'Inside the NFL' : The Perception of Belichick Around the League

[Iron Maiden]

Just now, OldTimeAFLGuy said:

 

......naw........how could this mean "dominance"?.................

QUICK HITS

• The Patriots have recorded 70 wins over the Bills, the most by the Patriots against any one opponent. The Jets are second with 61 wins.
• Tom Brady is chasing win #27 versus Buffalo on Sunday December 3, 2017.
• Bill Belichick has a 80-28 (.741) all-time regular season record against the AFC East as head coach of the Patriots.

 

You're right...they only went 16-0 once...the other years, they lose 2-3 and sometimes even 4 games.....they also went to the Superbowl only 7 times in the last 16 years...  Brady only has 217 wins and a whopping 63 losses....they are not dominant...

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

2 minutes ago, Iron Maiden said:

 

You're right...they only went 16-0 once...the other years, they lose 2-3 and sometimes even 4 games.....they also went to the Superbowl only 7 times in the last 16 years...  Brady only has 217 wins and a whopping 63 losses....they are not dominant...

 

....damn bottom feeders............

[Chris66]

Bottomiine don't give a rats behind what opposing fans think. They don't matter.

What matters is what gms, coaches and people who actually played  the game think. No one other than Marshal Faulk think the Pats cheated.

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

5 minutes ago, Chris66 said:

Bottomiine don't give a rats behind what opposing fans think. They don't matter.

What matters is what gms, coaches and people who actually played  the game think. No one other than Marshal Faulk think the Pats cheated.

 

....agree.....the other 31 were "lily white innocents" NOT stupid enough to get caught........EVERY one of their FIVE Lombardis shows cheat rust......they're good PERIOD.....deal with it or stop whining......the "cheat defense" is old.................

[JaCrispy]

On 12/1/2017 at 11:07 AM, plenzmd1 said:

I cant comment on the first two combo's, just a bit before my time, but I will take BB/TB over BW/JM really based a ton on the salary cap and free agency. I just think they are doing it in a much tougher era for prolonged success, and over a longer period of time.

I disagree with with your last sentence...I actually think it is easier in this era for a QB to have prolonged success due to all the rule changes that benefit the QB and the offense as a whole...those other great QBs never had it so easy imo.

 

Hell, Brady gets hit in his knee and the following year they change the rule...he fumbles in the AFC championship and they decide to change the rule to say it was a pass.

[Boatdrinks]

Bottom line is it doesn't matter what anyone thinks. Who cares except for fans of the Patriots? Why would they matter to Bills fans? Most NFL fans don't like the Patriots and this stuff doesn't really make any difference to anyone outside of the Boston metro. 

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

1 minute ago, Boatdrinks said:

Bottom line is it doesn't matter what anyone thinks. Who cares except for fans of the Patriots? Why would they matter to Bills fans? Most NFL fans don't like the Patriots and this stuff doesn't really make any difference to anyone outside of the Boston metro. 

 

.....hatred and foment derived from their obvious and prolonged success is how I see it......were they on the "hate chart" back in '85 when Grogan and company absorbed an azz whupping at the hands of the Bears in the SB?......nope.......Pats hate=Yankees hate......dominant for too long.........

[Boatdrinks]

3 minutes ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said:

 

.....hatred and foment derived from their obvious and prolonged success is how I see it......were they on the "hate chart" back in '85 when Grogan and company absorbed an azz whupping at the hands of the Bears in the SB?......nope.......Pats hate=Yankees hate......dominant for too long.........

I disagree completely. Sure , the Pats were once seen as irrelevant because that's what they were at the time. Those teams don't move the needle in either direction. For me, if you swapped out the Pats with different players , say A Rodgers or Peyton Manning and a likeable coach like John Harbaugh I wouldn't dislike them at all. There may be some fans who just don't like whoever is winning, but many hate the Pats because Brady and BB and others such as Edelman are DB's and not likeable. The incessant hype by the media and ex Patriot players that pollute most NFL tv shows adds to the dislike. It's mostly about the d-bag players and coach though. 

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

5 minutes ago, Boatdrinks said:

I disagree completely. Sure , the Pats were once seen as irrelevant because that's what they were at the time. Those teams don't move the needle in either direction. For me, if you swapped out the Pats with different players , say A Rodgers or Peyton Manning and a likeable coach like John Harbaugh I wouldn't dislike them at all. There may be some fans who just don't like whoever is winning, but many hate the Pats because Brady and BB and others such as Edelman are DB's and not likeable. The incessant hype by the media and ex Patriot players that pollute most NFL tv shows adds to the dislike. It's mostly about the d-bag players and coach though. 

