Flbillsfan#1 Posted May 12, 2009 Posted May 12, 2009 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. 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. While Walsh & Montana Cheated, B.B.* & Brady* would not have sniffed the Super Bowl without CHEATING. Their records are to forever be associated with *
billsfan89 Posted May 12, 2009 Posted May 12, 2009 I don't know how good Belichick is. He built a rep for two things one great game planning and developing players out of nowhere. But spygate kinda puts into suspect on the game planning element. As for player development he has kinda been so so in recent years. Besides Mayo who was a top ten pick his drafts over the last three to four years have not produced much talent. In 2005 and 2006 the Pats were good but not great they made the playoffs and won their division but they seemed to be on the downside of a dynasty good but on the down turn. Than in 2007 they made a bunch of big moves they traded a second round pick for Welker and they got a steal in Randy Moss. Than they spent big money on Addadalius thomas in their front seven. So it was big trades of draft choices and big money free agents that revived the team. Its not that they had third and fourth round picks ready to step up. Hell they haven't developed many first or second round picks. To sum up I think Belichick is a great coach who keeps a lot of Cap room so that he can add a big player if need be he also still a good game planner. But he is not the best coach ever and his recent draft mediocrity and spygate prove that. So great but not as great as we thought.
OCinBuffalo Posted May 13, 2009 Posted May 13, 2009 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. Simple. I said pick any decade and the Steelers have been better in that decade at everything than the Pats. You brought up the 80s and I laughed at you for it, because the Pats almost got moved due to sucking so badly in the late 80s. So...however "bad" you think the Steelers were in the 80's, they were, once again, better than that Pats*. What's hard to understand about that? At no time have the Pats* been better than the Steelers in terms of coaching/developing players. I believe they just won another SB....right? 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?? Nobody is a superstar/HOF player in this league until they get coached up. You cannot name one. Even LT and Ray Lewis had to learn. The guys who "don't need coaching" = Reggie Bush. So, there's no such thing as "drafting a superstar". There is such a thing as drafting superstar potential and developing that player. Bill Belechick avoids superstar potential by trading back, year in and year out, and prefers to draft lesser talent that he can push into his system. Avoiding having to coach greatness = a great coach exactly how? I have no idea what you are asking. I am simply saying that you either pick Brady or Belechick, you can't pick both. If Belechik got lucky then, that makes him lucky, and Brady can't be used as evidence that he is a great coach. 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? Yawn. Go back and watch the playoff games the last 8 years and see exactly what I am talking about. Adam Vinatieri kicks the game winnner!!! Tom Brady watches from sidelines, because he got stopped on 3rd down! Defense just has to hold the other team with 3+ mins on the clock. 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. What? Did you forget about 3 years ago when Brady threw for 3 INTs on the way to allowing the greatest comeback in AFC championship game history? At any point in the entire 4th quarter, he could have done anything, and they would have won...against the Colts defense??? AUFKM? Obviously I didn't review what???? 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. So you're a "don't tell the whole story guy"? "Brady was just 16-for-27 for 145 yards"...yeah he "won" the game alright... and the defense got the turnover that allowed for that mind-numbing collapse by the Rams D. No turnover...no win. Defense got that Rams team to give them the ball 3 times???? Are you really going to use this as an example of Brady being "great"? I'll give you the last drive, but really???? SI Says what I am saying right here = "The defense won the game, etc." 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. Yes, the exception to the rule.....now explain for me what has happened every other time in the playoffs? How about 4 years ago against San Diego, when Brady had his ass saved by an idiot CB fumbling away the INT Brady just threw him? How is that "great"? You can talk about Marino, Moon, and Kelly and "not use the words" SB winner, either. And you can call Phil Simms, Jeff Hostetler and Trent Dilfer SB winner as well. 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. Why do you keep bringing up cheating when I have already said nothing about it, 3 times? Ok let's talk about cheating...Is this some kind of generational insecurity? As in: your "great" team is never going to measure up to mine?I am starting to think that is the driving force behind this whole thing. Buddy, nothing is going to make the Pats* wholly legitimate now, not ever. These Pats* with this coach never can and never will be ranked with the all time great dynasty teams. Sorry, but one of the great teams of this decade will always have a *, and there's really no point in arguing against it, you just make yourself look ridiculous. They did the crime, got caught, and were punished by the commissioner. This is reality. Deal with reality, and stop bringing up cheating with me. I don't care, and nobody is ever going to say that the Pats* are as good as the 70's Steelers, or the 80's 49ers/Bears/Giants or the 90's Cowboys. They don't belong in that discussion, because they simply aren't as good as those teams, individually or on the whole. You add the cheating thing and that's all she wrote.
