Jump to content

Belichick acknowledging the dynasty is over?


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, More Cowbell said:

That's redic. Look at his accomplishments. You can't take that away. I hate the guy for what he did to us but he is a great HC. 

I didn’t take anything away from him other than the greatest coach of all time. I still think is a HOF coach and definitely a top 5-10 coach of all time. But this notion that he is clearly the best ever, and #2 is is far beneath him that he is in his own stratosphere I think is inaccurate.

The cheating mattered. That likely gave them 3 super bowl wins. Maybe he wins 1 of those original 3 without the cheating, maybe not.

Tom Brady matters because before and after Brady, BB’s team have been pretty sh*tty. Of course he deserves credit for what he’s done. I’m not saying the guy is a bum...but when you have arguably the best QB of all time and you’ve had a history of cheating, it changes the narrative for me. That’s all I’m saying.

In fact, I believe BB needs to also go into the HOF for his GM accomplishments. To me, that has been the most impressive aspect of his career. Fielding super bowl caliber rosters with different faces almost constantly. He found players that fit his system and constantly updated his system. To do that and be good as long as they have in the free agent era is truly remarkable.

But multiple contrasting points can all be true at the same time.

BB is a great coach. A HOF coach. One of the best of all time.

He is not automatically the best of all time because he has reasons that prove against it, imo.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 93
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Coach Belichick:  "Look, we're paying the price for a decade of selling out to push us over the top, takes time." Sports Media:  "His honesty is refreshing, we all know what's going on, he's got

Oh and don’t forget the cheating. Belichick’s a cheater. where’d he be without the cheating?  

When Gase wins 6 Superbowls then I'll be a lot more willing to listen to his excuses.

Posted Images

4 minutes ago, Adoni Beast said:

I didn’t take anything away from him other than the greatest coach of all time. I still think is a HOF coach and definitely a top 5-10 coach of all time. But this notion that he is clearly the best ever, and #2 is is far beneath him that he is in his own stratosphere I think is inaccurate.

The cheating mattered. That likely gave them 3 super bowl wins. Maybe he wins 1 of those original 3 without the cheating, maybe not.

Tom Brady matters because before and after Brady, BB’s team have been pretty sh*tty. Of course he deserves credit for what he’s done. I’m not saying the guy is a bum...but when you have arguably the best QB of all time and you’ve had a history of cheating, it changes the narrative for me. That’s all I’m saying.

In fact, I believe BB needs to also go into the HOF for his GM accomplishments. To me, that has been the most impressive aspect of his career. Fielding super bowl caliber rosters with different faces almost constantly. He found players that fit his system and constantly updated his system. To do that and be good as long as they have in the free agent era is truly remarkable.

But multiple contrasting points can all be true at the same time.

BB is a great coach. A HOF coach. One of the best of all time.

He is not automatically the best of all time because he has reasons that prove against it, imo.

I'm not sure he is considered an all time best coach but he is in the conversation. I would not say you can put of hand discount that. Also, as it appears he cheated and was punished for it, there was never a public statement by the league about it so that isn't going to be something that is considered a concert issue. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, More Cowbell said:

I'm not sure he is considered an all time best coach but he is in the conversation. I would not say you can put of hand discount that. Also, as it appears he cheated and was punished for it, there was never a public statement by the league about it so that isn't going to be something that is considered a concert issue. 

Yeah the league did the smart thing for the league...but not the correct thing. They tried to hide as much of it as they could and destroyed damping evidence that would have put the entire league under a microscope. But yes, the media is automatic with their label “Best coach of all time.” He is definitely one of the best.

I am more impressed by what coaches like Landry, Parcells, Gibbs, Shula have done. Good for a long time with multiple QB’s. To me, that is the hardest thing to do. Can I fault people like Belichick and Walsh for having Brady and Montana? No, not a fault to them, especially because they were both big reasons why those QB’s developed into what they became. But the other 4 I mentioned just impress me more. If we’re on the topic of best coaches list in no order:

Lombardi - Walsh - Belichick - Shula - Landry - Parcells - Gibbs - Noll - Brown - Halas

Lombardi / Brown / Halas were before my time but the legacy that they left on the game is undeniable.

Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Adoni Beast said:

I didn’t take anything away from him other than the greatest coach of all time. I still think is a HOF coach and definitely a top 5-10 coach of all time. But this notion that he is clearly the best ever, and #2 is is far beneath him that he is in his own stratosphere I think is inaccurate.

The cheating mattered. That likely gave them 3 super bowl wins. Maybe he wins 1 of those original 3 without the cheating, maybe not.

Tom Brady matters because before and after Brady, BB’s team have been pretty sh*tty. Of course he deserves credit for what he’s done. I’m not saying the guy is a bum...but when you have arguably the best QB of all time and you’ve had a history of cheating, it changes the narrative for me. That’s all I’m saying.

In fact, I believe BB needs to also go into the HOF for his GM accomplishments. To me, that has been the most impressive aspect of his career. Fielding super bowl caliber rosters with different faces almost constantly. He found players that fit his system and constantly updated his system. To do that and be good as long as they have in the free agent era is truly remarkable.

