How much of Belichick's success is because of Brady ? ? ?

[ghost_in_pads02]

8 hours ago, nyjunc said:

he had one of the best(if not the best) fanbases in the NFL and they HATED him.  I wonder if that played any role in the move? 

You think if cleveland had the chance to take BB back they wouldn't? No brady involved. 

[ljr]

1 minute ago, ghost_in_pads02 said:

let's quote me correctly....i said the same could be said for every coach in the NFL and lets point out -out of that list short you gave me  there was only one legit coach...Don Shula.

One, how long was the NFL in existence...and we have "one". OK my statement wasn't too far off. I know you just want to be SOOOO right against me....

Lol, I wanted to be SOOOO right because I was.

i don't feel a need to look back farther into the history of the NFL but I'm sure there are plenty from the earlier days.

if you had been less all or nothing with your comment I would certainly agree that it's very difficult for a top coach to be around long enough to last through more than 1 superstar QB tenure.

[ghost_in_pads02]

11 minutes ago, ljr said:

Lol, I wanted to be SOOOO right because I was.

i don't feel a need to look back farther into the history of the NFL but I'm sure there are plenty from the earlier days.

if you had been less all or nothing with your comment I would certainly agree that it's very difficult for a top coach to be around long enough to last through more than 1 superstar QB tenure.

ha ha you dont need to agree with me my statement was pretty accurate, and if not then i'm sure any media outlet, any NFL analyst or former player or coach would of brought that point out as well. Had they? NOPE.

 

and the topic of BB and Brady and who helped who more has come up a lot, never once someone said BB needed to develop more QBs like his predecessors has...sh*t even watching NFL "top ten" subject, head coaches of all time..that never came up.

 

and not to pick at Shula, but with all those "great QBs" he developed, he probably had the greatest of them all and couldnt win a Superbowl with him in Dan Marino (a number one pick...projected to be great) just saying.

[ljr]

25 minutes ago, ghost_in_pads02 said:

ha ha you dont need to agree with me my statement was pretty accurate, and if not then i'm sure any media outlet, any NFL analyst or former player or coach would of brought that point out as well. Had they? NOPE.

 

and the topic of BB and Brady and who helped who more has come up a lot, never once someone said BB needed to develop more QBs like his predecessors has...sh*t even watching NFL "top ten" subject, head coaches of all time..that never came up.

 

and not to pick at Shula, but with all those "great QBs" he developed, he probably had the greatest of them all and couldnt win a Superbowl with him in Dan Marino (a number one pick...projected to be great) just saying.

Your statement was written as an all or nothing ... There was a middle ground that wound up being the truth.

lol, you are hysterical  thinking the media, NFL analysts, & former players care about pointing out the errors of what "Ghost_in_pads02" is posting on JN ... But I'm sure Max appreciates the status you give his site!

nice try attempting to change topic & belittle Shula but that is a different conversation for a different thread ... And does does alter your being wrong about him.

[ghost_in_pads02]

19 minutes ago, ljr said:

Your statement was written as an all or nothing ... There was a middle ground that wound up being the truth.

lol, you are hysterical  thinking the media, NFL analysts, & former players care about pointing out the errors of what "Ghost_in_pads02" is posting on JN ... But I'm sure Max appreciates the status you give his site!

nice try attempting to change topic & belittle Shula but that is a different conversation for a different thread ... And does does alter your being wrong about him.

my statement wasnt really about there being an "absolute", or having a middle ground....as you really trying to homer that part home. I posted it just as i did because i know it was a bullsh*t reason knowing there weren't any coaches that developed more then one great QB, wait so you can feel better...there was only 1 out of *insert* this many great coaches..

and it;s not about the NFL pointing out the errors of what I or THIS BOARD has to say..but it's the simple fact that this board, you and everyone on here are talking SPORTS..YOU ARE TALKING NFL...the same thing NFL analyst and former players, etc do....heeey what do you know...what a concept right...talk the same subject matter that media outlets do....who would of thought?!?

 

and there is no belittling Shula...last i checked when you debate, you talk about the good points and the bad points of a player or coach.  And i pointed out Shula's short comings with Marino, because according to posters here. BB only won or is great because he has a great QB. 

[ljr]

18 minutes ago, ghost_in_pads02 said:

my statement wasnt really about there being an "absolute",

 

 

 

 

 

 

On June 28, 2016 at 8:51 AM, nyjunc said:

where are all the other QBs he developed? 

 

Quote

Ghosty - Well that could be said about every coach who has ever coached in the NFL *insert great coach name here*

 

Every coach who has ever coached in the NFL ... Call me crazy ... Sounds pretty absolute to me!

 

 Alright , tired of responding to your silliness ... Time for me to dream about Kate Upton's rack!

