Is he really that good?

[Ice Cold Bruschi]

How many superbowls did TUNA win without Belichick?

How many play off games has he won without belichick?

[thewildrabbit]

We all wish BB was the Bills head coach and hate him because he isn't, and we are stuck with his polar opposite, Jauron the perennial loser.

[Cynical]

1988 was his 10th year as a head coach. He started coaching in 1978.

 

See if you can follow along:

 

1978 - HC of KC => 1

1979 - HC of KC => 2

1980 - HC of KC => 3

1981 - HC of KC => 4

1982 - HC of KC => 5

1983 - Was not a HC in the NFL => still sitting at 5

1984 - Was not a HC in the NFL => still sitting at 5

1985 - Was not a HC in the NFL => still sitting at 5

1986 - Took over as HC for the Bills during the season => wasn't a full season, but we will say it is, 6

1987 - Bills HC => 7

1988 - Bills HC => 8

 

Looks like you are off.

 

Even if you count it your way, you are still off.

[djcalvin79]

We all wish BB was the Bills head coach and hate him because he isn't, and we are stuck with his polar opposite, Jauron the perennial loser.

 

exactly!

[Mr. WEO]

I disagree - he was a mediocre head coach (36-44 in Cleveland) until he hitched his wagon to Bill Parcells. After carrying Parcells' jock...er, uh...I mean serving as an assistant to Bill Parcells for a few years, Belicheat* finally got another head coaching job in New England*, and even then went 5-11 his first season as Patriettes* HC. Then he started cheating, and the wins started coming.

 

And, while Belicheat* is part of Parcells' impressive NFL coaching tree, his own NFL coaching tree is far from impressive...

 

 

Eric Mangini - former Jets HC and current Browns HC – 23-25 record with Jets, missed playoffs in his last two years in NYC. Hired by the Browns, where he immediately earned the ire of...

 

Mike Leach

 

Upon further review, is probably not a "Mangenius" as once thought.

 

 

Romeo Crennel - former Browns HC – 24-40 record with Browns. His horridness cannot be quantified, unless you count the money made on gambling against him.

 

 

Charlie Weis - Notre Dame HC – 29-21 record at Notre Dame, but only 10-15 in his last two seasons with his own recruits.

 

 

Nick Saban - former Dolphins head coach, current Alabama HC - was a disaster as Dolphins coach. (Saban is a great college coach, though, despite getting his ass kicked by Florida and Utah this year - way to ROLL in the big games, Nick.)

 

 

And the coming season doesn't look too promising in Denver for rookie HC Josh McDaniels, Belicheat's former OC, whose first big move as HC was to alienate starting QB Jay Cutler to the point where he demanded a trade. Good luck with Kyle Orton, Josh.

 

Actually, that list of post-BB losers points more to BB's greatness as a coach than disputes it. All of these guys were touted as young geniuses yet BB didn't need any of them and they have all proven to be morons.

 

Did someone really ask who anybody would rather have as HC of the Bills BB or Jauron?? Where do you guys come from???

 

Brady is the games best QB, but BB is easily the best caoch. Can anyone name a better coach in the league? Come on Senator, let's hear it. And can you possibly respond without putting "cheater" after each other word? We get it, he cheated.

 

Maybe you didn't notice, but he's gone 31-6 since getting caught.

[The Senator]

Actually, that list of post-BB losers points more to BB's greatness as a coach than disputes it. All of these guys were touted as young geniuses yet BB didn't need any of them and they have all proven to be morons.

 

Did someone really ask who anybody would rather have as HC of the Bills BB or Jauron?? Where do you guys come from???

 

Brady is the games best QB, but BB is easily the best caoch. Can anyone name a better coach in the league? Come on Senator, let's hear it. And can you possibly respond without putting "cheater" after each other word? We get it, he cheated.

 

Maybe you didn't notice, but he's gone 31-6 since getting caught.

Maybe you didn't notice, but he hasn't won a championship since getting caught, and the Belicheat*/Patriettes* era is on the wane.

 

The list was to rebut the claim that Belicheat* has left an impressive coaching 'tree' - nothing else. And, as you have stated, quite the opposite is true - they have all turned out to be morons.

 

I'm not naive enough to believe Belicheat* has ceased to exploit every opportunity to bend and break the rules, whether it's stealing signals, signing cut players for one week just before he faces their former team, or faking injuries to rest buy his squad a few moments of extra rest during a crucial point in a game. Once a cheater, always a cheater. It's in his genetic makeup.

 

As for a better coach, I'd say Coughlin, Dungy, Cowher, or anyone who can win championships without having to resort to cheating.

[OCinBuffalo]

Actually, that list of post-BB losers points more to BB's greatness as a coach than disputes it. All of these guys were touted as young geniuses yet BB didn't need any of them and they have all proven to be morons.

 

Did someone really ask who anybody would rather have as HC of the Bills BB or Jauron?? Where do you guys come from???

 

Brady is the games best QB, but BB is easily the best caoch. Can anyone name a better coach in the league? Come on Senator, let's hear it. And can you possibly respond without putting "cheater" after each other word? We get it, he cheated.

 

Maybe you didn't notice, but he's gone 31-6 since getting caught.

Yeah, maybe if you are playing Madden/are in college right now. Here are the answers to your questions:

1. Bill Walsh/Joe Montana. Both run circles round and round the Pats*. It's not even close. The NFC defensive teams of the 80's and early 90's would have escorted both Belechick and Brady out of the NFL years ago (um, D rules changes anyone???) ...as the Steelers/Bengals defenses, and the Oilers O already did to Belechick in Cleveland the first time around. Montana won games, he didn't "manage the system". Walsh invented entire offenses, Belechick lives off other people's ideas. Like I said, it's not even close. Walsh has 2 generations of coaching legacy(i.e. Holmgren, Reid, Dungy, Chucky, too many to name: his entire assistant staff were good/great head coaches, except one). Belechick has flop head coaches/disgruntled former employees who end up sucking.

2. The Steelers in general are better at everything than the 00's Pats*...take your pick of decade, etc. Player for player, it's not even kind of close. Coaching, development, scouting, drafting, the Steelers have always been better than the Pats*

3. IF we win 1 of any of the 4 SBs, you can easily say that Levy/Kelly was better...because neither had the Pats* defense. If the Marv Bills had the same Free Agency rules that Belechick did, we would have won 7 SBs in the 90's.

