TOD 8/12: Around the AFCE - Bellicheat - lucky or great?

[Blokestradamus]

His success has obviously been helped by Brady, no doubt about it. Is it lucky to hit on a 6th round QB? Absolutely. Is it luck to develop that player and maximise his strengths? Not one bit,

 

If anyone has read the book War Room by Michael Holley, you'll see that Belichick is simply reaping the rewards for a lot of trial and error. His greatness comes from being his own biggest critic. He stays true to his process and brings people on board that are willing to buy into that. Everyone from his coordinators to the equipment guys are Belichick guys.

 

I've dug into Bill and his career quite a bit and I'm something of a Belichick disciple. If he's willing to take me on, I'm ready.

[Thurman#1]

 

Yup. Both.

 

He does a hell of a job with the defense and their multifaceted system. And his draft trades and consistent methods for stockpiling extra choices are flat-out smart.

 

But without Brady he wouldn't have had nearly the success he had. Likely the same is true of Brady if he hadn't had Belichick, though.

 

 

 

How do you know this about Brady? What's Belicheat's track record with other QBs? HINT: The short answer is subpar

 

What's your basis for those comments on the D? Pure opinion?

 

 

How do I know it about Brady? I think when I say, "Likely the same is true of Brady," it should be pretty obvious that I wasn't pretending to know. It's a very reasonable opinion indeed, though.

 

My basis for those comments on the D? What comments? That he did a good job with the defense? Yeah, of course it's opinion, but backed up by the consistency of their success in staying pretty fairly low in the ranks of scoring allowed. That and the way they game-plan differently every week so consistently. Makes them hard to prepare for.

 

You yourself point out that they've never been below 17th in scoring defense. Further they've only been below 10 in scoring defense four times in sixteen years. That's a tremendous defensive run from a team that generally faces teams struggling to catch up, save time and score points.

 

No question that Belichick has been a better coach in New England than he was in Cleveland. Is that because he was with a better organization? Maybe. Sure, having Brady helped a whole lot. But in scoring defense he was also considerably worse in Cleveland, going 14th, 10th, 17th, 1st and 20th. IMHO he learned a lot in Cleveland, applied it and simply became a better coach.

 

Makes sense to me that while Belichick wouldn't be the same maybe the GOAT Belichick without Brady, Brady also wouldn't be the same maybe the GOAT without Belichick. And I hate Belichick.

Edited August 12, 2016 by Thurman#1

[C.Biscuit97]

Best ever. C Biscuit will come here pointing out that "he sucked" as a HC without Brady.

 

How many legendary HCs in the history of the NFL did not have an elite QB?

 

Answer: Zero

Right on cue! And the answer is Joe Gibbs. 3 SBs with 3 different Qbs! He is the goat but no one talks about him because he seems super boring.

 

Belichick is a great defensive coach. But dear lord does he get overrated by Brady. Brady might be the greatest qb ever (who cheats). A ton of coaches would have been successful coaching him.

[hondo in seattle]

His success has obviously been helped by Brady, no doubt about it. Is it lucky to hit on a 6th round QB? Absolutely. Is it luck to develop that player and maximise his strengths? Not one bit,

 

If anyone has read the book War Room by Michael Holley, you'll see that Belichick is simply reaping the rewards for a lot of trial and error. His greatness comes from being his own biggest critic. He stays true to his process and brings people on board that are willing to buy into that. Everyone from his coordinators to the equipment guys are Belichick guys.

 

I've dug into Bill and his career quite a bit and I'm something of a Belichick disciple. If he's willing to take me on, I'm ready.

 

Which is why he's a better coach now than he was for the Brownies.

 

 

Coaches (and GMs) have learning curves too.

Edited August 12, 2016 by hondo in seattle

[C.Biscuit97]

 

Which is why he's a better coach now than he was for the Brownies.

 

 

Coaches (and GMs) have learning curves too.

And having the best qb ever helps the learning curve.

[Ronin]

How do I know it about Brady? I think when I say, "Likely the same is true of Brady," it should be pretty obvious that I wasn't pretending to know. It's a very reasonable opinion indeed, though.

 

It is an opinion tho absent any facts to back it up. I've laid out the facts as to why Belicheat didn't "create" Brady.

 

So then you're also saying that Jim Mora created Peyton Manning, right? Because your logic is identical.

 

Or that Ron Rivera created Luke Kuechly.

 

We could go down the line, but it's a pretty cynical position to suggest that it's only Belicheat who's responsible for how all of his good players turn out but that conversely none of how his other players, particularly highly drafted ones from rounds 1-3, haven't worked out he's not responsible for.

 

etc.

 

My basis for those comments on the D? What comments? That he did a good job with the defense? Yeah, of course it's opinion, but backed up by the consistency of their success in staying pretty fairly low in the ranks of scoring allowed. That and the way they game-plan differently every week so consistently. Makes them hard to prepare for.

 

Cliche'd gibberish. No facts whatsoever.

