the list of players you provided is that most of them from the top group, Gronk the GOAT TE, Big Sey, Adam, Big Vince, Wes and Logan, were also let go, just as Brady was.
4) I agree that Bill is the GOAT HC but he's not the GOAT GM, and his biggest blunder and the reason for my frustration with him is that he let the GOAT QB leave and had no other option in place. I still don't understand why.

Why was letting Brady go a blunder?
Do you see any way the patriots could have won a SB last year by bringing Brady back and then not being able to add any players to the team they ended 2019 with while losing a handful of good ones?
This year they have almost 70 million to rebuild a team with. Do you “start over” with a 44 year old QB?

It’s very possible that the best move for Brady was to leave and the best move for belichick was to let him.

 

[Ring 6]

Gibbs is in my Top 5 with Bill, Lombardi, Noll and Landry. Vastly underrated.

4 appearances and 3 SBs with 3 different QBs during the 49ers, Giants, Cowboys, Eagles, Bears NFC-kick ass era is amazing.

Then he came back and made the playoffs a couple of times with a Snyder-owned Skins team- unheard of.

His critics will point to 2 of his SB wins were during shortened/scab strike seasons.

Walsh or Gibbs? Both had short careers, both had 3 rings.
Gibbs system tended to deemphasize the importance of qb while Walsh’s was the impetus for the qb-centric trend.
Im not sure winning with 3 different qbs qualifies as better coaching than developing one and sticking with him.
I find it hard to argue Walsh could develop Montana into SGOAT but couldn’t have won with other QBs.

 

[1960Pats]

Why was letting Brady go a blunder?
Do you see any way the patriots could have won a SB last year by bringing Brady back and then not being able to add any players to the team they ended 2019 with while losing a handful of good ones?
This year they have almost 70 million to rebuild a team with. Do you “start over” with a 44 year old QB?

It’s very possible that the best move for Brady was to leave and the best move for belichick was to let him.

*The answer to the question of why was letting Brady go a blunder is as obvious as the nose on Barbara Streisand's face.
*We'll never know how the Pats would have done last year with Brady. Even you don't know that. What we DO know is that they were 7-9 without a QB. Call me crazy, but I'm going to take a shot in the dark and say they would have been better with the GOAT.
*If they have 70 million this year how much would they have if Brady was still here? Whatever it is it would have been worth keeping Brady.
*Letting the GOAT QB go was not, and never will be, the best move for Belichick, this team or it's fans. That's also painfully obvious.

 

[Ring 6]

*The answer to the question of why was letting Brady go a blunder is as obvious as the nose on Barbara Streisand's face.
*We'll never know how the Pats would have done last year with Brady. Even you don't know that. What we DO know is that they were 7-9 without a QB. Call me crazy, but I'm going to take a shot in the dark and say they would have been better with the GOAT.
*If they have 70 million this year how much would they have if Brady was still here? Whatever it is it would have been worth keeping Brady.
*Letting the GOAT QB go was not, and never will be, the best move for Belichick, this team or it's fans. That's also painfully obvious.

Well emotionally maybe but im talking about the success of the franchise.
Keeping him to go 10-6 and then keep throwing him out there at 44+ to watch him diminish and forestall the reboot isn’t success to me.

 

[Calhoun44]

*Letting the GOAT QB go was not, and never will be, the best move for Belichick, this team or it's fans. That's also painfully obvious.

We will never know (you even said so earlier), but maybe letting Brady go opens the door for a younger QB that wouldn't have been available to us. And maybe the young QB gives us fans a new way to enjoy the Patriots succeed indifferent ways. Tom Brady (although he seems it) is not immortal, he will not p0lay forever. I missed him playing for the Pats last year, but we enjoyed the Pats before Brady, we should be able to enjoy them after him. Let's see if BB can right the ship and re-create a new winning way. FA is right around the corner.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Walsh or Gibbs? Both had short careers, both had 3 rings.
Gibbs system tended to deemphasize the importance of qb while Walsh’s was the impetus for the qb-centric trend.
Im not sure winning with 3 different qbs qualifies as better coaching than developing one and sticking with him.
I find it hard to argue Walsh could develop Montana into SGOAT but couldn’t have won with other QBs.

I think it's easier to build a winner with a HoF QB so Gibbs gets my nod for degree of difficulty.

 

[Ring 6]

I think it's easier to build a winner with a HoF QB so Gibbs gets my nod for degree of difficulty.

But Walsh built a HoF QB.

 

[venecol]

If Belichick wins a SB with any of the available QBs, he would be w/o question the GOAT coach. Even if he doesn't, he's certainly top 5 of all time. He needs to pass Halas/Shula in most wins to be the undisputed, imo. That could be a challenge with him being almost 70.

 

[Ring 6]

If Belichick wins a SB with any of the available QBs, he would be w/o question the GOAT coach. Even if he doesn't, he's certainly top 5 of all time. He needs to pass Halas/Shula in most wins to be the undisputed, imo. That could be a challenge with him being almost 70.

Meh, championships is more important than how long you hung around.

 

[RobertWeathers]

But Walsh built a HoF QB.

I agree, he did.

 

[Ring 6]

I agree, he did.

Isn’t that better coaching than getting one good year out of a few different guys?
I would bet a ton of money that if you took any given QB and gave him to Walsh, he would turn out better than if you gave gim
to Gibbs.
The illogic of damning a coach for developing a qb and pretending it takes better coaching to run through a bunch of different ones is mind boggling

 

[Patsgofor4]

BB is the only coach on the list who had to contend with true UFA. There is no way....zero percent chance....that Landry, Noll, Shula and Walsh would have had the same career/sustained success with the type of roster (and coaching staff) turnover that Belichick has had to contend with over the past 20 years.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Isn’t that better coaching than getting one good year out of a few different guys?
I would bet a ton of money that if you took any given QB and gave him to Walsh, he would turn out better than if you gave gim
to Gibbs.
The illogic of damning a coach for developing a qb and pretending it takes better coaching to run through a bunch of different ones is mind boggling

Who's damning Walsh? Christ all I did was leave him out of my Top 5.

Gibbs never had a HoF QB and Walsh did so it's impossible to come up with that conclusion. Feel free to speculate.

What we do know is in his 10 years with SF Walsh's offense finished on average 6th with a HoF QB.

From 1981-1992 Joe Gibb's offense finished on average 8th w/o a HoF QB.

 

[amfootball]

Isn’t that better coaching than getting one good year out of a few different guys?
I would bet a ton of money that if you took any given QB and gave him to Walsh, he would turn out better than if you gave gim
to Gibbs.
The illogic of damning a coach for developing a qb and pretending it takes better coaching to run through a bunch of different ones is mind boggling

Walsh had a very specific offense and he specifically targeted Montana to run it. I am not sure how his system would have worked with a less efficient, less patient QB. For example, I doubt Marino has the patience to run the ball as much as Montana did and hit all those shallow crossers and slants.