4. Elway was far and away a better QB...because unlike Brady*, Elway could lead comebacks. You get up on, or come back on, the Pats* and they will quit every time. Just like they did against the Dolphins last year, Giants the year before, and the Colts the year before that. Elway would never have let his teams quit. Brady leads the quitting-->see bitching at refs, whining in general, pouting on the sidelines. I can name at least 20 great QBs who wouldn't be caught dead doing that.

5. Marino was far and away a better QB...because Marino wasn't asked to win games by the Dolphins, he was asked to win SEASONS. The Dolphins spent crazy resources on Marino and their O line, got lucky with Duper and Clayton, and told them "go win" with a score of 35-28. Marino was the O, but he was also the D. You knew he could score on you in 2 mins, so you had to call plays on O that would hold the ball longer, etc. Nobody could beat the Dolphins in a shootout...until Kelly and the boys came along. Brady* has never been asked to win a SEASON, and Belechick looks to his D to win games.

6. From what I hear Otto Graham is better than all of the above, but I can't say, either way, cause I never saw him play.

 

But here's the thing: If Belechick is so smart, why did he wait until the 6th round to take Brady? Why didn't he start him right away if he 'knew'(because he is such a good coach) Brady was so good? Ok, so if he was being "developed", then why did he start out 4th on the depth chart? 4th gets you cut. How come Brady didn't get to compete for the starting spot his second year if he was being "developed"? Is this another example of Belecheat's amazing coaching ability? Or just getting very, very lucky? And finally, why are we talking about getting massively lucky with a QB, on a team whose coach focuses on defense = his team is at least in the game, every game, and acting like that is the same as other QBs...like Elway, Kelly, Marino, or Montana...whose defenses were nowhere near as good, ever?

 

Bottom Line: You give Payton Manning the Patriots Defense this decade and Tom Brady = Phil Simms...which is exactly what Belecheat "thought" he was drafting.

[QB Bills]

Yeah, maybe if you are playing Madden/are in college right now. Here are the answers to your questions:

1. Bill Walsh/Joe Montana. Both run circles round and round the Pats*. It's not even close. The NFC defensive teams of the 80's and early 90's would have escorted both Belechick and Brady out of the NFL years ago (um, D rules changes anyone???) ...as the Steelers/Bengals defenses, and the Oilers O already did to Belechick in Cleveland the first time around. Montana won games, he didn't "manage the system". Walsh invented entire offenses, Belechick lives off other people's ideas. Like I said, it's not even close. Walsh has 2 generations of coaching legacy(i.e. Holmgren, Reid, Dungy, Chucky, too many to name: his entire assistant staff were good/great head coaches, except one). Belechick has flop head coaches/disgruntled former employees who end up sucking.

2. The Steelers in general are better at everything than the 00's Pats*...take your pick of decade, etc. Player for player, it's not even kind of close. Coaching, development, scouting, drafting, the Steelers have always been better than the Pats*

3. IF we win 1 of any of the 4 SBs, you can easily say that Levy/Kelly was better...because neither had the Pats* defense. If the Marv Bills had the same Free Agency rules that Belechick did, we would have won 7 SBs in the 90's.

4. Elway was far and away a better QB...because unlike Brady*, Elway could lead comebacks. You get up on, or come back on, the Pats* and they will quit every time. Just like they did against the Dolphins last year, Giants the year before, and the Colts the year before that. Elway would never have let his teams quit. Brady leads the quitting-->see bitching at refs, whining in general, pouting on the sidelines. I can name at least 20 great QBs who wouldn't be caught dead doing that.

5. Marino was far and away a better QB...because Marino wasn't asked to win games by the Dolphins, he was asked to win SEASONS. The Dolphins spent crazy resources on Marino and their O line, got lucky with Duper and Clayton, and told them "go win" with a score of 35-28. Marino was the O, but he was also the D. You knew he could score on you in 2 mins, so you had to call plays on O that would hold the ball longer, etc. Nobody could beat the Dolphins in a shootout...until Kelly and the boys came along. Brady* has never been asked to win a SEASON, and Belechick looks to his D to win games.

6. From what I hear Otto Graham is better than all of the above, but I can't say, either way, cause I never saw him play.

 

But here's the thing: If Belechick is so smart, why did he wait until the 6th round to take Brady? Why didn't he start him right away if he 'knew'(because he is such a good coach) Brady was so good? Ok, so if he was being "developed", then why did he start out 4th on the depth chart? 4th gets you cut. How come Brady didn't get to compete for the starting spot his second year if he was being "developed"? Is this another example of Belecheat's amazing coaching ability? Or just getting very, very lucky? And finally, why are we talking about getting massively lucky with a QB, on a team whose coach focuses on defense = his team is at least in the game, every game, and acting like that is the same as other QBs...like Elway, Kelly, Marino, or Montana...whose defenses were nowhere near as good, ever?

 

Bottom Line: You give Payton Manning the Patriots Defense this decade and Tom Brady = Phil Simms...which is exactly what Belecheat "thought" he was drafting.

 

You're out to lunch.

 

1. How does that help your argument? Doesn't that just reinforce how good Belichick is?

2. Player by player, the Rams/Panthers/Eagles were all better than the Pats also. But oh wait, they cheated, right?

3. LOL...apparantly you have been hibernating the last 10 years. Free agency is the main reason the Bills suck. In case you haven't noticed, there has been a lot more outflow than inflow in regards to FAs

4. I really don't get where your argument is going...so now Brady isn't that good either? And neither is Belichick? As for quitting, I suppose if the Bills score first against them in the opener, we'll be 1-0 going into week 2.

5. Marino was a selfish prick who was more concerned with breaking records than winning a championship. Lois Einhorn should have done him in when he/she had the chance.

6. Whatever

 

Belichick is miles ahead of the pack in regards to preperation and coaching. I would pay the guy 15 million bucks a year to coach the Bills. And by saying "I", I really mean I would like it if Ralph did. He would have more of an effect on the prospects for the team than any player would.

 

Bottom line is, he really is that good. His record speaks for itself.

[hamtenp]

At the end of the 2000 season Bill Belichick career record was 41 wins and 55 losses that was the last year he did not have Tom Brady as his QB. IMO the best QB of all time. I cannot stand him but he is a pure winner. Romeo, Charlie, and ManGenious all have bombed in there post NE jobs. As it stands right know he is a hall of fame coach. I do not think he is that special he has just got the best toy on the block to play with. He must thank his lucky stars every day for Brady.

