How Belichick lost his place in posterity

[Ian]

Sure, Bill turned around the franchise. Kinda like how Josh turned around the Broncos franchise... The other myth is the rug pulled out myth. It's okay to admit Bill sucked in Cleveland.

That was a little different. Josh put his faith in Tebow, and then had a lot of other disfunction he created that led to his getting fired. Bill’s was out of his control.

Bill upset the Kosar fanatics by moving on to Testeverde who went on to win a playoff game there, and it’s not like he was a one-year wonder. He then went on to have success again under Parcells and other coaches. Again, another reminder that having a good QB helps.

But he also had an all star group of coaches and he did a great job flipping that roster. That’s not a myth. Again, if you watched the documentary, they were absolutely headed in the right direction.

 

[Ian]

I'd say 2013. First you had Hernandez leaving the team to the WR's being 2006 and later 2019 esque.

Dobson showed some promise and Thompkins had moments like the Saints game, but they wern't enough to compete with Denver.

At least in 2013 they also had Gronk, but wasn’t that the year he suffered the knee injury against Cleveland? I get those years mixed up…that period is sort of a blur, although I think that was the year they also brought in Amendola and Edelman had his breakout season.

 

[TheRainMaker]

At least in 2013 they also had Gronk, but wasn’t that the year he suffered the knee injury against Cleveland? I get those years mixed up…that period is sort of a blur, although I think that was the year they also brought in Amendola and Edelman had his breakout season.

Yep, he was out for the 2013 AFCCG against Denver. They had no shot without him. Then it it got worse was when Talib tapped out for the 2nd straight time getting knock out by our old friend Welker.

 

[sb1]

Sure, Bill turned around the franchise. Kinda like how Josh turned around the Broncos franchise... The other myth is the rug pulled out myth. It's okay to admit Bill sucked in Cleveland.

I’d say both have merit- it’s true that his franchise got the rug pulled out by the owner and that has no upside for any team…and Bill imo was not ready to be an NFL coach at the time. Kinda like how Pete wasn’t ready here either.

 

[Ian]

Yep, he was out for the 2013 AFCCG against Denver. They had no shot without him. Then it it got worse was when Talib tapped out for the 2nd straight time getting knock out by our old friend Welker.

Ah, that’s right. Forgot about that. Brutal.

 

[Tunescribe]

Now that their careers are over, and we have enough games and data of them playing without the other, it's ok to do an objective assessment.

Bill Belichick's record without Tom Brady: How legendary Patriots coach has fared before, after divorce with QB | Sporting News United Kingdom

Bill Belichick is one of the greatest coaches in NFL history, but his record without Tom Brady isn't too pretty.

www.sportingnews.com

Tom Brady	Wins	Losses	Winning %	Super Bowl titles
With Bill Belichick	249	75	.769	6
Without Bill Belichick	37	20	.649	1

While Brady did win a Superbowl in Tampa Bay, his winning percentage did drop from 76.9% to 64.9% demonstrating that Belichick did have an impact on Brady's game and ability and helped Brady go up very good, to stratospheric, and best all time.

And we have the data the other way around as well as BB also seems to have benefitted from Brady

Bill Belichick	Wins	Losses	Winning %	Super Bowl titles (as HC)
With Tom Brady	249	75	.769	6
Without Tom Brady	84	103	.449	0

Without Brady, Belichick likely cannot hold on to a HC job for more than 3-4 years with a garbage 44.9% win percentage, which is exactly what happened to him both at the Browns, or at the Patriots after Brady left, and he was fired both times. So Brady seems to have elevated Belichick from below average, or mediocre at best, to in the discussion for best all time.

But it seems people have elevated Brady's contribution to the run far above Belichick's. e.g. when people mention Paul Brown and Otto Graham (10 titles), they seem to revere Brown more. And when they mention Lombardi and Starr, it's no doubt the credit is heavily favoured towards Lombardi (likely due to run heavy era). But Belichick and Brady debate has only gone one way recently. With press, media, fans, and overall history seems to firmly be in the camp that Belichick rode Brady's coattails to success. How did this happen so quickly? He seems to have helped Brady on the margins as well.

I see the IBWT clowns just won't let go of the fact that BB is a well below .500 coach without Tom Brady...for comparison sake, look at Shula's record without Marino, Parcells without Simms, Jimmy Johnsons record without Aikman, Andy Reids record without Kermit...all above .500, whilst Belichick is in Jeff Fisher territory

At first I thought the wheels and track were wrong. Then I realized this moronic argument just goes around in circles and gets nowhere.

 

[Vindicate]

Now that their careers are over, and we have enough games and data of them playing without the other, it's ok to do an objective assessment.

Bill Belichick's record without Tom Brady: How legendary Patriots coach has fared before, after divorce with QB | Sporting News United Kingdom

Bill Belichick is one of the greatest coaches in NFL history, but his record without Tom Brady isn't too pretty.

www.sportingnews.com

Tom Brady	Wins	Losses	Winning %	Super Bowl titles
With Bill Belichick	249	75	.769	6
Without Bill Belichick	37	20	.649	1

While Brady did win a Superbowl in Tampa Bay, his winning percentage did drop from 76.9% to 64.9% demonstrating that Belichick did have an impact on Brady's game and ability and helped Brady go up very good, to stratospheric, and best all time.