 

...we have differing opinions but at the end of the day, respect for both is what makes this place work as designed.....so noted bud.....we're good.........

[Chris66]

34 minutes ago, JaCrispy said:

I disagree with with your last sentence...I actually think it is easier in this era for a QB to have prolonged success due to all the rule changes that benefit the QB and the offense as a whole...those other great QBs never had it so easy imo.

 

Hell, Brady gets hit in his knee and the following year they change the rule...he fumbles in the AFC championship and they decide to change the rule to say it was a pass.

Actually it was the steelers hit on Carson Palmer in the wildcard game that got the ball rolling

[stinky finger]

On 12/1/2017 at 2:38 PM, Buffalo Barbarian said:

 

McDermott and Mayfield (has a nice ring to it doesn't it) 10 Super Bowls coming up.

 

 

I'm trying to figure out which of your 2 posts is dumber.

 

Tough call.

 

 

6 hours ago, Iron Maiden said:

 

We all have different views of course, and that's great....I just think that your definition of  " dominance " will never be achieve in the free agency era...... in this current era, the are dominant IMO...and quite frankly, I hope we never see a team that much better than the rest of the league....as I said in an earlier post, I think it's bad for the NFL....

The NFL product, overall, is in a downward spiral.

[Mr. WEO]

20 hours ago, Dan said:

And for evidence of your statement, you only have to look at the 2 times Brady missed games.  They went 11-5 and 3-1.  So yeah, he's good and runs that offense, but...when he's not there they don't miss him near as much as the Pack miss Rodgers, for example.

 

Brady's playoff record: 25-9.

 

Rodgers: 10-7.

 

SBs with Brady: 5 wins, 7 appearances.  Without Brady: 0/0.

 

Rodgers: 1/1

2 hours ago, JaCrispy said:

I disagree with with your last sentence...I actually think it is easier in this era for a QB to have prolonged success due to all the rule changes that benefit the QB and the offense as a whole...those other great QBs never had it so easy imo.

 

Hell, Brady gets hit in his knee and the following year they change the rule...he fumbles in the AFC championship and they decide to change the rule to say it was a pass.

 

 

Huh?

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

5 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

Brady's playoff record: 25-9.

 

Rodgers: 10-7.

 

SBs with Brady: 5 wins, 7 appearances.  Without Brady: 0/0.

 

Rodgers: 1/1

 

 

Huh?

 

...and the league outlawed Lester Hayes' stick-um....now what?...the Lester Rule?...............

[Iron Maiden]

2 hours ago, JaCrispy said:

I disagree with with your last sentence...I actually think it is easier in this era for a QB to have prolonged success due to all the rule changes that benefit the QB and the offense as a whole...those other great QBs never had it so easy imo.

 

Hell, Brady gets hit in his knee and the following year they change the rule...he fumbles in the AFC championship and they decide to change the rule to say it was a pass.

 

Look it up...then come back to us.....it was a stupid rule but it was applied correctly in that game...you make it sound like they made up a rule on the spot to help NE....as a matter a fact, in that same 2001 season, the tuck rule was called against NE.....

[reddogblitz]

3 hours ago, Chris66 said:

Bottomiine don't give a rats behind what opposing fans think. They don't matter.

What matters is what gms, coaches and people who actually played  the game think. No one other than Marshal Faulk think the Pats cheated.

 

You forgot Peyfton Manning http://www.businessinsider.com/peyton-manning-patriots-visiting-locker-room-bugged-2015-8 and Donovan McNabb http://www.phillyvoice.com/eagles-believed-patriots-cheated-super-bowl-39/

 

Quote

When Spygate broke, some of the Eagles now believed they had an answer for a question that had vexed them since they lost to the Patriots 24-21 in Super Bowl XXXIX: How did New England seem completely prepared for the rarely used dime defense the Eagles deployed in the second quarter, scoring touchdowns on three of four drives? The Eagles suspected that either practices were filmed or a playbook was stolen. "To this day, some believe that we were robbed by the Patriots not playing by the rules ... and knowing our game plan," a former Eagles football operations staffer says.