Total bullcrap! I am a true Billsfan and I believe Belichick is a fabulous coach. He keeps losing assistant coaches each of the past 5 yrs and still has his team playing at a top notch level. I would be thrilled to have him as our coach.

[hamtenp]

You're out to lunch.

 

1. How does that help your argument? Doesn't that just reinforce how good Belichick is?

2. Player by player, the Rams/Panthers/Eagles were all better than the Pats also. But oh wait, they cheated, right?

3. LOL...apparantly you have been hibernating the last 10 years. Free agency is the main reason the Bills suck. In case you haven't noticed, there has been a lot more outflow than inflow in regards to FAs

4. I really don't get where your argument is going...so now Brady isn't that good either? And neither is Belichick? As for quitting, I suppose if the Bills score first against them in the opener, we'll be 1-0 going into week 2.

5. Marino was a selfish prick who was more concerned with breaking records than winning a championship. Lois Einhorn should have done him in when he/she had the chance.

6. Whatever

 

Belichick is miles ahead of the pack in regards to preperation and coaching. I would pay the guy 15 million bucks a year to coach the Bills. And by saying "I", I really mean I would like it if Ralph did. He would have more of an effect on the prospects for the team than any player would.

 

Bottom line is, he really is that good. His record speaks for itself.

 

I agree 100% with you. Belichick is special.

[Mr. WEO]

Yeah, maybe if you are playing Madden/are in college right now. Here are the answers to your questions:

1. Bill Walsh/Joe Montana. Both run circles round and round the Pats*. It's not even close. The NFC defensive teams of the 80's and early 90's would have escorted both Belechick and Brady out of the NFL years ago (um, D rules changes anyone???) ...as the Steelers/Bengals defenses, and the Oilers O already did to Belechick in Cleveland the first time around. Montana won games, he didn't "manage the system". Walsh invented entire offenses, Belechick lives off other people's ideas. Like I said, it's not even close. Walsh has 2 generations of coaching legacy(i.e. Holmgren, Reid, Dungy, Chucky, too many to name: his entire assistant staff were good/great head coaches, except one). Belechick has flop head coaches/disgruntled former employees who end up sucking.

2. The Steelers in general are better at everything than the 00's Pats*...take your pick of decade, etc. Player for player, it's not even kind of close. Coaching, development, scouting, drafting, the Steelers have always been better than the Pats*

3. IF we win 1 of any of the 4 SBs, you can easily say that Levy/Kelly was better...because neither had the Pats* defense. If the Marv Bills had the same Free Agency rules that Belechick did, we would have won 7 SBs in the 90's.

4. Elway was far and away a better QB...because unlike Brady*, Elway could lead comebacks. You get up on, or come back on, the Pats* and they will quit every time. Just like they did against the Dolphins last year, Giants the year before, and the Colts the year before that. Elway would never have let his teams quit. Brady leads the quitting-->see bitching at refs, whining in general, pouting on the sidelines. I can name at least 20 great QBs who wouldn't be caught dead doing that.

5. Marino was far and away a better QB...because Marino wasn't asked to win games by the Dolphins, he was asked to win SEASONS. The Dolphins spent crazy resources on Marino and their O line, got lucky with Duper and Clayton, and told them "go win" with a score of 35-28. Marino was the O, but he was also the D. You knew he could score on you in 2 mins, so you had to call plays on O that would hold the ball longer, etc. Nobody could beat the Dolphins in a shootout...until Kelly and the boys came along. Brady* has never been asked to win a SEASON, and Belechick looks to his D to win games.

6. From what I hear Otto Graham is better than all of the above, but I can't say, either way, cause I never saw him play.

 

But here's the thing: If Belechick is so smart, why did he wait until the 6th round to take Brady? Why didn't he start him right away if he 'knew'(because he is such a good coach) Brady was so good? Ok, so if he was being "developed", then why did he start out 4th on the depth chart? 4th gets you cut. How come Brady didn't get to compete for the starting spot his second year if he was being "developed"? Is this another example of Belecheat's amazing coaching ability? Or just getting very, very lucky? And finally, why are we talking about getting massively lucky with a QB, on a team whose coach focuses on defense = his team is at least in the game, every game, and acting like that is the same as other QBs...like Elway, Kelly, Marino, or Montana...whose defenses were nowhere near as good, ever?

 

Bottom Line: You give Payton Manning the Patriots Defense this decade and Tom Brady = Phil Simms...which is exactly what Belecheat "thought" he was drafting.

 

Probably the most prolific collection of idiotic ramblings ever found at this site. Full of lazy, factless nonsense.

 

First of all, last time I checked, Walsh, Montana, Marino and Elway are long ago RETIRED. The Steelers?? Pick a decade? OK how about the 1980's? One SB appearance in the 90's. Coaching? This team gave us Mike Mularkey. Drafting and developing? You mean Tom Donohoe? Cordell Stewart?? hahahahaha.

 

As for Brady are you saying that BB was stupid for drafting him 6th? Or for keeping him on the team as a 4th QB instead of cutting him--just because he was "4th on the depth chart"?? Or for not starting him as a ROOKIE instead of his franchise QB? You are all over the place. Brady didn't lead any 4th Q comebacks? Maybe you should ask a friend or try the internet to review some of the Pats SB recent wins. In fact, from the years 1996 t02006, Brady is ranked 4th among QBs in successful 4th Q comebacks. In fact, he is the ONLY QB to win more 4th Q comeback attempts than he lost .

 

Until Elway was paired up with a great RB, he was a SB loooooser.

 

Keep trying.

[OCinBuffalo]

You're out to lunch.

1. How does that help your argument? Doesn't that just reinforce how good Belichick is?

Re-read what I wrote... To summarize, Belechick sucks compared to Walsh for the easons I have clearly stated, and Brady is not and never will be in Montana's league, as evidenced by the fact that on 3 separate occasions, in the playoffs, the Pats* have asked Brady to win the game, instead of simply manage it, and he has failed all 3 times. All Montana would have done in those situations is win, all 3 times. Period.

2. Player by player, the Rams/Panthers/Eagles were all better than the Pats also. But oh wait, they cheated, right?

Interesting...you said it, not me. I have yet to talk about cheating. I am talking about how the Steelers have been great to the Pats* good, and that getting lucky with a QB that you draft in the 6th round is not skill...they were trying to decide between Brady and Tim Rattay for God's sake.