 

[nyjunc]

16 hours ago, Jet Nut said:

Didn't even get that at a time when no one would hire him Hess did.  He gave him big money to wait his turn and for no other reason that to reward his loyalty. A coach that no one wanted.  He takes the dying old mans money and runs, dealing with Kraft on the sneak, under the table, grabbing a better deal, looking like a complete nut on the way out the door.   

S U C C E S S! 

He did take that million dollar bonus in 1999 but I don't blame him for leaving.  That was more about parcells than anything else, Parcells was waffling, wouldn't tell him he was stepping down and he was looking out for his future.  I used to blame him, the more I have learned about that situation I don't blame him for what he did.

10 hours ago, ghost_in_pads02 said:

You think if cleveland had the chance to take BB back they wouldn't? No brady involved. 

today? of course.  In 1999 or 2000?  not a chance.  any team would take a SB winner, Carolina once hired George Seifert.

[Rangers9]

When you look at NEP's success it's mostly imo due to getting players who buy into a smart system on and off the field. The coaching is impeccable in terms of strategy and the players do not freelance or they're gone. You rarely see players esp on D out of position which happens all of the time on badly coached teams (for example Rex Ryan-the king of blown coverages).. You don't always need the greatest talent to succeed and they've proven that many times over. It's funny Woody tried to copy this when he hired Mangini (and he also had Tannenbaum another BB disciple). The problem was Eric was the wrong guy. He tried to copy Bill Belichick but couldn't. 

[nyjunc]

4 minutes ago, Rangers9 said:

When you look at NEP's success it's mostly imo due to getting players who buy into a smart system on and off the field. The coaching is impeccable in terms of strategy and the players do not freelance or they're gone. You rarely see players esp on D out of position which happens all of the time on badly coached teams (for example Rex Ryan-the king of blown coverages).. You don't always need the greatest talent to succeed and they've proven that many times over. It's funny Woody tried to copy this when he hired Mangini (and he also had Tannenbaum another BB disciple). The problem was Eric was the wrong guy. He tried to copy Bill Belichick but couldn't. 

they have proven you don't always need the greatest talent to compete b/c they have BRADY who wins w/ anyone.  No Brady and they'd be up and down and not a consistent winner plus their SB win in 2014 they brought in more talent including Revis.  In other years they went cheap and Brady brought them as far as they could go but they didn't win it all.

[Rangers9]

3 minutes ago, nyjunc said:

they have proven you don't always need the greatest talent to compete b/c they have BRADY who wins w/ anyone.  No Brady and they'd be up and down and not a consistent winner plus their SB win in 2014 they brought in more talent including Revis.  In other years they went cheap and Brady brought them as far as they could go but they didn't win it all.

Brady is a key factor in their success but not the main factor imo. I think they would have won but not 4 rings without him. But we'll never know. I don't believe they would have been up and down. I think up all of the time under BB. The Cleveland five years not withstanding. 

[nyjunc]

7 minutes ago, Rangers9 said:

Brady is a key factor in their success but not the main factor imo. I think they would have won but not 4 rings without him. But we'll never know. I don't believe they would have been up and down. I think up all of the time under BB. The Cleveland five years not withstanding. 

he's the key factor, the main factor, whatever you want to call it.  w/o him BB would be a DC somewhere today.  w/o him they don't win any of those Super Bowls.

[Rangers9]

2 minutes ago, nyjunc said:

he's the key factor, the main factor, whatever you want to call it.  w/o him BB would be a DC somewhere today.  w/o him they don't win any of those Super Bowls.

You can't be serious about that statement. Even when he was DC with the Jets he was several cuts above the rest of the coaches in the NFL. The system overshadows the players. And in BBs case it's the best org and system in the NFL. As much as I hate giving him credit he's the best (coach) not person. 

[nyjunc]

1 minute ago, Rangers9 said:

You can't be serious about that statement. Even when he was DC with the Jets he was several cuts above the rest of the coaches in the NFL. The system overshadows the players. And in BBs case it's the best org and system in the NFL. As much as I hate giving him credit he's the best (coach) not person. 

He's a brilliant football mind but there is much more to being a good head coach than that and w/ us his brilliance saw his D blow a 10 point lead in the 2nd half of the AFC Championship Game in 1998.  A theme you will notice in his D's through the years in big games/spots.

He was a terrible HC in cleveland and hadn't changed early in NE.  5-13 in his first 18 games then magically Brady steps on the field and they finish 2001 14-3.  In first 18 games he was 5-13 w/o Brady, next 18 15-3 w/ Brady including a SB.  

[Rangers9]

12 minutes ago, nyjunc said:

He's a brilliant football mind but there is much more to being a good head coach than that and w/ us his brilliance saw his D blow a 10 point lead in the 2nd half of the AFC Championship Game in 1998.  A theme you will notice in his D's through the years in big games/spots.

