Would the Pats* dynasty happened if Parcells was still head coach?

[first_and_ten]

Parcells led Dallas to a cumulative 34–32 record and no playoff wins.

The Dolphins have made the playoffs once since 2007, when he "worked his magic." And I think we can all agree that was a fluke season.

 

In no way am I saying he wasn't a very good coach. I'm just saying he's not even in the "best ever" discussion and there are a lot of coaches, past and present, who are were/are far better.

 

What about Belicheat? His record in Cleveland was mediocre. I think the Brady pick and the cheating made Belichick the "great" coach he is today. Is Belicheat mentioned in the discussion of greatest coaches ever if he doesn't win a superbowl? I doubt it. One could argue that all his superbowl wins were tainted. I know others in this board don't agree with me, but I don't think cheaters deserve recognition. I think he should have been tossed out of the league. They suspended Payton for bountygate because they were concerned about the integrity of the game. What Belicheat did hurt the integrity of the game more.

[Gugny]

What about Belicheat? His record in Cleveland was mediocre. I think the Brady pick and the cheating made Belichick the "great" coach he is today. Is Belicheat mentioned in the discussion of greatest coaches ever if he doesn't win a superbowl? I doubt it. One could argue that all his superbowl wins were tainted. I know others in this board don't agree with me, but I don't think cheaters deserve recognition. I think he should have been tossed out of the league. They suspended Payton for bountygate because they were concerned about the integrity of the game. What Belicheat did hurt the integrity of the game more.

Bill Belichick is likely the best head coach ever, in my opinion. The cheating crap ... yawn ... the only thing he did wrong was get caught. I don't condone it, but they still had to play the games. The cheating didn't make them Super Bowl champions.

 

And it's not like he only won a Super Bowl or two. Does he win all those Super Bowls without Brady? Likely not. But how many would Bill Walsh have won without Montana? I know it's taboo to acknowledge greatness when it comes to the Patriots*, but as a fan of football (not just a fan of the Bills) I can appreciate how great of an organization they are.

[ALLEN1QB]

Who knows if he stayed in NE we may have drafted Brady in the 7th and win 3 championships!

[C-Man]

No dynasty.

[first_and_ten]

Bill Belichick is likely the best head coach ever, in my opinion. The cheating crap ... yawn ... the only thing he did wrong was get caught. I don't condone it, but they still had to play the games. The cheating didn't make them Super Bowl champions.

 

And it's not like he only won a Super Bowl or two. Does he win all those Super Bowls without Brady? Likely not. But how many would Bill Walsh have won without Montana? I know it's taboo to acknowledge greatness when it comes to the Patriots*, but as a fan of football (not just a fan of the Bills) I can appreciate how great of an organization they are.

 

Is that all the cheaters in baseball did wrong? Just get caught? It's a sad day when people think cheating to win is ok and something to be overlooked. Too bad Lance Armstrong got caught. We wouldn't all know what a loser he turned out to be. And yes you are condoning it, despite what you just claimed. And yes an argument can be made that the cheating made them superbowl champs. Tell the opposing coaches that the other team knew what they were going to run and see how they feel about it. I doubt they yawn

Edited June 24, 2013 by first_and_ten

[26CornerBlitz]

How quickly his multiple Super Bowl victories are forgotten. It's like people's historical consciousness only extends back to the 1990s.

 

In 1986, the Giants went 14-2. In the playoffs, they knocked off, in succession, Bill Walsh's 49ers 49-3 and Joe Gibbs' Redskins 17-0.

 

Who was Parcells' DC during the Giants' SB years?....why it was Belichick. W/O Belichick on his staff, Parcells has Zero rings. Meanwhile, Hoodie has three rings of his own away from Parcells. I'm done here.

[IDBillzFan]

That would have depended on two things happening; first obviously is drafting Brady. Second is playing Brady. There's a very big question about whether Brady would have gotten a shot under Parcells. Parcells had a strong preferrence for veterans and he liked Bledsoe. And it stands to reason that with a different head coach, the stars would not have aligned to allow Mo Lewis to knock Bledsoe's lungs into the 3d row during that September 2001 game.

 

Add all that up and you probably have a healthy Bledsoe continuing to get the Pats into the playoffs but highly questionable about them winning a SB, much less 3.

 

Part of me even thinks Parcells would have kept Brady on the bench after Bledsoe came off the bench to win the Pittsburgh playoff game. I have no genuine reason to think this...I just hate these douchebags.

 

I hate them so much that I actually wish the word Patriot was a little bit derogatory so Tim Graham would only refer to them as New England.