3. LOL...apparantly you have been hibernating the last 10 years. Free agency is the main reason the Bills suck. In case you haven't noticed, there has been a lot more outflow than inflow in regards to FAs

What the Bills have done since 2002 is irrelevant to my point, and this thread.

Apparently you have no idea what you are talking about, and/or you can't pay attention to what I AM saying. Moss, Welker, Thomas and everybody else that the Pats* got in FA since 2002 would simply not be available under the 90's FA rules. If the 90's Bills, and let's face those guys would have stayed put on this team, could go out and grab top tier talent from other teams in FA, they would have been almost impossible to beat, and they surely would have won SB after SB. What if the Bills could have gone out in FA and singed Derrick Thomas? We'd have the best pass rushing team of all time, that's what. What if the 90s Bills could have signed any of the WRs from Miami or the Oliers of the time? =Passing records that would never be broken. Hint: the only reason we were able to get James Lofton in FA? He had domestic trouble, and got kicked out of Green Bay, and then didn't fit in with LA(Oakland).

4. I really don't get where your argument is going...because you really don't know football that well, other than what you see on your Madden screen so now Brady isn't that good either? I dunno, what does your Madden rating say?And neither is Belichick? Again, check MaddenAs for quitting, I suppose if the Bills score first against them in the opener, we'll be 1-0 going into week 2.

No, but if the Bills get up by two TDs, or come back after being down 2 TDs and go ahead by a TD, you can pretty much count on all of the quitting behavior I described. He has been consistent with it the last 3 years in the playoffs, why should it change?

5. Marino was a selfish prick who was more concerned with breaking records than winning a championship. Lois Einhorn should have done him in when he/she had the chance.

You can say what you want about Marino's character, I don't see it, but it's irrelevant, anyway. Marino personally won SEASONS for Miami, Brady has yet to personally win a single playoff game. Marino absolutely wanted to win a Championship more than anything(further proof that you have no idea what you are saying) and his hatred for the Bills insistence on keeping his fingers bare is well documented. To this day Marino will not talk about Buffalo of the Bills.

6. Whatever

Exactly. You willingness to dismiss a HOF QB who has stats that will never be broken is the icing on the cake of my "you really don't know football that well, other than what Madden tells you" point.

Belichick is miles ahead of the pack in regards to preperation and coaching. I would pay the guy 15 million bucks a year to coach the Bills. And by saying "I", I really mean I would like it if Ralph did. He would have more of an effect on the prospects for the team than any player would.

 

Bottom line is, he really is that good. His record speaks for itself.

None of which speaks to my point about drafting Brady, why he was almost cut, why Brady was relegated as back-up, never given a chance to compete, etc., yet we are supposed to give Belecheat credit for being a genius and drafting him?

No. That's retarded.

 

So you are right because, instead of backing up what you say with facts, you would simply pay Belechick a lot of money?

No. That's retarded.

 

You think a guy who drafts Brady in the 6th, and then gets lucky = great ability to draft players/see talent?

No. That's retarded.

 

The fact is that Belechick trades back for 2 main reasons:

1. It means he gets more 2nd/3rd round players, which means he spreads his risk across multiple people instead of one great prospect. In this way, he's never really "wrong" in the draft, because he doesn't get great players unless they are a sure thing. Besides, he's not looking to get great players, only good ones. He can't coach great players, and have them outshine him/his system. IF that were to happen Belechick loses his "infallibility" and the whole thing falls apart(see: Crennel, Mangini, etc.)

2. He gets more late round players, which means he gets to treat his entire team like a college program. You can't have a large ego and be a late round guy, and besides, how could you possibly squeeze another ego onto the plane, with Belechicks already taking up all the room? Later round players will gladly chuck their individual aspirations just to get a chance to play, but they are still no better than the system.

 

Because of 1+2 he runs his team with lesser players(they suck everywhere else they go as FA)that fit into a system. It's a good plan, but it's not really coaching, it's system management. Belechick doesn't develop his players to be the best they can be...if he did that then they might outgrow his system, and he can't deal with that.

 

Parcells had shown this type of "coaching" can be effective. Belechick copied it. But neither of them could hold a candle to real coaches who develop their players and build HOFers, not robots.

[QB Bills]

Re-read what I wrote... To summarize, Belechick sucks compared to Walsh for the easons I have clearly stated, and Brady is not and never will be in Montana's league, as evidenced by the fact that on 3 separate occasions, in the playoffs, the Pats* have asked Brady to win the game, instead of simply manage it, and he has failed all 3 times. All Montana would have done in those situations is win, all 3 times. Period.

 

Interesting...you said it, not me. I have yet to talk about cheating. I am talking about how the Steelers have been great to the Pats* good, and that getting lucky with a QB that you draft in the 6th round is not skill...they were trying to decide between Brady and Tim Rattay for God's sake.

 

What the Bills have done since 2002 is irrelevant to my point, and this thread.

Apparently you have no idea what you are talking about, and/or you can't pay attention to what I AM saying. Moss, Welker, Thomas and everybody else that the Pats* got in FA since 2002 would simply not be available under the 90's FA rules. If the 90's Bills, and let's face those guys would have stayed put on this team, could go out and grab top tier talent from other teams in FA, they would have been almost impossible to beat, and they surely would have won SB after SB. What if the Bills could have gone out in FA and singed Derrick Thomas? We'd have the best pass rushing team of all time, that's what. What if the 90s Bills could have signed any of the WRs from Miami or the Oliers of the time? =Passing records that would never be broken. Hint: the only reason we were able to get James Lofton in FA? He had domestic trouble, and got kicked out of Green Bay, and then didn't fit in with LA(Oakland).

 

No, but if the Bills get up by two TDs, or come back after being down 2 TDs and go ahead by a TD, you can pretty much count on all of the quitting behavior I described. He has been consistent with it the last 3 years in the playoffs, why should it change?

 

You can say what you want about Marino's character, I don't see it, but it's irrelevant, anyway. Marino personally won SEASONS for Miami, Brady has yet to personally win a single playoff game. Marino absolutely wanted to win a Championship more than anything(further proof that you have no idea what you are saying) and his hatred for the Bills insistence on keeping his fingers bare is well documented. To this day Marino will not talk about Buffalo of the Bills.