He was a terrible HC in cleveland and hadn't changed early in NE.  5-13 in his first 18 games then magically Brady steps on the field and they finish 2001 14-3.  In first 18 games he was 5-13 w/o Brady, next 18 15-3 w/ Brady including a SB.  

If I had to choose between Brady or Beli I'd take BB. That system is more than the players. 

[nyjunc]

4 minutes ago, Rangers9 said:

If I had to choose between Brady or Beli I'd take BB. That system is more than the players. 

How much winning did BB do w/ his system w/o Brady?  Brady IS THE system.

[Rangers9]

6 minutes ago, nyjunc said:

How much winning did BB do w/ his system w/o Brady?  Brady IS THE system.

Personally I don't think that Brady would have been as good in a lesser org like the Jets. 

[nyjunc]

2 minutes ago, Rangers9 said:

Personally I don't think that Brady would have been as good in a lesser org like the Jets. 

NE was a lesser organization when Brady took over, he turned them into a premiere organization.  would have done the same thing here.

[Rangers9]

1 minute ago, nyjunc said:

NE was a lesser organization when Brady took over, he turned them into a premiere organization.  would have done the same thing here.

Without that structure they wouldn't have been as good. That goes for offense, defense everything. Brady didn't make the whole team Beli did. But Brady gets much credit. So do other players for example Adam Viniateri. 

[nyjunc]

4 minutes ago, Rangers9 said:

Without that structure they wouldn't have been as good. That goes for offense, defense everything. Brady didn't make the whole team Beli did. But Brady gets much credit. So do other players for example Adam Viniateri. 

I ask again, how were they doing without Brady? and it's not like they had Kyle Mackey at QB, they had a QB that had reached a SB and was in his prime.  How were they doing?

Obviously many players and coaches contributed but w.o Brady it doesn't happen.

[Rangers9]

6 minutes ago, nyjunc said:

I ask again, how were they doing without Brady? and it's not like they had Kyle Mackey at QB, they had a QB that had reached a SB and was in his prime.  How were they doing?

Obviously many players and coaches contributed but w.o Brady it doesn't happen.

They would have had an adequate if not good Qb. This is not an incompetent org. And if Brady went to a team without that structure maybe no rings. I mean Tony Romo is good and like Brady an unknown coming out of college who worked his way to becoming a star but no SBs. 

[Jet Nut]

2 hours ago, nyjunc said:

He did take that million dollar bonus in 1999 but I don't blame him for leaving.  That was more about parcells than anything else, Parcells was waffling, wouldn't tell him he was stepping down and he was looking out for his future.  I used to blame him, the more I have learned about that situation I don't blame him for what he did.

today? of course.  In 1999 or 2000?  not a chance.  any team would take a SB winner, Carolina once hired George Seifert.

Can't agree.  He was hired to be the DC and next HC.  GM wasn't part of the deal.  Whining that Parcells was still going to be in the building as the GM was a convenient excuse for Beli to take more money to be totally in charge in NE.  He went for the better deal, wasn't running away from Parcells

[nyjunc]

6 minutes ago, Rangers9 said:

They would have had an adequate if not good Qb. This is not an incompetent org. And if Brady went to a team without that structure maybe no rings. I mean Tony Romo is good and like Brady an unknown coming out of college who worked his way to becoming a star but no SBs. 

the organization looked incompetent pre Brady.

 

Tony Romo is not Tom Brady, Romo has had everything he eneds to win and has 2 playoff wins in his career.  

[nyjunc]

1 minute ago, Jet Nut said:

Can't agree.  He was hired to be the DC and next HC.  GM wasn't part of the deal.  Whining that Parcells was still going to be in the building as the GM was a convenient excuse for Beli to take more money to be totally in charge in NE.  He went for the better deal, wasn't running away from Parcells

it wasn't about BP as the GM as much as BP wouldn't give him an answer about his plans.  BP wouldn't tell him if he was coming back to coach when he knew he wasn't coming back so BB made alternate plans.  BB had ONE more shot as a HC, if he failed he was never getting a 3rd shot so he had to do what he had to do.

[Rangers9]

6 minutes ago, nyjunc said:

the organization looked incompetent pre Brady.

 

Tony Romo is not Tom Brady, Romo has had everything he eneds to win and has 2 playoff wins in his career.  

So if Brady went to the Lions would they have won rings?

[Jet Nut]

5 minutes ago, nyjunc said:

it wasn't about BP as the GM as much as BP wouldn't give him an answer about his plans.  BP wouldn't tell him if he was coming back to coach when he knew he wasn't coming back so BB made alternate plans.  BB had ONE more shot as a HC, if he failed he was never getting a 3rd shot so he had to do what he had to do.