But multiple contrasting points can all be true at the same time.

BB is a great coach. A HOF coach. One of the best of all time.

He is not automatically the best of all time because he has reasons that prove against it, imo.

How much do you discount Bill Walsh for having Joe Montana?  How much do you discount Lombardi for his success with 1 QB, Bart Starr?  Cowher and Tomlin didn't win a SB without Roethlisberger.  Chuck Knoll didn't win a SB without Bradshaw.  Landry didn't win a SB without Staubach.  Johnson and Switzer didn't win SB without Aikman and an allstar cast on both sides of the ball.  

I would make the argument that the most innovative coaches since I'm watching were probably Stram and Walsh.  I wouldn't argue that either were the best of all time.  BB is definitely in the argument.  He has probably been the most flexible in terms of consistently developing game plans to exploit the opponent rather than being an innovator who has changed the way the game is played.  He has been brilliant in exploiting high quality opponents under playoff pressure over a very long run.  He has done it with different personal and different approaches depending on his personal and his opponents personal.  He has had the one constant, great QB play.  Not that different than all the other HOF head coaches.

Best of all time is mostly hyperbole.  He's in the conversation and anyone saying he is, isn't far off. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Biggs said:

How much do you discount Bill Walsh for having Joe Montana?  How much do you discount Lombardi for his success with 1 QB, Bart Starr?  Cowher and Tomlin didn't win a SB without Roethlisberger.  Chuck Knoll didn't win a SB without Bradshaw.  Landry didn't win a SB without Staubach.  Johnson and Switzer didn't win SB without Aikman and an allstar cast on both sides of the ball.  

I would make the argument that the most innovative coaches since I'm watching were probably Stram and Walsh.  I wouldn't argue that either were the best of all time.  BB is definitely in the argument.  He has probably been the most flexible in terms of consistently developing game plans to exploit the opponent rather than being an innovator who has changed the way the game is played.  He has been brilliant in exploiting high quality opponents under playoff pressure over a very long run.  He has done it with different personal and different approaches depending on his personal and his opponents personal.  He has had the one constant, great QB play.  Not that different than all the other HOF head coaches.

Stram for matriculating the ball down the field.

Walsh for using the pass to set up the run.

How about Jimmy Johnson for loading up his team with speedsters on defense?

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Biggs said:

How much do you discount Bill Walsh for having Joe Montana?  How much do you discount Lombardi for his success with 1 QB, Bart Starr?  Cowher and Tomlin didn't win a SB without Roethlisberger.  Chuck Knoll didn't win a SB without Bradshaw.  Landry didn't win a SB without Staubach.  Johnson and Switzer didn't win SB without Aikman and an allstar cast on both sides of the ball.  

I would make the argument that the most innovative coaches since I'm watching were probably Stram and Walsh.  I wouldn't argue that either were the best of all time.  BB is definitely in the argument.  He has probably been the most flexible in terms of consistently developing game plans to exploit the opponent rather than being an innovator who has changed the way the game is played.  He has been brilliant in exploiting high quality opponents under playoff pressure over a very long run.  He has done it with different personal and different approaches depending on his personal and his opponents personal.  He has had the one constant, great QB play.  Not that different than all the other HOF head coaches.

Best of all time is mostly hyperbole.  He's in the conversation and anyone saying he is, isn't far off. 

I don’t discount those coaches for those qb’s, as I mentioned they are partly responsible for the development of those players.

I just feel like BB gets more credit than those other coaches mentioned. I guess partly because it is in the here and now, while the others are in history.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, TuscanyTile2 said:

Walsh using the pass to set up the run.  How about Jimmy Johnson for loading up his team with speedsters on defense?

I picked Stram because he was the first guy I saw who used play action effectively.  Walsh for the WCO which changed the entire way offense was run.  

Most younger fans look at Al Davis as a dinosaur.   Davis loaded up his defenses with speed in the 60's.  He was obsessed with having speed in his defensive backfield and at linebacker.  He was a great football man in his prime.

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Adoni Beast said:

Yeah the league did the smart thing for the league...but not the correct thing. They tried to hide as much of it as they could and destroyed damping evidence that would have put the entire league under a microscope. But yes, the media is automatic with their label “Best coach of all time.” He is definitely one of the best.

I am more impressed by what coaches like Landry, Parcells, Gibbs, Shula have done. Good for a long time with multiple QB’s. To me, that is the hardest thing to do. Can I fault people like Belichick and Walsh for having Brady and Montana? No, not a fault to them, especially because they were both big reasons why those QB’s developed into what they became. But the other 4 I mentioned just impress me more. If we’re on the topic of best coaches list in no order:

Lombardi - Walsh - Belichick - Shula - Landry - Parcells - Gibbs - Noll - Brown - Halas

Lombardi / Brown / Halas were before my time but the legacy that they left on the game is undeniable.

All the coaches you mentioned had super star talent at QB. Landry, Parcells, Walsh, and Shula had it all over the teams they coached. If I have to give anyone of them a hat tip, it would be Shula because he truly adapted to the talent on the team. When he had Conka and Kick, he made a running team and when Marino showed up, he went to the air. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Adoni Beast said:

I don’t discount those coaches for those qb’s, as I mentioned they are partly responsible for the development of those players.