 

Exactly. You willingness to dismiss a HOF QB who has stats that will never be broken is the icing on the cake of my "you really don't know football that well, other than what Madden tells you" point.

 

None of which speaks to my point about drafting Brady, why he was almost cut, why Brady was relegated as back-up, never given a chance to compete, etc., yet we are supposed to give Belecheat credit for being a genius and drafting him?

No. That's retarded.

 

So you are right because, instead of backing up what you say with facts, you would simply pay Belechick a lot of money?

No. That's retarded.

 

You think a guy who drafts Brady in the 6th, and then gets lucky = great ability to draft players/see talent?

No. That's retarded.

 

The fact is that Belechick trades back for 2 main reasons:

1. It means he gets more 2nd/3rd round players, which means he spreads his risk across multiple people instead of one great prospect. In this way, he's never really "wrong" in the draft, because he doesn't get great players unless they are a sure thing. Besides, he's not looking to get great players, only good ones. He can't coach great players, and have them outshine him/his system. IF that were to happen Belechick loses his "infallibility" and the whole thing falls apart(see: Crennel, Mangini, etc.)

2. He gets more late round players, which means he gets to treat his entire team like a college program. You can't have a large ego and be a late round guy, and besides, how could you possibly squeeze another ego onto the plane, with Belechicks already taking up all the room? Later round players will gladly chuck their individual aspirations just to get a chance to play, but they are still no better than the system.

 

Because of 1+2 he runs his team with lesser players(they suck everywhere else they go as FA)that fit into a system. It's a good plan, but it's not really coaching, it's system management. Belechick doesn't develop his players to be the best they can be...if he did that then they might outgrow his system, and he can't deal with that.

 

Parcells had shown this type of "coaching" can be effective. Belechick copied it. But neither of them could hold a candle to real coaches who develop their players and build HOFers, not robots.

 

This has got to be the quote of the day on here: It's a good plan, but it's not really coaching, it's system management. Guy, are you for real??? Can you explain the difference?

 

You are all over the place here and your arguments against Belichick are actually making the case for him being great even stronger.

 

1. You're saying that Brady was a fluke, which may be the case, but they did have 11 wins last year with a makeshift QB who hadn't started a game since high school. I agree that Brady is overrated but that's because he's a product of Belichick's system...which reinforces how good Belichick is.

 

2. You're saying he can't coach great players. But he's won three super bowls. So a coach has won 3 super bowls with no great players...doesn't that say something? Personally, I think they had a few great players, but they definitely weren't the most talented team in the league when they won, and I'd argue that they still aren't. BB is the main reason they are always good.

 

3. You say Belichick looks for his D to win games. What's wrong with that? On a team with no great players, his D is coached pretty well if they can win games, don't you think?

 

4. And I don't get my football knowledge from Madden, I get it from Tecmo Super Bowl, as my name states. Madden is Dick Jauron, Tecmo is Belichick.

 

So, just to be clear, Brady is a whiner and not a great QB. The pats don't have great players. They are only good because of the system. Add that all up and you come up with: Belichick is not that good of a coach?

 

It seems like you have this hatred of the pats that is spawned by envy. I know I do. But at least I can give credit where credit's due. BB is a prick, but he's far and away the best coach out there. In fact, if I could pick one person, player or otherwise, to join the Bills, it would be Belichick.

 

In any case, whenever I get overly jealous of their success, I just look at this picture of Wilfork and his wife:

 

http://cache.boston.com/bonzai-fba/Third_P...614880_4371.jpg

[OCinBuffalo]

Probably the most prolific collection of idiotic ramblings ever found at this site.

We'll see...

First of all, last time I checked, Walsh, Montana, Marino and Elway are long ago RETIRED.

Which means they aren't better than Brady/Belechick how exactly? So far you are doing so well on the idiotic ramblings buddy. This rambling from you is extra specially silly.

The Steelers?? Pick a decade? OK how about the 1980's? One SB appearance in the 90's.

And compare that to the Pats of the 80's = getting destroyed in SB they got lucky to be at in the first place, based on a lucky fumble recovery? Getting destroyed the rest of the decade? The Pats were the worst team in football from 86-96 and were going to be bought and moved to St. Louis in 1993. Primary reason: they flat out sucked. Kraft stepped in and saved their asses in 1994. Strike 2 on idiot ramblings from you.

Coaching? This team gave us Mike Mularkey. Drafting and developing? You mean Tom Donohoe? Cordell Stewart?? hahahahaha.

No, I mean the Steelers who have never been in danger of moving because they suck so badly, have few fans, and the fans they do have are bandwagoners. I mean the Steelers have how many HOFers? compared to the Pats*? I mean the fact that they have developed player after player, year after year, to be as good as he can be, not tried to fit JAG players into a system. Another whiff from you.

As for Brady are you saying that BB was stupid for drafting him 6th?

No I'm asking this question:

How can Brady be awesome, but get drafted in the 6th round, but Bill Belecheat is awesome, because he drafts so well, exist anyplace other than an addled brain? You can't have it both ways. Pick one and quit wasting my time.

Or for keeping him on the team as a 4th QB instead of cutting him--just because he was "4th on the depth chart"?? Or for not starting him as a ROOKIE instead of his franchise QB? You are all over the place.

No I am simply getting ahead of the usual BS excuses people like you make when I apply logic to their position. The fact is Brady's rise to stardom was not an intentional plan by BB. No other conclusion is possible. You cannot describe Brady without using the words "luck" and "great defense". I can easily talk about Elway, Montana, Kelly, Moon, and Marino and not use the words luck or especially "great defense".

Brady didn't lead any 4th Q comebacks? Maybe you should ask a friend or try the internet to review some of the Pats SB recent wins.

Maybe you should watch some game films. Hint: having your FG kicker come in and kick a 45 yard FG with 3+ minutes left in the game is NOT leading a 4th quarter comeback. That = getting stopped on 3rd down, leaving the other team an ability to tie/beat you by giving them the ball back, not winning the game, and leaving the winning of the game to your defense....there goes that darn defense thing again. Go back and review, this is precisely what happened in the "Pats SB recent wins" and also what happened in the "Pats SB recent LOSS".

 

In contrast, youtube is littered with what real comebacks, Elway, Kelly, Marino, Montana, Moon, etc. look like. More idiot ramblings from you....

Until Elway was paired up with a great RB, he was a SB loooooser.

 

Keep trying.

