Maybe its Time for Belichick and Brady

[PBF81]

Why would anyone hire a 72-year old coach that has only succeeded with the GOAT and been a miserable failure without that GOAT.  

 

 

[Mr. WEO]

On 11/28/2023 at 5:36 PM, theRalph said:

. This will draw ridicule.

 

 

[dma0034]

5 minutes ago, PBF81 said:

Why would anyone hire a 72-year old coach that has only succeeded with the GOAT and been a miserable failure without that GOAT.  

 

 

 

To be fair he did have a playoff birth before and after Brady. It's a QB driven league and his QB hasn't been great at all. He probably ends up with the Chargers imo. He gets a good offense but will never win a SB again

[Gregg]

2 minutes ago, PBF81 said:

Why would anyone hire a 72-year old coach that has only succeeded with the GOAT and been a miserable failure without that GOAT.  

 

 

 

Allen isn't the GOAT, but he is an elite level franchise QB. Bill is a much better DC than McDermott. In their 13-3 win over the Rams in the Super Bowl was it the Brady led offense that scored a whopping 13 points or Bill's defense holding the Rams to 3 that was the key to victory. How about the INT in the final minute to beat the Seahawks in the Super Bowl. Or making in game adjustments after the Falcons went up 28-3. They Pats D shut them out the rest of the way which allowed NE to come back and beat them 34-28 in OT for another Super Bowl championship. I don't think Bill is coming here since I doubt McDermott is getting fired. If Bill leaves NE, then it's probably for the Chargers or Commanders. But I would take him over McDermott as HC 24-7-365. 

[PBF81]

Just now, dma0034 said:

 

To be fair he did have a playoff birth before and after Brady. It's a QB driven league and his QB hasn't been great at all. He probably ends up with the Chargers imo. He gets a good offense but will never win a SB again

 

His playoff performances sans Brady are miserable. 

 

Look them up.  Ironically, the only non-humiliating playoff game he was ever in, his only playoff win in fact apart from Brady, was against Bledsoe's Pats.  Look up Bledsoe's playoff history when you have a second.  I'll provide links to both below.  He was an attrocious playoff QB.  Horrible.  

 

No reason for this kind of beatdown by a Neil O'Donnell-led offense, particularly when you have the 1st-ranked D.  

 

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/199501070pit.htm

 

Here's his only playoff win per above, and the Pats were far from a great team that season, good, not great by any measure.  

 

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/199501010cle.htm

 

Then of course there's the abject beatdown he took against us in '21.  

 

Bledsoe's playoff history, ... his best playoff QB Rating was 72.3.  LOL  

 

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/B/BledDr00/gamelog/post/

 

 

[Saxum]

21 hours ago, chongli said:

 

Yet some people want him here as coach?!?!

 

He is ancient.  Streaming makes him need to use bathroom.

[PBF81]

12 minutes ago, Gregg said:

 

Allen isn't the GOAT, but he is an elite level franchise QB. Bill is a much better DC than McDermott. In their 13-3 win over the Rams in the Super Bowl was it the Brady led offense that scored a whopping 13 points or Bill's defense holding the Rams to 3 that was the key to victory. How about the INT in the final minute to beat the Seahawks in the Super Bowl. Or making in game adjustments after the Falcons went up 28-3. They Pats D shut them out the rest of the way which allowed NE to come back and beat them 34-28 in OT for another Super Bowl championship. I don't think Bill is coming here since I doubt McDermott is getting fired. If Bill leaves NE, then it's probably for the Chargers or Commanders. But I would take him over McDermott as HC 24-7-365. 

 

The notion that Belichick, even at 72, is better than McDoesn'tKnow is a given.  

 

Still, Belichick is strong on defense, knows little about offense, has struggled without Brady doing the offense's thinking for him, but more importantly, isn't a long-term answer either way.  It's also far riskier than it needs to be.  

 

There are any number of candidates that would be better for Allen & the Offense, which means a better overall team, than McDoesn'tKnow.  

 

No need to hit up an assisted living facility for a guy that would likely want both the GM and HC positions and who's only proven that he sucks at the former.  

 

Either way, to start, McD likely isn't going anywhere for as much as most fans want him outta here, so it's more or less moot.  It comes down to Pegula who's a strange cat in that way.  I suppose if we finish 2-3, which is unfathomable, but should it happen then the pressure will be on him.  