SouthGeorgiaBillsFan Posted May 13, 2009 Posted May 13, 2009 The fact that Matt Cassel can step in and lead the Pats to 11 wins just shows that Tom Brady isn't *that* good. Granted, he is one of the premier quarterbacks of the era, but he is not Peyton Manning. Any NFL quarterback, when given that kind of time to throw, is going to carve a team up. Tom Brady is a great QB but the credit for their success more than anything belongs to their O line, which was assembled by....Belichick and co. I despise Belichick but without question he is the most effective coach in the league today, perhaps ever.
Mr. WEO Posted May 14, 2009 Posted May 14, 2009 The fact that Matt Cassel can step in and lead the Pats to 11 wins just shows that Tom Brady isn't *that* good. Any NFL quarterback, when given that kind of time to throw, is going to carve a team up. Tom Brady is a great QB but the credit for their success more than anything belongs to their O line I guess less original or intelligent posts have appeared here... Manning has had consistently better receivers, TEs and RBs than Brady has. Also, few QBs have had better protection than Manning--he has only been sacked more than 20 times in a season once since 2003. Brady never gats sacked less 20 times a year. Look at the head to head results between the two over the years. Count the rings. Brady, like Manning, has become the best because he is highly intelligent and devotes himself to studying the game. Both are always looking at film. Saying that his success is due to "their O-line" or that any QB could have had the same result shows your bias and reflects poorly on your intelligence.
VOR Posted May 14, 2009 Posted May 14, 2009 The cheating destroys his legacy. Same for Brady. Patriots lovers will try and argue otherwise, but that's understandable.
Mr. WEO Posted May 14, 2009 Posted May 14, 2009 The cheating destroys his legacy. Same for Brady. Patriots lovers will try and argue otherwise, but that's understandable. Many will feel that way. But an argument can be made that, given the way the Pats and Brady tore through the league in record fashion in '07, the value of spygate "cheating" was overrated. In fact, as the season wore on, few were talking about spygate anymore--more about how the Pats were running up the score on teams (without the videotapes). Brady's legacy is safe.
VOR Posted May 14, 2009 Posted May 14, 2009 Many will feel that way. But an argument can be made that, given the way the Pats and Brady tore through the league in record fashion in '07, the value of spygate "cheating" was overrated. In fact, as the season wore on, few were talking about spygate anymore--more about how the Pats were running up the score on teams (without the videotapes). Brady's legacy is safe. They tore through the league and the playoffs...but lost in the SB, in a fashion not unlike their 3 last-minute SB wins. And without those SB wins, Brady has no legacy.
Mr. WEO Posted May 14, 2009 Posted May 14, 2009 They tore through the league and the playoffs...but lost in the SB, in a fashion not unlike their 3 last-minute SB wins. And without those SB wins, Brady has no legacy. The SB loss was not due to the lack of illicit info from not spying. The closeness of 3 other SBs is suggests that the Pats didn't know the opposing D signals. Also, it would have been hard for the Pats to video "steal" Panther's and Eagles' signals if they had never played them before the SB in those years. The 3 SBs will always be questioned by those who didn't think much of Brady or BB before spygate.
Willis990 Posted May 14, 2009 Posted May 14, 2009 They tore through the league and the playoffs...but lost in the SB, in a fashion not unlike their 3 last-minute SB wins. And without those SB wins, Brady has no legacy. You can couch your argument anyway you wish but in the end Brady will go down as one of the five greatest QB's in history. Keep up the good fight.
Flbillsfan#1 Posted May 14, 2009 Posted May 14, 2009 The SB loss was not due to the lack of illicit info from not spying. The closeness of 3 other SBs is suggests that the Pats didn't know the opposing D signals. Also, it would have been hard for the Pats to video "steal" Panther's and Eagles' signals if they had never played them before the SB in those years. The 3 SBs will always be questioned by those who didn't think much of Brady or BB before spygate. It is well known the Pats* video taped the Rams practice before their 1st Super Bowl. Watching that game I & others thought..................it is like the Pats* know exactly what play the Rams are going to run. Now we know why..........& the Pats* still barely won. I'm sure B.B.* could have & did send someone to tape a game or two that the Pats* did not play in.
