ALP
Pro Bowl Player
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2007
- Messages
- 10,453
- Reaction score
- 3,175
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.Even if you do know economics you don't know how little the Pats were offering Brady. I think we can all agree that they weren't offering Brady more than one year though. We just don't know the figure.I've been saying the same thing for two years , don't count on many agreeing with you, most don't understand the economics.
BB also ran the talent pool at WR and TE dry.Brady was practically begging for any sort of commitment from the Patriots and Belichick wasn't willing to give it to him. 'Stats are for losers' Bill forced Brady into an embarrassing one-year incentive laden contract prior to the 2018 season. This after Belichick had completely ****ed Brady in Super Bowl 52. Then after Brady led his 6th game-winning Super Bowl drive, Belichick still had the balls to offer Brady another incentive laden contract and Brady told him to FO!
You cited a a short blurb/opinion without any substance. Of course you need competent coaches and coaching matters, but the degree to which it matters is vastly overblown. My point was there are no metrics, and I pointed out that oddsmakers see coaching as virtually irrelevant. Nothing you've posted here has poked any holes in that.
The Broncos just gave up a first and a second for a coach...but yeah, coaching doesn't matter.Didn't we have a similar argument a while back re. UFOs? Again, where your argument fails is over reliance on quantification.
What you're saying is the degree to which coaching matters in winning football games is "vastly overblown" and "virtually irrelevant" for lack of defining metrics. Yet, there are countless examples throughout NFL history where coaching was the ONLY difference in supremely talented teams failing or teams with average talent succeeding. Sometimes, circumstantial evidence is overwhelming enough to represent proof beyond reasonable doubt; the examples I provided were illustrative. On balance, player talent might be the prime factor in winning but coaching is a very close second and often the essential difference. No way can its importance be considered vastly overblown.
The Broncos just gave up a first and a second for a coach...but yeah, coaching doesn't matter.
Nobody is saying coaching doesn't matter though.The Broncos just gave up a first and a second for a coach...but yeah, coaching doesn't matter.
How many TDs did the coaches throw in 36? How many INTs or sacks did the coaches have in 36?No way could New England beat the Rams in Super Bowl 36. Chicago defeating the Redskins 73-0 was impossible. On and on and on ...
The argument that I hear about Russell that makes no sense is that he played against less teams. That actually makes his career more meaningful because the talent level was more concentrated.There are several Russell Celtic games on youtube and just by watching them it's painfully obvious he would do well in today's game.
His athleticism, speed, timing, leaping ability, court awareness and unselfishness is absurd.
I guarantee if you gave him a year or two to train like a 2022 athlete does he'd be a top 10 player.
A coach that made one SB with Brees as his QB, and didn't win more than one playoff game any other season with Brees as his QB. A dozen years with a top 10 all time QB and that's all you get...The Broncos just gave up a first and a second for a coach...but yeah, coaching doesn't matter.
Who said coaching didn't matter? I think it's clear that players are more important than coaches but of course the coaches matter. A poor one can, and has, lost games with great players.The Broncos just gave up a first and a second for a coach...but yeah, coaching doesn't matter.
What is the point?No one would win 11 championships in todays anything that’s not really the point though.
How many TDs did the coaches throw in 36? How many INTs or sacks did the coaches have in 36?
Did the coaches lose the '17 SB vs Philly? Probably.
Fun Fact: Russell declined participating in the 1956 Olympics as a high-jumper (ranked 7th in the world at the time) because he didn't want to be a distraction to his olympic basketball team and risk injury which would hurt the team's chances for gold.The argument that I hear about Russell that makes no sense is that he played against less teams. That actually makes his career more meaningful because the talent level was more concentrated.
My biggest thank you for Bill's career was the way the refs called the games. If they allowed Wilt to drop his shoulder and go through people, like Shaq did in his career, even Russell wouldn't have been able to stop Wilt.
When we look back at that 13 year stretch with 11 titles we can see that the Celtics weren't always the 1st place team but won in the playoffs. That speaks to the strength of the league.
We do have a saying among the coaches on our staff: Players win games, coaches lose them. Not that I am taking sides with him, mind you, but I am sure we didn't write this cliché.It seems that what you're trying to say is that coaching can be a deciding factor in losing but not winning. Go back to bed.
Bill Belichick has said it for years: "Players win games. Coaches lose them."It seems that what you're trying to say is that coaching can be a deciding factor in losing but not winning. Go back to bed.
Actually, Bill offered him one year but said he couldn't pay him what he got the last year, one of the writers wrote that it was 15 mill they offered, is it accurate, not sure but there was some chatter about it.Even if you do know economics you don't know how little the Pats were offering Brady. I think we can all agree that they weren't offering Brady more than one year though. We just don't know the figure.
Saying that the Pats didn't have room for Brady is the biggest copout there is. For him you make room, especially knowing that you didn't have a QB to replace him. Maybe if they had done that the Pats might have had more than one playoff blowout loss in the last 3 years.
Let's face it folks, letting Tom Brady go was one of the biggest blunders in the history of Boston sports and the proof of that has been right in front of our eyes for 3 years.
And now Bendover Bob wants him to sign a one day contract as if he finished his career here. What a joke.
You may have missed it (and you’re fortunate if that’s the case) but multiple people are.Nobody is saying coaching doesn't matter though.
LOL - am even more shocked nobody is outraged (unless I missed it) that Brady indeed never meant to thank Pats fans in his retirement message.I'm shocked it took this long to get to Bill vs Brady.