Edited June 24, 2013 by LABillzFan

[Gugny]

 

Is that all the cheaters in baseball did wrong? Just get caught? It's a sad day when people think cheating to win is ok and something to be overlooked. Too bad Lance Armstrong got caught. We wouldn't all know what a loser he turned out to be. And yes you are condoning it, despite what you just claimed. And yes an argument can be made that the cheating made them superbowl champs. Tell the opposing coaches that the other team knew what they were going to run and see how they feel about it. I doubt they yawn

I don't like that any cheating occurred. I'm simply stating that it's my belief that the type of cheating the Pats* got caught doing is far from unique and far from isolated to New England.

 

Bill Belichick never needed to cheat to win. He's a better coach that the guy on the opposite sideline 100% of the time.

 

My assertion is that it's commonplace. Just like in bicycle racing.

 

Baseball is a different story. No cheaters ever won anything other than individual awards and individual records. It frosts my ass, because those records are ruined forever.

 

The Patriots* would have won every single one of those Super Bowls without the "cheating." They were always the best team when they won. And they were even the best team when they lost the first Giants Super Bowl.

[ChasBB]

W/O Belichick.....My answer is a resounding NO!

Not a chance.

+1 to each

Belichick was also responsible for Parcells' success in NY.

[dave mcbride]

Who was Parcells' DC during the Giants' SB years?....why it was Belichick. W/O Belichick on his staff, Parcells has Zero rings. Meanwhile, Hoodie has three rings of his own away from Parcells. I'm done here.

 

I hate this sort of logic. Really. The most important thing a coach can do is build a good staff. He has control over that. He doesn't have control over the players because that's the GM's job. Parcells discovered, hired, and promoted Belichick over the course of a decade with the Giants. He then brought him on to the Pats and the Jets. He hired Tom Coughlin as the wide receivers coach in the late 1980s. Coughlin had a hand in playcalling in 1990 (granted by Parcells), and after that he went and rebuilt BC's program. His hire Ron Erhardt proved to be a great coordinator for the Giants (after being canned by the Pats), and Erhardt later went on to coordinate the Steelers 1995 Super Bowl team. He discovered Charlie Weis and Romeo Crennel.

 

If Levy had been better at building a staff in the late 1980s, the Bills would have won a super bowl. It was a huge failing of his. Walt Corey was terrible, and the replacements for Marchibroda (Shofner/Bresnahan) weren't good either. And the less said about Chuck Dickerson the better.

 

Is Belichick a lesser coach because he's never won a super bowl without Charlie Weis or Romeo Crennel?

 

The bottom line: Parcells BUILT his staff, not the other way around. And he built great ones because he had a very keen eye for positional and unit-level coaching talent.

 

To put it another way, Morgoth had a strong first age but was useless in the second and third age. Sauron was clearly a servant of Morgoth in the first age, but had a good run in the second and third ages. Yet at the end of the day, Sauron remained a servant of Morgoth through it all. You can see where I'm going with this.

Edited June 24, 2013 by dave mcbride

[brucethomas34]

Bill Parcells admits he regrets leaving New England Patriots a few years before their dynasty started

 

 

 

discuss....

 

Only way is if Parcells cheated...that team is mediocre at best without all of that cheating...

[Kemp]

Parcells has zero rings without Belichick. Belichick has three without Parcells.

[RJ (not THAT RJ)]

BPLoDR

 

[bill Parcells Law of Diminishing Returns]

[San Jose Bills Fan]

I was leaning more towards Dave's arguments and then he clinched it with the Tolkien references.

 

Parcells won two Super Bowls with just above average QBs and teams that were more solid than star-studded.

 

His coaching tree is one of the most impressive in football.

 

He coached in a great division against other great teams/coaches and during a time when there was no shortage of great teams.

 

He resurrected numerous programs in short order.

 

Was Parcells perfect? No one is but Parcells is rightfully a first-ballot HOFer.

 

To the original question, I doubt that Parcells would have matched Belichick's feats but New England would have remained the strong program he turned them into.

 

Also I disagree with Fig's take.

 

1) Cheating is a cardinal sin

 

2) The margin between victory and defeat in the NFL is razor thin. In the years the Cheatriots*** were cheating (Belichick admitted under oath that he had been taping opponents signals since he took over New England in 2000), they won numerous close regular season games which made their road to the Super Bowl much easier. For instance, in their first Super Bowl season they won 4 games by 3 points or less.

 

Their 3 Super Bowl victories were by a total of 8 points. I won't digress into a discussion of the Tuck Game and all those ramifications.