VOR Posted May 14, 2009 Posted May 14, 2009 The SB loss was not due to the lack of illicit info from not spying. The closeness of 3 other SBs is suggests that the Pats didn't know the opposing D signals. Also, it would have been hard for the Pats to video "steal" Panther's and Eagles' signals if they had never played them before the SB in those years. The 3 SBs will always be questioned by those who didn't think much of Brady or BB before spygate. The Patriots played the Eagles the year before, and they played teams they faced in the playoffs during those seasons. Which goes to the point about how they blew through the season in 2007 despite getting caught, because teams rarely change their signals, much less in-season. There were questions about Belichick and Brady. Like how a career losing HC coming off a 5-11 season suddenly "shocks the world," and wins 3 SB's. Or how a 6th round pick suddenly becomes a 3-time SB winner. It raises questions, and there seem to be some answers.
PushthePile Posted May 14, 2009 Posted May 14, 2009 It is well known the Pats* video taped the Rams practice before their 1st Super Bowl. Watching that game I & others thought..................it is like the Pats* know exactly what play the Rams are going to run. Now we know why..........& the Pats* still barely won. I'm sure B.B.* could have & did send someone to tape a game or two that the Pats* did not play in. Sure you did. You should have said something back in 2002. It would have saved you and the other goofs an entire thread of trying to convince everyone Brady and Belichick aren't HOFs.
NewHampshireBillsFan Posted May 14, 2009 Posted May 14, 2009 I live in NH and have to hear about him every day and everyone here just thinks he is a genius. Here are some reasons I think Belicheat wins, besides Brady. 1.) Cheating is his modus operandi. We will never know the full extent of it and the league has tried to hush it up, especially WNY's own Goodell! What about the former Pats video employee now living in Hawaii. He made it clear that he knew stuff about Belicheat and the league did NOTHING to try to get him to talk. So the NFL is fully complicit in Bellicheat's success. 2.) He is creative in his thinking and spends a lot of time thinking about what will work and what doesn't work. This I must give him credit for. 3.) He works very hard and looks at little things, like all great coaches do. Before NE played in that incredibly windy game for the final game of last year at RWS, Belicheat looked at the whole NY Giants game in Buffalo from a previous season where there was also a lot of wind to figure out what would work and wouldn't work at that specific stadium under those similar conditions. And because of that NE actually was better adept at handling the weather, esp. against the wind than our home team Buffalo! Do you think Jauron looked at windy Bills games or tried to plan for the wind. No!!! He just ran the ball every time against the wind. Although Jackson got 136 yards the Bills got no points. I was there to see Jauron get out coached. Not just letting the clock run out at the half, but the whole game he was out coached. So in summary Bellicheat is a consummate unethical, cheater. He also is creative and willing to put in the hard work that Jauron seemingly will not. Home many times have Bills players said they didn't expect or weren't prepared for something in a game. How many times do NE players say they weren't prepared. The answer is never.
Ramius Posted May 14, 2009 Posted May 14, 2009 The SB loss was not due to the lack of illicit info from not spying. The closeness of 3 other SBs is suggests that the Pats didn't know the opposing D signals. Also, it would have been hard for the Pats to video "steal" Panther's and Eagles' signals if they had never played them before the SB in those years. The 3 SBs will always be questioned by those who didn't think much of Brady or BB before spygate. The closeness of the 3 super bowls combined with the knowledge that they were cheating exposes how big of a fraud the pats* team was. Without cheating, they'd be lucky to even advance to the super bowl. Shall we get into the entire HGH issue with pats* defenders in their mid-30s all of a sudden playing like they are 10 years younger?
A Dog Named Kelso Posted May 14, 2009 Posted May 14, 2009 The 49ers spent on players OVER the salery cap every year & were not punished for it until Eddie D was forced to leave the team & league. People give Walsh much more credit than he deserves. Neither Belicheat or Walsh would have won a single Superbowl without cheating. Are you talking about Walsh's time as a coach? The salary cap came into existance ~1994 and Walsh was well gone by then.
djcalvin79 Posted May 14, 2009 Posted May 14, 2009 I live in NH and have to hear about him every day and everyone here just thinks he is a genius. Here are some reasons I think Belicheat wins, besides Brady. ... So in summary Bellicheat is a consummate unethical, cheater. He also is creative and willing to put in the hard work that Jauron seemingly will not. Home many times have Bills players said they didn't expect or weren't prepared for something in a game. How many times do NE players say they weren't prepared. The answer is never. I hear you man.. I live close to the MA-NH border and the good Lord knows I have done my time listening to the village idiots here glorifying the Patriots* The one time I remember that Bellicheat's stooges were caught unprepared with their pants puddling around their ankles, they were soundly thrashed and roundly humiliated.. this was the advent of the Wildcat formation last year. Much as I hate to give the Fins any sort of credit, this one time I had to applaud them for embarrassing Bellicheat..
Recommended Posts