I just feel like BB gets more credit than those other coaches mentioned. I guess partly because it is in the here and now, while the others are in history.

No doubt people look at the present as better than the past.  It's an evolutionary bias that ignores the possibility that we peaked a long time ago and might be crawling back into the ocean and returning to primordial slime as opposed to advancing away from it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, More Cowbell said:

All the coaches you mentioned had super star talent at QB. Landry, Parcells, Walsh, and Shula had it all over the teams they coached. If I have to give anyone of them a hat tip, it would be Shula because he truly adapted to the talent on the team. When he had Conka and Kick, he made a running team and when Marino showed up, he went to the air. 

And when he had an opponent who could run the ball he had a hose.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, More Cowbell said:

I'm not sure he is considered an all time best coach but he is in the conversation. I would not say you can put of hand discount that. Also, as it appears he cheated and was punished for it, there was never a public statement by the league about it so that isn't going to be something that is considered a concert issue. 

Belichick is the Phil Jackson of the NFL

 

Bill Parcells is the Pat Riley

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, More Cowbell said:

Does make him a bad coach. Took advantage of the weather. Sucked for us

Shula is obviously a great HC.  I think not winning a SB with Marino is a black eye.  Marino was a once in a lifetime talent.  He squandered years with arguably the best QB in football at the time.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Patriot Killa said:

Rex has no legs to dance on. He’s a failed head coach and will never have the record or rings that Belichick has.

But not the failure Mangini was.. Plus we had BB as HC in 1997 then Hess brought in the Tuna and the rest is history. Would BB have the record or rings without Brady?? I think we know the answer to that..:getgreen:

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, More Cowbell said:

All the coaches you mentioned had super star talent at QB. Landry, Parcells, Walsh, and Shula had it all over the teams they coached. If I have to give anyone of them a hat tip, it would be Shula because he truly adapted to the talent on the team. When he had Conka and Kick, he made a running team and when Marino showed up, he went to the air. 

Shula failed in talent evaluation and was mediocre in coaching ability after the early 80’s. He relied on Marino to mask those failures. His running game fell into mediocrity and his defenses usually failed to compete with average to top teams.

Marino could put up large numbers, but his defenses would give up leads and Shula could never run out the clock.

Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Savage69 said:

But not the failure Mangini was.. Plus we had BB as HC in 1997 then Hess brought in the Tuna and the rest is history. Would BB have the record or rings without Brady?? I think we know the answer to that..:getgreen:

Rex would have a couple rings if he had the GOAT Qb for 20 years

 

But then again so would anyone 

Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Biggs said:

Shula is obviously a great HC.  I think not winning a SB with Marino is a black eye.  Marino was a once in a lifetime talent.  He squandered years with arguably the best QB in football at the time.  

From what I remember Shula and the Dolphins FO as a whole lost a step his last 10 or so years there.  He got old and complacent and Marino helped cover up years of bad drafting and free agency moves

 

That’s part of why the dolphins replaced Shula with Jimmy Johnson.  Johnson was the considered the best evaluator of talent in the league during the 90’s

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Ian Fleming said:

Shula failed in talent evaluation and was mediocre in coaching ability after the early 80’s. He relied on Marino to mask those failures. His running game fell into mediocrity and his defenses usually failed to compete with average to top teams.

Marino could put up large numbers, but his defenses would give up leads and Shula could never run out the clock.

I don't agree so much on the he couldn't draft thing. Miami's OL was a fixture in the Pro Bowl, Jason Taylor was a monster pass rushers, Roby was an unbelievable punter, and the WR's were always very good. He focused the high picks on O. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, SAR I said:

Coach Belichick:  "Look, we're paying the price for a decade of selling out to push us over the top, takes time."

Sports Media:  "His honesty is refreshing, we all know what's going on, he's got good reasons."

Coach Gase:  "Look, we're paying the price for a decade of bad GM's and bad drafts, takes time."

Sports Media;  "How does this guy have a job?  Why isn't he fired?  Don't give me excuses!"

SAR I

Personally Gase’s eyes bothered me a lot less than Belichick French kissing his daughter on National tv. Hope that helps. 

  • Post of the Week 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, More Cowbell said:

I don't agree so much on the he couldn't draft thing. Miami's OL was a fixture in the Pro Bowl, Jason Taylor was a monster pass rushers, Roby was an unbelievable punter, and the WR's were always very good. He focused the high picks on O. 

Marino added to the reputation of the early to mid-80’s OL with his quick throwing skills. After the mid-80’s that OL suffered from Shula’s inability to replace players like Dwight Stephenson. His RBs rarely reached the 1,000 yd mark. Marino elevated the OLs reputation while it could never sustain the RB game

Taylor was drafted by Jimmy Johnson.

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Savage69 said:

+1 However Tuna won 2 bowls without a HOF QB.  Simms and Hoss had a total of 3 Pro bowls between them.

And would have won a third with Vinny if he didn’t rupture his Achilles in 1999

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...