Will Bill Belichick break Don Shula's all time win record?

[sb1]

Did they know they were even going to get Mac when they signed Cam? Nope. All things considered Cam was playing better in the offense at training camp. It was the move they had while they hoped they got the guy of the future

That’s true it was before the draft. But Fitz would have made more sense imo.

 

[Pats2000]

That’s true it was before the draft. But Fitz would have made more sense imo.

I dont know, another year with a guy where it's his first time in the offense. Fitz is also really streaky. I think it was the right move if they didn't get their QB of the future

 

[Ivan]

The worse move was re-signing Cam. A vet like Fitz would have been better if they wanted to give Mac more time.

Agree with this.

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

Don't kid yourself; it absolutely, positively matters to Bill... Why in the world do you think he started Cam vs da Jete at the end of last season?

Because the purpose of playing a game is to win it and he thought that gave them the best chance to win.

—



Looks like he made the opposite point last year @sb1 @203Pat

 

[Ring 6]

View attachment 37011


View attachment 37010

What is your point?
Most open minded people can see both sides for an argument.

 

[Ring 6]

View attachment 37011
View attachment 37012
View attachment 37013

—

View attachment 37010

Looks like he made the opposite point last year @sb1 @203Pat

Are you really both this obtuse and this obsessed with me?

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

 

[1960Pats]

It might sound ridiculous but when does the clock start ticking for Bill and his Patriots rebuild? Does he have the stamina to see it through? Will Kraft start to have doubts and consider a change? Remember, Kraft is a fan just like us who happens to own the team.


Anyone feel free to correct me. I believe the count right now on wins is:

Don Shula 328 career wins + 36 playoff wins (not sure if that's included in the total number of career wins)

Bill Belichick 282 career wins (including this season) + 31 playoff wins.

It would take 5 years for Bill to do it and I don't think he's going to coach that long

 

[1960Pats]

I'm sorry if that will disappoint you

I'm stating that the regular season all time wins record is not affected by playoff wins (or titles)

And, it would be nice for Belichick to go out on top

...what was said at this stage in 2001...

What's really disappointing is seeing Brady in another uniform.

Bill had the misfortune of starting out as a HC at a much later age than Shula*, otherwise he'd be past him already.

I'll only like to see Bill go out on top if he's with the Pats when it happens.

In 2001 most people didn't think the Pats had a chance but they didn't know Brady. Now we do and Mac probably isn't another Brady.

 

[Tony2046]

View attachment 37011
View attachment 37012
View attachment 37013

—

View attachment 37010

Looks like he made the opposite point last year @sb1 @203Pat

 

[BigPeteG]

Bill seems to be aging well - we saw him doing squats in the gym the other day. I think he will pass Shula. We now have 17 games a season making it slightly easier.

This is a close league and you can go from losing nearly all the time to winning nearly all the time quite easily - and vice versa. Bill is generally good enough to make that change. So say we only get 9 wins this year - you could easily see a Mac Jones run of 12+ wins for 3 years - boom - he has done it.

 

[seven]

Late to the show:
Yes, BB breaks Shula record

History, the record has profound professional and personal
meaning to the great man.
*
Remaining questions:
When

Wildcard:
With which team.
*

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

Because that game meant absolutely Nothing Whatsoever, and should've been used to give the yutes all the snaps they could handle - especially Stidham, who should've practiced with the first team during the week and then started that season-ender vs da Jete.

I disagree. Winning always matters.
Players are putting film in the can every game that determines their ability to stay in the league. Putting them at risk of bad film because you put poor players on the field with them.
They know what they have in Stidham, they’ve seen him for 2 years. You are mistaking you being able to see what he can do with them. They already know.

—

 

[Ring 6]

View attachment 37034
View attachment 37025
View attachment 37031

—

View attachment 37026
View attachment 37024
View attachment 37027
View attachment 37028
View attachment 37029
View attachment 37030
View attachment 37032
View attachment 37033

Not sure what kind of a game you are trying to play here.
I was very vocal that Newton sucked. Thinking he should be in the bench is not at all inconsistent with the fact that you always play to win. Belichick felt Newton gave him the best chance to win. That’s why he played him.
I did not, that’s why I wanted him to play Stidham.
Pretty simple stuff.
Maybe you should spend less time researching my posts and get a life.

 

[Tony2046]

Not sure what kind of a game you are trying to play here.
I was very vocal that Newton sucked. Thinking he should be in the bench is not at all inconsistent with the fact that you always play to win. Belichick felt Newton gave him the best chance to win. That’s why he played him.
I did not, that’s why I wanted him to play Stidham.
Pretty simple stuff.
Maybe you should spend less time researching my posts and get a life.

I'm not sure if I want to agree or disagree with you because I don't know which side of the point you're on. It's like you're the prosecutor and the defense during the same case.

I guess it's a good argumentative strategy. You can't technically lose an argument if you're on both sides of it.

 

[Ring 6]

I'm not sure if I want to agree or disagree with you because I don't know which side of the point you're on. It's like you're the prosecutor and the defense during the same case.

I guess it's a good argumentative strategy. You can't technically lose an argument if you're on both sides of it.

There is no confusion where I stand.
1) winning always matters
2) belichick played newton because of 1
3) I wanted belichick to play Stidham because of 1

 

[Tony2046]

There is no confusion where I stand.
1) winning always matters
2) belichick played newton because of 1
3) I wanted belichick to play Stidham because of 1

Is this the for or against argument? Hard to tell.

 

[JarOfMayo51]

I hope he breaks Shula's record, but it will be close...

it isnt as big of a deal now tho, a huge part of the satisfaction would have been seeing that miserable bastard's face when he lost the record to BB

 

[Ring 6]

Is this the for or against argument? Hard to tell.

Neither. It’s the statements that I made.
it’s not an argument at all

Of course it’s hard to tell because there isn’t any inconsistency. Some bozo decided to post my responses to different questions and try to make it appear they are different. They are not.

They are comments made months apart in response to different questions.

Question 1 last year, should Newton play.

Question 2, now, why did BELICHICK okay Newton.

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]