Belicheat was hired and pod to coach though.  Parcells was vague about being the permanent GM or a consultant kind of gig.  Either way who was Beli to argue?  He was never getting the jets GM gig at that time

[PatsFanTX]

So if Brady went to the Lions would they have won rings?

If BB was the HC.

[Rangers9]

The story I heard was that first Belichick didn't love working with Parcells. And thought that Parcells was overbearing and rough on him and others and he didn't want to deal with that again. He basically didn't like Parcells. Plus after Cleveland he wanted another chance at being a head coach and didn't want to be under Parcells. Also he had a good relationship with Kraft and preferred working for him over Woody. Ownership is a big deal to NFL head coaches and always was a huge factor for Parcells, too. 

[nyjunc]

20 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

 

[nyjunc]

12 minutes ago, Rangers9 said:

So if Brady went to the Lions would they have won rings?

maybe, better chance than if he didn't go and BB was the HC.

11 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

Belicheat was hired and pod to coach though.  Parcells was vague about being the permanent GM or a consultant kind of gig.  Either way who was Beli to argue?  He was never getting the jets GM gig at that time

I am not a fan of his but he did what he felt he had to do and it's worked out pretty well for him.

[nyjunc]

11 minutes ago, PatsFanTX said:

If BB was the HC.

as long as Brady was there he could have won, if not he wouldn't have.

3 minutes ago, Rangers9 said:

The story I heard was that first Belichick didn't love working with Parcells. And thought that Parcells was overbearing and rough on him and others and he didn't want to deal with that again. He basically didn't like Parcells. Plus after Cleveland he wanted another chance at being a head coach and didn't want to be under Parcells. Also he had a good relationship with Kraft and preferred working for him over Woody. Ownership is a big deal to NFL head coaches and always was a huge factor for Parcells, too. 

Woody was an unknown, he had his deal w/ Kraft before Woody became the owner.

[Rangers9]

Just now, nyjunc said:

as long as Brady was there he could have won, if not he wouldn't have.

Woody was an unknown, he had his deal w/ Kraft before Woody became the owner.

I don't think Parcells wanted to work with Woody, either. All they had to do was meet him and talk to him one time to make that decision. 

[nyjunc]

Just now, Rangers9 said:

I don't think Parcells wanted to work with Woody, either. All they had to do was meet him and talk to him one time to make that decision. 

I think that was his excuse, Parcells didn't even want to coach in 1999 but committed before hess died.

[Rangers9]

Just now, nyjunc said:

I think that was his excuse, Parcells didn't even want to coach in 1999 but committed before hess died.

Parcells liked and was loyal to Hess who was known as a very good guy and an owner who let his professionals run the football team. Except for one time and that was monumental. When he personally fired Pete Carroll and hired one of his all time favorites, Kotite. 

[nyjunc]

6 minutes ago, Rangers9 said:

Parcells liked and was loyal to Hess who was known as a very good guy and an owner who let his professionals run the football team. Except for one time and that was monumental. When he personally fired Pete Carroll and hired one of his all time favorites, Kotite. 

I get it and BP didn't want another Kraft situation(who, by the way, has turned into one of the best owners in sports) but the reality is he wanted out after 1998 and if he came back in 2000 even if woody interfered he would have had to deal w/ it for just one year b/c there was no way he was statung beyond 2000 when he didn't even want to stay beyond 1998.  if BB's D did a better job in the '98 title game Parcells would have retired after 1998 w/ a SB.

[PFSIKH]

21 hours ago, Jet Nut said:

Your constant worship and excuse making over his cheating ways and who's more influential to the Pats says otherwise.  So actually it's based on comprehension.

BTW, he had one good season out 5 in Cleveland.  He sent them spiraling downward.  He pissed off a loyal fanbase and was hated.  He pissed off his owner who hated him as no owner ever has hated his HC.  Real success.  On what level? 

He took over a 3-13 team. They won 6 games the next year.  That is doubling the win total and hardly a downward spiral.  They won 7 games the next two years before winning 11 in year four.  Who knows how things would have gone if Model did not announce the move until after the season.  They were 4-4 when he did.

Again, as I said in the post you quoted, kind of the comprehension thing, I said he made mistakes in Cleveland.  His experience in Cleveland helped form how he handles things in New England.  

22 hours ago, nyjunc said:

he did NOT turn that franchise around.  he was there 5 years

6-10

7-9

7-9

11-5

5-11

how is that turning it around? one playoff app in 5 seasons.  I don't know how going from 11 wins to 5 wins the team was headed in the right direction w.o major injuries.  I know about the move, they were bad before the announcement so it's not like they were 5-2 then finished 5-11 after the announcement.

he was not going to be fired during the 2001 season but the seat was heating up, 5-11 then starting 0-2 and looking like another 5 win type season.  That gets any coach in trouble.

If you add the 3-13 before that, you have a better perspective of what he did.