 

You yourself point out that they've never been below 17th in scoring defense. Further they've only been below 10 in scoring defense four times in sixteen years. That's a tremendous defensive run from a team that generally faces teams struggling to catch up, save time and score points.

 

The other parts that you don't mention is that he's had very good defensvie talent. I also said he's underachieved with it. As well, you leap-frogged the other comments about his D rankings.

 

What, you don't think it helps D rankings to play the Bills, Jets, & Fins without any decent QBs/offenses 6 times a season for 40% of your games?

 

No question that Belichick has been a better coach in New England than he was in Cleveland. Is that because he was with a better organization? Maybe. Sure, having Brady helped a whole lot. But in scoring defense he was also considerably worse in Cleveland, going 14th, 10th, 17th, 1st and 20th. IMHO he learned a lot in Cleveland, applied it and simply became a better coach.

 

What are you talking about? Do you read what you write?

 

His average scoring D ranking in Cleveland was 12th and average yardage D was 15th.

 

In NE over the last 7 seasons his average scoring D ranking has been 9th, only marginally better in a much easier division, his average yardage D ranking has been 20th, notably worse in a much easier division.

 

In his first 7 seasons, his average scoring D ranking in NE was 7th, again, only marginally better with top talent. His yardage D ranking in those first seven seasons is 14th, all but the same, again, in the easiest division in football during that span of time and with top talent.

 

Makes sense to me that while Belichick wouldn't be the same maybe the GOAT Belichick without Brady, Brady also wouldn't be the same maybe the GOAT without Belichick. And I hate Belichick.

 

Again, that is the argument.

 

Seems to me that Brady would have been fine on just about any team just like Manning was.

 

There is absolutely no evidence, ZERO, that Belicheat has any history in developing QBs, none whatsoever.

 

It's a tough argument to suggest that Brady and his work ethic, brain for football, the fact that they say he coaches from the position, etc., wouldn't have been good elsewhere rendering the Pats exactly what they were under Bledsoe/Parcells.

 

I suppose we'll find out w/ Garoppolo, won't we. Then the excuse will be that he's a rookie.

Take Brady away from the Pats since 2001 and you can subtract 4 wins every season. Easily.

 

Belicheat's defenses in NE have simply not been that good. They're overrated because in many games their opponents were forced to throw in the 2nd halves of games, something that fed right into helping NE, but that was Brady's offense putting up 20-some points in the 1st halves and threatening to score on every drive.

 

No one fears NE's defenses anymore. No one.

Edited August 12, 2016 by TaskersGhost

[Freddie's Dead]

A bit of both. Proved his genius as a coach in SB XXV, but lucking into Marcia and having the NFL look the other way while you blatantly cheat doesn't hurt.

Edited August 12, 2016 by Freddie's Dead

[FireChan]

Take Brady away from the Pats since 2001 and you can subtract 4 wins every season. Easily.

 

Belicheat's defenses in NE have simply not been that good. They're overrated because in many games their opponents were forced to throw in the 2nd halves of games, something that fed right into helping NE, but that was Brady's offense putting up 20-some points in the 1st halves and threatening to score on every drive.

 

No one fears NE's defenses anymore. No one.

 

BB has followed a bend but don't break defensive philosophy. Having a top 10 points allowed average is great. What other coaches have achieved that that aren't great coaches?

 

How come Manning's teams defenses were rarely top 10 in points allowed in an arguably weaker division like the AFC South? You do realize Brady and BB weren't the only ones who played in weak divisions, right? Did Manning put up less points on the Jags, Titans and Texans than Brady on the AFCE? Wouldn't the same "had to throw in the second half playing from behind wth bad QB's" argument ALSO apply to the Manning Colts? What's the key difference between those two teams?

[Captain Hindsight]

Its both. Without Brady he is still a good coach but with Brady he is the best ever.

 

I'm never scared of the Pats* D anymore. Its all Brady

 

That said, A. Rodgers is the best QB in the league and hes only played in one SB. That's on McCarthy IMO. Just speaks to how good Belicheck is

Edited August 12, 2016 by Captain Hindsight

[Uffalo Ills]

Both. Most "great" coaches are lucky at some point and some bad coaches get lucky too. But it takes a lot more than luck to dominate the way BB has over the last 15 years.

[Nihilarian]

 

 

 

They went 11-5 against an extremely easy schedule. So easy that the Dolphins, playing a slightly tougher schedule in that they played the Pats instead of themselves also went 11-5. Worth noting that the year before that the Fins went 1-15 and the year after went 7-9.

 

The three divisions the AFC East played that year were the AFC West, the NFC West and of course the games against AFC East rivals, Those were three really weak divisions that year.

 

AFC West: Chargers 8-8, Broncos 8-8, Raiders 5-11, and Chiefs 2-14

NFC West: Cards 9-7, 9ers 7-9, Seahawks 4-12 and Rams 2-14

 

The wins the teams in those three divisions got that year were pretty much all a result of playing the other crappy teams in those three divisions.