And Brady has apparently had no running game/short passing game this entire time huh. Yeah it's all been down the field for noodle armed Tom.

 

Buddy...idiot ramblings??? You did yourself no favors with this post.

[OCinBuffalo]

This has got to be the quote of the day on here: It's a good plan, but it's not really coaching, it's system management. Guy, are you for real??? Can you explain the difference?

Of course I can. It depends on whether you define "coach" as a guy who develops players, or as a guy who has the word "coach" on his t-shirt.

 

I have coached high school players, helped them improve their game, and be successful at the D1/D3 level, and also won league titles, in 2 different sports(lacrosse and baseball) at the same time. I have also ran a "system" on a team where believe me, nobody was going anywhere after this, and won league titles(basketball). In the first instance, you develop your plan around the talent you have, work that talent extensively in practice to maximize it, and come game time you get out of the way and let the talent win. In the second instance, you demand compliance to the fundamentals of the system, work the system, and can replace any of the "parts" with other "parts" as long as the rest of the system is working and you keep each role relatively simple and strictly defined.

 

Both approaches can be successful if all you care about is winning. But, if you care about being referred to by your players as their "first real coach", as in the players you helped improve still buy you beers every time they see you and genuinely thank you for helping them improve and get where they went, then the second approach is not for you.

 

What? Did you think I was pulling this out of my ass? I still get asked to do private coaching in lacrosse and would if I had the time, not for the easy fat $$$, but because I really enjoy it. Let's hear about your extensive coaching/management experience and you tell me where I am going wrong.

You are all over the place here and your arguments against Belichick are actually making the case for him being great even stronger.

Yeah...this ought to be fun..

1. You're saying that Brady was a fluke, which may be the case, but they did have 11 wins last year with a makeshift QB who hadn't started a game since high school. I agree that Brady is overrated but that's because he's a product of Belichick's system...which reinforces how good Belichick is.

God....I am saying no such thing. I am saying: pick Belechick for creating a good defensive team by using players nobody else wanted(um, fat, slow DL and undersized fast LBs), OR, pick Brady for overcoming and doing well. One, or the other, not both. You don't get to pick both, unless you think Belechick "planned" to pick his eventual starter in the 6th round, in which case you are wasting our time. You cannot give Belechick credit for Brady...and call him smart for letting him sit out there for 5 rounds, in the same universe.

2. You're saying he can't coach great players. But he's won three super bowls. So a coach has won 3 super bowls with no great players...doesn't that say something? Personally, I think they had a few great players, but they definitely weren't the most talented team in the league when they won, and I'd argue that they still aren't. BB is the main reason they are always good.

Yes, which is why I am saying...he can't coach great players. Great players are, by definition, counter-productive for the Pats*. Good system players/guys who are past their "greatness" (see Seau, Thomas) are what you need in Belechicks system, none of which will ever represent Belechick's "coaching" ability. Did he make Seau better? Of course not, Seau got worse in NE*. He simply keeps the parts working properly and replaces them occasionally.

 

In contrast, Bill Walsh drafted Joe Montana against the "wisdom" of the press at the time, developed his great talent, and turned him into the player that he still is: the greatest QB of all time. That's coaching, period. Having Brady throw to TEs for 4 yards, hand the ball off, and send in the kicker to win the game, is not real coaching.

3. You say Belichick looks for his D to win games. What's wrong with that? On a team with no great players, his D is coached pretty well if they can win games, don't you think?

Nothing is wrong with that, if you want to win games. If you want to be known as an "innovative coach that changed the game"(Walsh, Shula, Landry, Levy, Holmgren), which is the standard for HOF coaches...not so much. What did Belechick change?

4. And I don't get my football knowledge from Madden, I get it from Tecmo Super Bowl, as my name states. Madden is Dick Jauron, Tecmo is Belichick.

Well all these comments seem heavily informed by the annoying madden/fantasy football mentality so....

So, just to be clear, Brady is a whiner and not a great QB. The pats don't have great players. They are only good because of the system. Add that all up and you come up with: Belichick is not that good of a coach?

I think I have made my point clear: I define "coaching" as improving players themselves, not sorting them into spots in a system and improving the system. Just because your title is "coach" doesn't mean you actually do any. It's easy to see this for yourself: Go hang out at your local athletic fields for a week and tell me how much "coaching" is actually going on. More like people yelling "run" at soccer games, and "hit the ball" or "throw strikes" at baseball games, and "shoot" or "pick up the ball" at lacrosse games.

 

Clearly I don't put Belechick in that category, but he sure as hell isn't in Walsh's category either.

It seems like you have this hatred of the pats that is spawned by envy. I know I do. But at least I can give credit where credit's due. BB is a prick, but he's far and away the best coach out there. In fact, if I could pick one person, player or otherwise, to join the Bills, it would be Belichick.

As I have described my observations are based on my experience as a coach and D1 player. I believe they are objective and based on what the words we are using: "coaching", "system", etc. actually mean.

[bladiebla]

Given his record prior to when the cheating started per rumormill I'm saying he was a decent coach but nothing special. Yet having yet tape all these years made him learn stuff others wouldn't such as what decisions an opposing coach makes; his tendencies with relation the the plays and playbooks used. The advantage he had was learning this while being sure it was like that which now translates into a far better guessing ability assuming he doesn't cheat anymore.

 

The guy has been going to coaching college with all this material availble to him all these years and he should have been banned from the NFL in all. But $$$ > a fair game.

[QB Bills]

Of course I can. It depends on whether you define "coach" as a guy who develops players, or as a guy who has the word "coach" on his t-shirt.

 

I have coached high school players, helped them improve their game, and be successful at the D1/D3 level, and also won league titles, in 2 different sports(lacrosse and baseball) at the same time. I have also ran a "system" on a team where believe me, nobody was going anywhere after this, and won league titles(basketball). In the first instance, you develop your plan around the talent you have, work that talent extensively in practice to maximize it, and come game time you get out of the way and let the talent win. In the second instance, you demand compliance to the fundamentals of the system, work the system, and can replace any of the "parts" with other "parts" as long as the rest of the system is working and you keep each role relatively simple and strictly defined.

 

Both approaches can be successful if all you care about is winning. But, if you care about being referred to by your players as their "first real coach", as in the players you helped improve still buy you beers every time they see you and genuinely thank you for helping them improve and get where they went, then the second approach is not for you.