 

You will never convince me nor do you make a strong case that their cheating was not instrumental to their success.

Edited June 24, 2013 by San Jose Bills Fan

[benderbender]

Bill Belichick is likely the best head coach ever, in my opinion. The cheating crap ... yawn ... the only thing he did wrong was get caught. I don't condone it, but they still had to play the games. The cheating didn't make them Super Bowl champions.

By that logic, you must also be fine with the NSA recording all of your phone calls and internet transactions as well. I mean, collecting all of your personal data doesn't make it spying. Right?

[boyst]

I was leaning more towards Dave's arguments and then he clinched it with the Tolkien references.

 

Parcells won two Super Bowls with just above average QBs and teams that were more solid than star-studded.

 

His coaching tree is one of the most impressive in football.

 

He coached in a great division against other great teams/coaches and during a time when there was no shortage of great teams.

 

He resurrected numerous programs in short order.

 

Was Parcells perfect? No one is but Parcells is rightfully a first-ballot HOFer.

 

To the original question, I doubt that Parcells would have matched Belichick's feats but New England would have remained the strong program he turned them into.

 

Also I disagree with Fig's take.

 

1) Cheating is a cardinal sin

 

2) The margin between victory and defeat in the NFL is razor thin. In the years the Cheatriots*** were cheating (Belichick admitted under oath that he had been taping opponents signals since he took over New England in 2000), they won numerous close regular season games which made their road to the Super Bowl much easier. For instance, in their first Super Bowl season they won 4 games by 3 points or less.

 

Their 3 Super Bowl victories were by a total of 8 points. I won't digress into a discussion of the Tuck Game and all those ramifications.

 

You will never convince me nor do you make a strong case that their cheating was not instrumental to their success.

Well said.

 

The other disturbing point everyone leaves out is Brady and the Patriots drafting and free agents in general. Folks claim they had two good drafts in the last dozen years. I hardly see them as being anything better then other teams in other years - that is to say, they got it right a few years just as all teams do. However, they have had extremely poor draftees, with one of their best players in the last three years being their punter, Mesko. The free agents they have brought in have choked, the bunch they let go either went on to fall faster then a rock or continue at successful rates. Them getting Welker was huge, and anyone who knew anything about football wanted Welker on their team - but the critics, tons of them here, said he was not a #1. A team needs a #1 WR. (sound familiar)

 

The very same year that Bledsoe got hurt he signed the most lucrative contract in NFL history. The highest paid player in the NFL does not get benched for bad games, for poor play or for letting a no-name 6th rounder get a few reps. The Pats were forced to play Brady. I am too lazy to do it now, but have before, gone to look at past articles from major reporters just after Bledsoe got hurt. The Pats had worked out several QB's, called many others, and were not sure what to do. They stuck with Brady for simple reasons. Their defense was good enough to win a game when defenses won championships. Brady did not do anything stupid, and was very efficient playing smart as a game manager. They were able win enough games over several weeks after Brady's injury to determine it was best to go ahead and see what Brady had in the tank and let him fizzle out - like Tommy Maddox and any Eagles QB. They could return the following year with a HOF QB in Bledsoe and the best D in the league.

 

Brady becoming the starting QB for an NFL was a fluke, not good office management.

[vincec]

Well Parcells had already put together a Super Bowl team before he left, and they were young, so he wouldn't exactly be starting from scratch in the "dynasty" department. I won't say that they would've had the same level of success as they have since by lucking into Brady but they would've been good and contended for a championship for several more years.

[Kemp]

Comparing NSA spying to what goes on in football is laughable because if yiu want to head to higher moral ground, professiinal spirts is a poor choice to use as an example.

 

Since all teams have encouraged illegal drug use or at the very least looked the other way, spare me using morality in a discussion of the relative participants in the game.

 

And let's not forget how many NFL players have run afoul of the law and still been lauded as heroes.

[first_and_ten]

Comparing NSA spying to what goes on in football is laughable because if yiu want to head to higher moral ground, professiinal spirts is a poor choice to use as an example.

 

Since all teams have encouraged illegal drug use or at the very least looked the other way, spare me using morality in a discussion of the relative participants in the game.

 

And let's not forget how many NFL players have run afoul of the law and still been lauded as heroes.

 

Wow, who pissed in your cornflakes?

[BuffaloBill]

Fig is right. He is overrated. But without the luck of Brady performing it would have never happened. Think about it. It was like Levi Brown coming in and performing as well. And remember we had Brohm who was supposed to be the next huge thing.

 

Those are scary memories... We really have been desperate for a qb haven't we?