 

Not counting the Fins - and I don't - the Pats played two good teams that year, the 12-4 Steelers and the 12-4 Colts, and lost to both.

 

They got very lucky with the schedule that year.

and yet he went 11-5 after Brady went out for the season with a QB that didn't start a single game in his entire four-year career in college...which seems to elude everyone. In essence, a backup college QB that managed to beat the Buffalo Bills 2x that year!! The Buffalo Bills couldn't get past 7-9 with a first round pick at QB.

 

The last game that year the teams played against each other was in Buffalo during a windstorm which should have favored Buffalo and yet it didn't.

 

This same head coach took a RB who spent his first four seasons in Buffalo and won a Super bowl with him as the starting RB.

 

Like I said, the man also took the super hapless Cleveland Browns to an 11-5 record in 1994 with a total scrub bum at QB who in his 21-year NFL career only had four winning seasons. The last time the Browns went better then 11-5 was in 1986 and that was the only year since being in Cleveland that they bettered 11-5 and they haven't beaten that record since!

 

I'd say Bill Belichick is defined in his career more by having Tom Brady as his QB! But then, he was also smart enough to draft him, develop him and start him over a former #1 overall pick at QB. A lot of people in the league thought he was crazy to trade away a former #1 overall pick at QB to a division rival. In that, this same QB had also managed to take the Patriots to the super bowl under Bill Parcells

[Nuncha]

Lucky? - For 15 straight years???

[machine gun kelly]

Exactly. This is silly. So Brady became great on his own? Guys, they are both top talents as QB and Coach.

 

I can't stand Belicheck, but he is great. When I was an athlete, and competed at a high level, I can respect someone who is great even if I hate the guy, or will do anything to beat him.

 

He's just managed their team so well over many years in staffing, decisions in games, and so on. I'll respectfully agree to disagree with my TBD friends.

[The Wiz]

I want to say great but can't evaluate him considering Brady was his QB. Some would point to when brady was injuried the whole season and rode Matt Cassel to 11-5 but that team was coming off an almost perfect season and had pretty much every player returning.

 

That being said, with the turnover that most nfl rosters have I will say that being able to be as good as they have been in the past 16 years leans toward a few conclusions:

A) he's actually a great coach with an amazing QB

B) he's a decent coach with an amazing QB

 

We might see what a glimpse of one of these while Brady sits for a month. I think it will be option B.

[Nitro]

Luck helps any coach in the short term but to be successful for as long as he has been is a testament to how good he is. He and Brady are a great together. The chemistry they have has made the NE Patriots a annual power. Look at how they got by with marginal talent, specially in skilled positions. I hate to say it but the jerk is really good.

[The Wiz]

Luck helps any coach in the short term but to be successful for as long as he has been is a testament to how good he is. He and Brady are a great together. The chemistry they have has made the NE Patriots a annual power. Look at how they got by with marginal talent, specially in skilled positions. I hate to say it but the jerk is really good.

But even marginal talent can be overcome by a great QB. It's no surprise that Brady has the fastest release in the game. His OLine isn't as good as it was and need to adapt. Their MO hasn't changed in I would say the past 5 years; outscore the opponent. And they usually do because of Brady.

[Talley56]

Descent coach, lucky to have had Brady. He failed in Cleveland not too long after Marty Schottenheimer made them perennial contenders. His first year in NE sans Brady ended in 5-11. Next year they begin 0-2 before Brady steps in and that is when he finally starts becoming a winning coach. 2008 Brady goes down and they miss the playoffs losing to a Dolphins team that went 1-15 the year before. Brady has made him look better than he really is.

[CardinalScotts]

he's a great coach but Brady has been their key to success, nowhere near the dynasty. I think we overrate winning coaches and pile on losing coaches to much. So many variables change a lot of things. When Brady first came in they had the best defense in the league they were 47-14 in Brady's first 4 years while he average 220yds passing. As he grew as a player the defense got older switched out players and still was usually very good (that's bellechik) but they turned into one of the top offenses over the next 5 years (thats brady)...and have been able to "scratch out" 12-4 seasons the last years while replacing offensive players (that's brady). Also can not be ignored leading a super competitive league where turnovers are HUGE in winning and losing they have been able to fumble less than anyone over and over (that's bellechik)

[The Wiz]

he's a great coach but Brady has been their key to success, nowhere near the dynasty. I think we overrate winning coaches and pile on losing coaches to much. So many variables change a lot of things. When Brady first came in they had the best defense in the league they were 47-14 in Brady's first 4 years while he average 220yds passing. As he grew as a player the defense got older switched out players and still was usually very good (that's bellechik) but they turned into one of the top offenses over the next 5 years (thats brady)...and have been able to "scratch out" 12-4 seasons the last years while replacing offensive players (that's brady). Also can not be ignored leading a super competitive league where turnovers are HUGE in winning and losing they have been able to fumble less than anyone over and over (that's bellechik)

I thought that was mcnally or jastremski?

[jr1]

he's great and a cheater