 

What? Did you think I was pulling this out of my ass? I still get asked to do private coaching in lacrosse and would if I had the time, not for the easy fat $$$, but because I really enjoy it. Let's hear about your extensive coaching/management experience and you tell me where I am going wrong.

 

Yeah...this ought to be fun..

 

God....I am saying no such thing. I am saying: pick Belechick for creating a good defensive team by using players nobody else wanted(um, fat, slow DL and undersized fast LBs), OR, pick Brady for overcoming and doing well. One, or the other, not both. You don't get to pick both, unless you think Belechick "planned" to pick his eventual starter in the 6th round, in which case you are wasting our time. You cannot give Belechick credit for Brady...and call him smart for letting him sit out there for 5 rounds, in the same universe.

 

Yes, which is why I am saying...he can't coach great players. Great players are, by definition, counter-productive for the Pats*. Good system players/guys who are past their "greatness" (see Seau, Thomas) are what you need in Belechicks system, none of which will ever represent Belechick's "coaching" ability. Did he make Seau better? Of course not, Seau got worse in NE*. He simply keeps the parts working properly and replaces them occasionally.

 

In contrast, Bill Walsh drafted Joe Montana against the "wisdom" of the press at the time, developed his great talent, and turned him into the player that he still is: the greatest QB of all time. That's coaching, period. Having Brady throw to TEs for 4 yards, hand the ball off, and send in the kicker to win the game, is not real coaching.

 

Nothing is wrong with that, if you want to win games. If you want to be known as an "innovative coach that changed the game"(Walsh, Shula, Landry, Levy, Holmgren), which is the standard for HOF coaches...not so much. What did Belechick change?

 

Well all these comments seem heavily informed by the annoying madden/fantasy football mentality so....

 

I think I have made my point clear: I define "coaching" as improving players themselves, not sorting them into spots in a system and improving the system. Just because your title is "coach" doesn't mean you actually do any. It's easy to see this for yourself: Go hang out at your local athletic fields for a week and tell me how much "coaching" is actually going on. More like people yelling "run" at soccer games, and "hit the ball" or "throw strikes" at baseball games, and "shoot" or "pick up the ball" at lacrosse games.

 

Clearly I don't put Belechick in that category, but he sure as hell isn't in Walsh's category either.

 

As I have described my observations are based on my experience as a coach and D1 player. I believe they are objective and based on what the words we are using: "coaching", "system", etc. actually mean.

Get off your high horse. I suppose you think you are a better coach than Belichick too just because you told little mikey to stay away from drugs.

 

This is professional football we are talking about here, not high school sports. The objective is to win, not to make a difference in their lives. If you are developing players, it's not so they will buy you a beer and tell their grandchildren about you, but rather to win. Anything else is secondary. Why do you think some players take less money to play for a winner. In every sport, not just football. Can you see someone doing that to come to the Bills to play special teams? I mean, we've got the most innovative special teams coach in the NFL, don't we?

 

I still can't figure out whether you think Tom Brady is a great QB or not. Throwing to the tight ends for 4 yards and kicking field goals?? Are you on crack? Are you sure there's not some parallel bizarro league you've been watching for the last decade?

 

I'm not disputing Bill Walsh or Joe Montana's credentials at all. But the reason they are looked upon so highly is because they won super bowls and were consistently good. Same as Belichick. The idea is to win, and that's how everyone measures a coach's pedigree. Everyone but you, apparantly.

[Mr. WEO]

We'll see...

 

Which means they aren't better than Brady/Belechick how exactly? So far you are doing so well on the idiotic ramblings buddy. This rambling from you is extra specially silly.

 

And compare that to the Pats of the 80's = getting destroyed in SB they got lucky to be at in the first place, based on a lucky fumble recovery? Getting destroyed the rest of the decade? The Pats were the worst team in football from 86-96 and were going to be bought and moved to St. Louis in 1993. Primary reason: they flat out sucked. Kraft stepped in and saved their asses in 1994. Strike 2 on idiot ramblings from you.

 

No, I mean the Steelers who have never been in danger of moving because they suck so badly, have few fans, and the fans they do have are bandwagoners. I mean the Steelers have how many HOFers? compared to the Pats*? I mean the fact that they have developed player after player, year after year, to be as good as he can be, not tried to fit JAG players into a system. Another whiff from you.

 

No I'm asking this question:

How can Brady be awesome, but get drafted in the 6th round, but Bill Belecheat is awesome, because he drafts so well, exist anyplace other than an addled brain? You can't have it both ways. Pick one and quit wasting my time.

 

No I am simply getting ahead of the usual BS excuses people like you make when I apply logic to their position. The fact is Brady's rise to stardom was not an intentional plan by BB. No other conclusion is possible. You cannot describe Brady without using the words "luck" and "great defense". I can easily talk about Elway, Montana, Kelly, Moon, and Marino and not use the words luck or especially "great defense".

 

Maybe you should watch some game films. Hint: having your FG kicker come in and kick a 45 yard FG with 3+ minutes left in the game is NOT leading a 4th quarter comeback. That = getting stopped on 3rd down, leaving the other team an ability to tie/beat you by giving them the ball back, not winning the game, and leaving the winning of the game to your defense....there goes that darn defense thing again. Go back and review, this is precisely what happened in the "Pats SB recent wins" and also what happened in the "Pats SB recent LOSS".

 

In contrast, youtube is littered with what real comebacks, Elway, Kelly, Marino, Montana, Moon, etc. look like. More idiot ramblings from you....

 

And Brady has apparently had no running game/short passing game this entire time huh. Yeah it's all been down the field for noodle armed Tom.

 

Buddy...idiot ramblings??? You did yourself no favors with this post.

 

 

Look, I don't know how to make this any easier for you to understand. The topic is BB, the Pats and Brady. YOU were the one who foolishly brought up the Steelers and and then said "Pick any decade"--and I say, "ok--the 80's" and you go on rambling about how the Pats sucked back then. What this has to do with BB's Pats and Brady, only you know.

 

So BB takes JAGS and develops championship teams with them and the Steelers draft superstars and make them into......superstars? And that is evidence that BB is NOT a great coach? Sure picknig up Brady looks like a lot of luck now--anyone can see that. But if BB was any other coach, wouldn't he as even YOU have suggested, cut Brady in camp his first year? Isn't that what you just said??