 

I'd be fully in favor of a 2-year contract for the next guy, with stipulations involving an AFCC and SB appearance, with a guaranteed 3-5 year extension based upon that.  

 

It's still a business, right.  

 

 

Edited December 4, 2023 by PBF81

[LeGOATski]

5 minutes ago, PBF81 said:

I'd be fully in favor of a 2-year contract for the next guy, with stipulations involving an AFCC and SB appearance, with a guaranteed 3-5 year extension based upon that.  

 

It's still a business, right.  

 

 

That'd be nice, but I don't think you'd be able to negotiate that from a top candidate. They have more leverage.

[PBF81]

8 minutes ago, LeGOATski said:

That'd be nice, but I don't think you'd be able to negotiate that from a top candidate. They have more leverage.

 

The leverage that we have is Allen.  

 

How many coaches are going to have a chance to coach with a QB of Allen's characteristics.  

If they'd rather go coach a team with a lesser QB or no long-term QB prospect, for more money, so be it.  Seems to me that they wouldn't have been here primarily to win then anyway.  

 

Not sure we need a coach here that is more concerned about money than about performance.  Besides, the money would follow the performance.  

 

And otherwise, put performance incentives in it.   

 

What coach wouldn't think that having Allen gives him a far greater chance to succeed and make him great as well.  

Just my take however.  

 

 

Edited December 4, 2023 by PBF81

[LeGOATski]

1 hour ago, PBF81 said:

 

The leverage that we have is Allen.  

 

How many coaches are going to have a chance to coach with a QB of Allen's characteristics.  

If they'd rather go coach a team with a lesser QB or no long-term QB prospect, for more money, so be it.  Seems to me that they wouldn't have been here primarily to win then anyway.  

 

Not sure we need a coach here that is more concerned about money than about performance.  Besides, the money would follow the performance.  

 

And otherwise, put performance incentives in it.   

 

What coach wouldn't think that having Allen gives him a far greater chance to succeed and make him great as well.  

Just my take however.  

 

 

That would all be fine and dandy. It's just not reality. A top HC candidate is going to get a contract with the length and guarantees that match the market and their worth. 

 

I don't think Pegula minds paying for a top candidate, anyway. 

[Donuts and Doritos]

[PBF81]

3 minutes ago, LeGOATski said:

That would all be fine and dandy. It's just not reality. A top HC candidate is going to get a contract with the length and guarantees that match the market and their worth. 

 

It shouldn't be unrealistic.  In essence, you're telling the new coach that if he underachieves, he's gone.  He could be gone anyway except with the contract in hand, but most coaches move on and get other jobs anyway, which comes out of their past contracts.  

 

So if you're looking for a head-coaching job, and the Jets or Panthers come calling with 3-year $20M contracts, or we offer you competitive per annum compensation to work with Allen, with a commitment to extend and keep you assuming that you also don't underachieve, you're saying that they'd opt to go to the Jets or Panthers instead?  

 

Most new head coaches don't get five year contracts, do they?  Otherwise, I'd even offer them more money and give 'em a five year contract with plans on eating it after 2 years if it doesn't work out.  Not sure I see much of a difference except that in one case they don't get fired, whereas in the other scenario they do.  

 

I'm not sure that'd be the case.  With Tyrod Taylor, sure.  But with Josh Allen?   I have difficulty envisioning that.  For me personally, I'd take a one-year flyer like that to with the opportunity to coach Allen & the Bills to a championship with the possibility of continuing on.  At the end of the season if you fail, make your pitch to the owner, if it makes sense, you stick around for another season to see what happens.  If you can't coach an Allen-led team to the AFC CG, not sure you're right anyway.  

 

IMO teams make too much out of how much a head coach is paid compared to the players.  Under Wilson, he didn't want to spend a few million more on great coaches and we paid the price, but now we make decisions like Von Miller which pales in contrast to a HC making say $10M instead of $5M, say on a four year contract, losing what, $10M if he's cut after two seasons.  

 

 

3 minutes ago, LeGOATski said:

I don't think Pegula minds paying for a top candidate, anyway. 

 

Agree there.  

 

 

[Aussie Joe]

Terry P said anything yet ?