What if Brady succeeds elsewhere? Ramifications for BB.

[sb1]

A 14-6 record with two of the best Patriots teams ever. What about the additional non-Brady 5-13 Patriots tenure?

The 08 team is nowhere near the best Patriot team ever. They still went 11-5 with a QB that hadn’t started since high school.

The 00 Pats were at the nadir of their decline since SBXI- a lousy and undisciplined football team that did nothing all that well. BB knew he had to change the culture and that doesn’t happen overnight. Not much really more to say than that.

 

[XLIX]

Cassel certainly wasn’t an upgrade over Brady but Bill being coach was a very large reason why they were 11-5 and not the reverse of that.

Look what happened to the Colts when they lost Manning and had a subpar coach. Doubt that happens if they had BB.

The Colts tanked, pure and and simple. They sucked for Luck, and it worked. A better comparison with them is they went from 10-6 with Manning to 11-5 with Luck.

 

[Tony2046]

BB had the team go 11-5 with Cassel and 3-1 during Brady’s BS suspension.

I don’t think anyone should downplay Bill’s contribution to Brady’s career.

11-5 with Cassel? The same team went 16-0 the prior year and against a stronger schedule.

It's the same as saying if BB went 7-9 with Stidham etc.. So the 11-5 argument is not the argument I'd use.


3-1 is ok.

BB built a winning environment. He plays no favoritism games. Everyone has to contribute equally or at least more so than every other team. OCD in preparation. Should have two Super Bowl defensive game plans in the HOF.

Those are the arguments I'd use.

Brady and BB have both benefited from each other.

 

[sb1]

11-5 with Cassel? The same team went 16-0 the prior year and against a stronger schedule.

It's the same as saying if BB went 7-9 with Stidham etc.. So the 11-5 argument is not the argument I'd use.


3-1 is ok.

BB built a winning environment. He plays no favoritism games. Everyone has to contribute equally or at least more so than every other team. OCD in preparation. Should have two Super Bowl defensive game plans in the HOF.

Those are the arguments I'd use.

Brady and BB have both benefited from each other.

IMO the 08 team overall wasn’t nearly as good as it was in 07 even outside of the QB. The defense took a big step backwards despite a much easier schedule. But they still won 11 games.

Winning 11 games in 08 is not a statement either way about Brady but it is all about Bill. Lesser coaches wouldn’t sniff .500 with that team.

 

[Patstastic]

This is a disrespectful thread to a sports legend. I just can't believe how demanding, entitled, and spoiled we've all become.

 

[Biffins]

If you have to cherry pick your way towards completely eliminating 114 games to make your point, then you have a very weak point.

What do you mean cherry pick? What are we discussing here? I thought the question was how good/bad the Patriots opposition in AFC East is and whether that’s a factor in the Patriots’ successful record. To check that you have to see how they have done against everyone excluding the Pats, and compare that to how everyone else has done against each other excluding the Pats. You can’t penalize the rest of the AFC East for playing the Pats so often, otherwise you are just stating that the Pats are good and not that these teams are bad.

And when you check their record against everyone else excluding the Pats, it’s pretty good. Not sure what the confusion is.

 

[Brewskies]

If Brady plays better elsewhere, "who cares"?
Other than Brady lovers. BB is the GOAT

 

[XLIX]

What do you mean cherry pick? What are we discussing here? I thought the question was how good/bad the Patriots opposition in AFC East is and whether that’s a factor in the Patriots’ successful record. To check that you have to see how they have done against everyone excluding the Pats, and compare that to how everyone else has done against each other excluding the Pats. You can’t penalize the rest of the AFC East for playing the Pats so often, otherwise you are just stating that the Pats are good and not that these teams are bad.

And when you check their record against everyone else excluding the Pats, it’s pretty good. Not sure what the confusion is.

No, to be consistent you would take away the other 3 teams’ games against their toughest division opponent. So, for example, you would compare Mia/NYJ/Buf (minus games against NE) to Cin/Cle/Bal (minus games against Pit).

The only confusion here is yours.

 

[VJCPatriot]

You can just say that you want Belichick to fail because it supports your arguments. You don’t have to tiptoe around it.

Even if the Patriots went 4-12 next year, BB has enough leeway that he would be kept on since losing Brady would be considered a transition year. But if he continues to stink like 2 or 3 years into life after Brady, well a lot of people would be calling for his head because it would clearly indicate that he couldn't cut it without a certain elite QB propping up his team.

It's hard to say what would happen but it feels like the writing is on the wall. BB wants to get rid of Brady to 'prove' that he was the mastermind behind all the wins and his pride demands that he proves he can 'plug and play' just any guy off the street and win Lombardis. Only time will tell.

I hope Brady stays but the lack of news seems pretty indicative of what's going to happen.

 

[Biffins]

No, to be consistent you would take away the other 3 teams’ games against their toughest division opponent. So, for example, you would compare Mia/NYJ/Buf (minus games against NE) to Cin/Cle/Bal (minus games against Pit).

The only confusion here is yours.

Why?

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

No, to be consistent you would take away the other 3 teams’ games against their toughest division opponent. So, for example, you would compare Mia/NYJ/Buf (minus games against NE) to Cin/Cle/Bal (minus games against Pit).