 

He didn't develop Brady? Brady is not a great player?? You claim to be some sort of evaluator of talent and championship coach and yet you describe Brady's game as "throw to TEs for 4 yards, hand the ball off, send in the kicker to win the game"? Man, do you even watch NFL football? How could even a casual viewer make such an incredibly stupid statement?

 

As for the Pats and Brady folding when they don't have a lead in the 4th Q, I have already shown you that you don't know what you are talking about. But here's some more--specifically regarding the SB's. Obviously you didn't review them.

 

SB #1 (Rams): Early 4th Q Pats UP BY 14 POINTS, then Defense gives up 14 points in short order. 1:30 left in the game, no timeouts, Brady completes 5 passes to get into Adam V's FG range with seconds left on the clock.

 

SB #2 (Carolina): Again, the Pats have a double digit 4th Q lead of 21-10. Defense gives up 14 pointsand the lead. Brady leads a 68 yard TD drive to REGAIN the lead. AGAIN the defense ("there goes that darn defense thing again")gives up a late 4th Q lead. 1 minute left, Brady and the offense again come back out onto the field. 3rd and 3--14 yard pass by Brady. 14 seconds left---17 yard pass by Brady. Adam V comes in and "wins" the game with chip shot FG.

 

You can talk about Marino, Moon, and Kelly and "not use the words" SB winner, either.

 

You really shouldn't invoke "logic" when you are describing these feelings that you have. It makes you look "extra specially silly".

 

 

 

As for the cheating stuff, BB didn't invent signal stealing--it has been an accepted part of the game since signals were first employed. Marv Levy once boasted that he had the best signal stealer in the league. Nor did BB invent video-taped signal stealing. It had been around sicne the 80's when portable video cameras became practical. An early proponent, according to Jimmy Johnson, who admitted doing it early in his career, was Howard Mudd, who went on to Indy as O-line coach. BB IS the guy who got caught brazenly filming not from the stands or the endzone, but right on the sideline--after the Commish had warned ALL teams against this practice th year before.

[OCinBuffalo]

Get off your high horse. I suppose you think you are a better coach than Belichick too just because you told little mikey to stay away from drugs.

So I will take this as: you have 0 coaching experience, as I thought. Otherwise you wouldn't by trying to deride mine.

This is professional football we are talking about here, not high school sports. The objective is to win, not to make a difference in their lives.

Further evidence that you have little experience with coaching, or sports in general. High school is all about winning. The only real question is "how" you win. Do you want to be known as a coach who develops players? or a guy who consumes them? I guarantee from the players perspective, you want to play for the 1st coach, not the 2nd. It's the same reason Trent Edwards was happy to come here, and said so, because he knew this team would actually coach him.

If you are developing players, it's not so they will buy you a beer and tell their grandchildren about you, but rather to win. Anything else is secondary. Why do you think some players take less money to play for a winner. In every sport, not just football. Can you see someone doing that to come to the Bills to play special teams? I mean, we've got the most innovative special teams coach in the NFL, don't we?

I had ALL my players playing over their head, killing people on the field, and throwing their bodies everywhere...but yeah, training players how to do that and motivating them to do that has nothing to do with winning.

I still can't figure out whether you think Tom Brady is a great QB or not. Throwing to the tight ends for 4 yards and kicking field goals?? Are you on crack? Are you sure there's not some parallel bizarro league you've been watching for the last decade?

Well I suppose I won't reward poor reading comprehension by repeating myself. Are you on crack??? great argument. Go back and watch the SBs Adam Vinateri has won...I mean...Tom Brady has "won". Hint: it went down exactly as I say in every SB the Pats* have "won". Go back and watch the tape. You are confusing what happened two years ago...when Brady got rocked, and once again could not win the SB personally, with what happened when they did win.

I'm not disputing Bill Walsh or Joe Montana's credentials at all.

Because you absolutely can not. No one can. Contrast that with Belechik and Brady...realize that you can dispute their credentials based a number of things...and then realize the stupidity of putting them anywhere near Walsh and Montana.

But the reason they are looked upon so highly is because they won super bowls and were consistently good. Same as Belichick. The idea is to win, and that's how everyone measures a coach's pedigree. Everyone but you, apparantly.

Apparently, you have a hard time with reading....for the last time, I played to win, I coach to win, and I would probably do that with any age group. The difference is not whether you win, but "how" you win. I would even argue that honest to God coaching even makes you win, MORE OFTEN What an amazing concept! But real coaching is also much more risky, and system coaching is by definition much safer.

 

I am merely saying that a system coach like Belechick cannot hold a candle to real innovators/talent developers like Walsh/Shula/Levy/Landry etc....and Parcells, another system coach, still not being in the HOF, means I am hardly alone in that view. They have passed on him on multiple occasions when he was "retired", but I'm sure you know more than they do.

[Mr. WEO]

Well I suppose I won't reward poor reading comprehension by repeating myself. Are you on crack??? great argument. Go back and watch the SBs Adam Vinateri has won...I mean...Tom Brady has "won". Hint: it went down exactly as I say in every SB the Pats* have "won". Go back and watch the tape. You are confusing what happened two years ago...when Brady got rocked, and once again could not win the SB personally, with what happened when they did win.

 

Actually, this is what really happened: SB#1: passing and running games fairly well balanced. TE's not a factor. SB#2:Brady passes for 354 yards, 3TDs, completeing 23 passes to WRs, 19 passing 1st downs, 127 yds rushing ad 2 missed FGs by Adam V. SB#3: 236 yards passing (67%), 2 TDs, 112 yds rushing, Branch with 11 catches 133 yards. TE's not a factor. SO, in your world, he just handed off, dumped off to his TE, and watched his kicker win the games? Unbelievable.

 

Because you absolutely can not. No one can. Contrast that with Belechik and Brady...realize that you can dispute their credentials based a number of things...and then realize the stupidity of putting them anywhere near Walsh and Montana.

 

They can't be compared, based on "a number of things"??

 

 

How ablout these:

 

BB/Brady: regular season record 86-26 (77%)

playoff record 14-3 (82%)

 

Walsh/Montana: regular season 112-39 (74%)

playoffs 14-5 (74%)

 

Both went to 4 SBs. BB/Brady 3 wins, Walsh/Montana 4.

 

Both missed playoffs a single season. Walsh/Montana 3 years one and done in playoffs. BB/Brady--never.

 

Why do you continue to make statements and arguments that are so easily proven wrong??

 

Back to shop class, oach.