And we have the data the other way around as well as BB also seems to have benefitted from Brady

Bill Belichick	Wins	Losses	Winning %	Super Bowl titles (as HC)
With Tom Brady	249	75	.769	6
Without Tom Brady	84	103	.449	0

Without Brady, Belichick likely cannot hold on to a HC job for more than 3-4 years with a garbage 44.9% win percentage, which is exactly what happened to him both at the Browns, or at the Patriots after Brady left, and he was fired both times. So Brady seems to have elevated Belichick from below average, or mediocre at best, to in the discussion for best all time.

But it seems people have elevated Brady's contribution to the run far above Belichick's. e.g. when people mention Paul Brown and Otto Graham (10 titles), they seem to revere Brown more. And when they mention Lombardi and Starr, it's no doubt the credit is heavily favoured towards Lombardi (likely due to run heavy era). But Belichick and Brady debate has only gone one way recently. With press, media, fans, and overall history seems to firmly be in the camp that Belichick rode Brady's coattails to success. How did this happen so quickly? He seems to have helped Brady on the margins as well.

Funny how former Patriots don't think this at all. Ya know. The people who played with him.

 

[Family]

The documentary was unfair to Bill, but one moment clearly stood out that showed Bill's greatness.

He went with Brady over Bledsoe. How many coaches would have done that with the owner in his face considering the position Bill was in at the time? It was an unbelievable move by the greatest football coach of all time.

 

[TheRainMaker]

The documentary was unfair to Bill, but one moment clearly stood out that showed Bill's greatness.

He went with Brady over Bledsoe. How many coaches would have done that with the owner in his face considering the position Bill was in at the time? It was an unbelievable move by the greatest football coach of all time.

Probably none. It was a ballsy move putting his career on the line. He believed in Brady that much.

Drew was my favorite QB and had many great moments in NE, but the current personnel and scheme didn't fit Drew's style of play anymore. He needed a solid ground game to kill teams off play action. He needed good protection up front as he was downfield thrower. Needed guys like Glenn and Jefferson running past coverage. He didn't have a field enforcer in Coates when Bill took over. He looked very uncomfortable under center as much as he was in 2000 because Damien Woody was even worse snapping the football in shotgun than his rookie season which led to the Mike Compton signing in 2001. Drew was never going to succeed as a Patriot after Glenn was sent home.

And I still think Kraft would've canned Bill either way had the Pats crashed and burned in 2001 so he doesn't look bad.

 

[TinhWoodhead]

BB drafted and developed Brady.

Dumb.

if he really really like Brady, he’d have drafted him earlier

 

[TheRainMaker]

if he really really like Brady, he’d have drafted him earlier

You can't really argue that because he did draft Jordan Richards in the 2nd round. However, how early would you take him given you have Drew Bledsoe at QB? I'd say no earlier than the 4th round.

 

[Tunescribe]

if he really really like Brady, he’d have drafted him earlier

Not if they knew he would still be available where they took him.

 

[ahmed]

Jfc

Again?

Wtf

Hahaha - this is hilarious!!! Replies are always the best part of threads like this.

 

[ahmed]

Brady has a lower % yes but he also did it at 42-44. It is crazy impressive when you add that context.

 

[ahmed]

Why do so much over analyzing

Here's my analysis

View attachment 57332

Does that mean McDaniels is a 3 time SB HC? LOL. Bill's rings as an assistant as the only ones I ever saw counted for some reason.

I am not being critical of Bill here but saying he won 8 is ridiculous when we all now non HC rings don't count with HC rings.

 

[DarrylS]

Does anyone remember the brouhaha when Bledsoe got healthy and BB continued with Brady?? Drew, many fans and most media were up in arms that BB would have broken his alleged promise.
BB stayed the course, if he did not do that then #12 may have only been a footnote in NFL history..

 

[Ian]

if he really really like Brady, he’d have drafted him earlier

That’s a tough way to look at it. It’s yet another example of getting criticized for being patient vs getting killed again for reaching. If they had taken Brady in the second or third round, they would’ve gotten laughed at. Especially coming off of his footage from the scouting, combine, etc.

Him getting taken late was probably the best thing because Bledsoe didn’t view him as a threat and he ended up resting on his laurels as he always tended to. If they had won nine or 10 games the previous season, I’d be willing to bet Belichick also doesn’t get the approval to go with Brady when he did, but that record works against him the way people view it in this argument.

It’s just weird that we keep coming back to this. But killing a guy after he made one of the most significant decisions in franchise history and then taking away credit because it worked out so well is just so strange.

 

[sb1]

Does that mean McDaniels is a 3 time SB HC? LOL. Bill's rings as an assistant as the only ones I ever saw counted for some reason.

I am not being critical of Bill here but saying he won 8 is ridiculous when we all now non HC rings don't count with HC rings.

Matt Patricia also has more Super Bowl rings than Bill Parcells. Obviously that means Patricia and Josh were better. Lol

 

[Hugepatsfan]

It'd be pretty naïve to ignore the disparity in records with/without Brady entirely. It'd also be pretty naïve to treat the "with Brady" games as one homogenous population. Their time together lasted 20 years and Brady went from late round pick afterthought who fit in with the team rather than stood out to the GOAT that the entire team looked to and rallied around in that time. They won Super Bowls (s as in plural) at both of those extremes and competed for them pretty much every year in between. Within that 20 years of "with Brady" record, BB deserves a lot more credit than he'll ever get with such a simplistic breakdown for those early years.

 

[signbabybrady]

Does that mean McDaniels is a 3 time SB HC? LOL. Bill's rings as an assistant as the only ones I ever saw counted for some reason.

I am not being critical of Bill here but saying he won 8 is ridiculous when we all now non HC rings don't count with HC rings.

I didn't qualify as a head coach. Any other coaches have 8 even as an assistant?