The only confusion here is yours.

Why?

It depends what question you’re trying to answer here.

Is the AFC East weak compared to other divisions? (Pretty self-explanatory - overall division record.)

Do the Patriots benefit playing in the AFC East? (Their winning pct vs. the AFC East is lower than vs. the rest of the NFL, so probably not. Miami’s success against New England does make that equation pretty strange though.)

Is Buff/Mia/NYJ the worst combined record of any divisional 3-team combo in the league? (Yes.)

Is the Buffalo/Mia/NYJ record caused by their own ineptitude only or by having to play the Patriots too? Are they really the worst group of 3 teams in any division in the NFL in a vacuum, or is this caused by playing the Patriots frequently? (When you have a team winning .750+ of their games, that could potentially be the x-factor in that statistic. You’d subtract the Patriots games from Mia/Buff/NYJ records...since that does factor into the record of the bottom 3 teams. You have to isolate the teams minus the Patriots impact to answer this question...bottom 3 teams in other divisions are facing a weaker #1, aka a more beatable “tougher opponent” than the Patriots.)

Has the AFC East failed to produce a real SB contender to challenge the Pats since 2001? (Heck yes. Cumulative winning pct be damned...what a catastrophic failure...over SIXTY combined seasons they have not even produced a single 12-game winner. I think the sell-out, cap stretching Jets of 2010-11 with Sanchez was the only one with two straight winning seasons. What a sht show.)

 

[Biffins]

It depends what question you’re trying to answer here.

Is the AFC East weak compared to other divisions? (Pretty self-explanatory - overall division record.)

Do the Patriots benefit playing in the AFC East? (Their winning pct vs. the AFC East is lower than vs. the rest of the NFL, so probably not. Miami’s success against New England does make that equation pretty strange though.)

Is Buff/Mia/NYJ the worst combined record of any divisional 3-team combo in the league? (Yes.)

Is the Buffalo/Mia/NYJ record caused by their own ineptitude only or by having to play the Patriots too? Are they really the worst group of 3 teams in any division in the NFL in a vacuum, or is this caused by playing the Patriots frequently? (When you have a team winning .750+ of their games, that could potentially be the x-factor in that statistic. You’d subtract the Patriots games from Mia/Buff/NYJ records...since that does factor into the record of the bottom 3 teams. You have to isolate the teams minus the Patriots impact to answer this question...bottom 3 teams in other divisions are facing a weaker #1, aka a more beatable “tougher opponent” than the Patriots.)

Has the AFC East failed to produce a real SB contender to challenge the Pats since 2001? (Heck yes. Cumulative winning pct be damned...what a catastrophic failure...over SIXTY combined seasons they have not even produced a single 12-game winner. I think the sell-out, cap stretching Jets of 2010-11 with Sanchez was the only one with two straight winning seasons. What a sht show.)

Yeah agree with everything except the final observation. The fact that those three teams haven’t produced consecutive winning seasons or challenged the Pats implies that was even possible. IMO they ran into a historically great Patriots team and there was nothing to be done. No GM or HC or player roster could have been brought in to male much of a difference. As you already mentioned, Pats beat other teams in the league even more frequently than they beat these three, so what lesson was there to be learnt from the rest. We’ve consigned the fans of these teams to two lost decades of misery.

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

Yeah agree with everything except the final observation. The fact that those three teams haven’t produced consecutive winning seasons or challenged the Pats implies that was even possible. IMO they ran into a historically great Patriots team and there was nothing to be done. No GM or HC or player roster could have been brought in to male much of a difference. As you already mentioned, Pats beat other teams in the league even more frequently than they beat these three, so what lesson was there to be learnt from the rest. We’ve consigned the fans of these teams to two lost decades of misery.

Can never know that answer for certain, but I think we can guess that theoretically some of these teams would likely split home games with the Patriots and challenge them for the division. When you look at the makeup of these teams, the ones to really rival them within the conference, the QB play stands out in most cases. None of these teams play in the AFC East (except the Colts in 2001, before they were good.). It’s hard to imagine that none of these teams would be, at the minimum, perennial postseason contenders, even playing in the Patriots division.

2000s Colts
Mid-2000s Chargers
Early/Mid-2010s Broncos
2000s/2010s Steelers
Late 2000s/Early 2010s Ravens

Then there’s also a handful of teams that you have to imagine would have been a .500 or better team over a consistent chunk of time, unlike these AFC East teams.

Early/Mid 2000s Broncos
Mid/Late 2010s Chiefs
2010s Texans

I will say this, though, in looking at these teams in retrospect: none of the divisions was really that brutal behind the top team. The Colts and Broncos didn’t have much competition, though the Titans and Chargers were okay. The Steelers were only challenged by the contending Ravens teams from roughly 2008-12. The AFC North was the only decent 3-deep playoff contender team for just a few years when Cincinnati was fake good. All of these teams have had the opportunity to go on a long run of dominance, and only Manning was able to do it, and that merely got him in prime postseason position that he’d usually choke away. But from a regular season perspective, it just lends more credence to the idea that super dominating QB play (Brady and Manning only) were the cause of these runs and not the lucky byproducts or weak competition.

 

[Patsgofor4]

If a frog had wings he wouldn't bump his booty.

End of discussion.