 

Pretty much the same thing Marshall Faulk said. He is far from the only player or coach that said y'all cheated as you say.

 

 

Edited December 2, 2017 by reddogblitz

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

5 minutes ago, Iron Maiden said:

 

Look it up...then come back to us.....it was a stupid rule but it was applied correctly in that game...you make it sound like they made up a rule on the spot to help NE....as a matter a fact, in that same 2001 season, the tuck rule was called against NE.....

 

...hell IM go back to your post(s) about their gaudy statistical accomplishments......so you now EVERY damn excuse in the book is forthcoming like these, "cheaters", yada yada....only a fool would try to deny they're good and have been for some quite some time.....dammit.............

[reddogblitz]

2 minutes ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said:

 

...hell IM go back to your post(s) about their gaudy statistical accomplishments......so you now EVERY damn excuse in the book is forthcoming like these, "cheaters", yada yada....only a fool would try to deny they're good and have been for some quite some time.....dammit.............

 

If they're so good, why do they gave to cheat? They DID get fined a quarter of a million dollars once and had Saint Tommy suspended for 4 games another time for getting caught, wait for it, CHEATING.

 

They are good, but they're tainted. 

[Fadingpain]

On December 1, 2017 at 10:57 AM, plenzmd1 said:

Lets face it, the combination of BB and TB is the best there ever was in the NFL. No way around it. 

 

Now, I think Brady alone would have still been the GOAT, but not so sure if BB would be the GOAT without Brady, especially in this QB driven Era. Even without Brady, BB probably top 5 all time.

 

Love the way he attacks, changes game plans loved the eligible/ineligible stuff in the Ravens game, loved going for it on 4th and 2 even though it did not work,.guy just out thinks most coaches.

 

Always amazes me when still lapses into NFL coach think sometimes, and that would be only reason why he may not be the GOAT..he knows better, but can still have those brainfarts

BB is the best coach not because he gives the best halftime speeches or leads the best post-game pow-wow in the locker room....or any other BS NFL coach crap.

 

He is the best of all time because he is the smartest.

 

If you are going to beat him you are going to have to out-think him.

 

 

 

 

[Dan]

9 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

Brady's playoff record: 25-9.

 

Rodgers: 10-7.

 

SBs with Brady: 5 wins, 7 appearances.  Without Brady: 0/0.

 

Rodgers: 1/1

 

 

Huh?

Yes because Brady took the field by himself and won all those games single handedly.  I stand corrected.  But for the record, I'm not saying he sucks... I was pointing out the fact that without Brady, Belichick still gets the team to winning records; indicating that he appears to be more important in their success then Brady.  So, yes, Brady is a certain first ballot HOFer, but Belichick has proven he can win without Brady. The same cannot be said in reverse.  

 

Contrast that to a QB like Manning who proved he could win with multiple coaches and teams.  Granted we can't say Brady couldn't do it, because he's never had the opportunity.  I would suggest that its completely unknown how he would perform if you take away the team and coach he's played his entire career with.

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

7 minutes ago, reddogblitz said:

 

If they're so good, why do they gave to cheat? They DID get fined a quarter of a million dollars once and had Saint Tommy suspended for 4 games another time for getting caught, wait for it, CHEATING.

 

They are good, but they're tainted. 

 

....and the other 31 are "lily white innocent", right?......try just not stupid enough to get caught....but one must find obvious (COUGH) reasons for their tainted success.....right.....

[Iron Maiden]

7 minutes ago, reddogblitz said:

 

If they're so good, why do they gave to cheat? They DID get fined a quarter of a million dollars once and had Saint Tommy suspended for 4 games another time for getting caught, wait for it, CHEATING.

 

They are good, but they're tainted. 

 

Are the 49ers with Montana and Rice tainted ?...Are the Broncos with Elway tainted ?.....

 

[Iron Maiden]

When the vast majority of former players, coaches and analysts all agree that Brady is the GOAT, that BB is one of the best ever, and their run is historic, I feel bad for the few Bills fans who keep bringing up the silliness of cheating......it makes our fan base look ignorant....yeah, sure, you can find a former player here and there who lost to them and are claiming they cheat....but there's about 10 players for everyone of them that will say they are the real deal...Ever since 2009, when Brady came back from his 2008 knee injury, I've been waiting for the decline.....I thought they were done then.....2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016.....it hasn't happened...2017 does not look promising either....

 

It does not make you a bad Bills fan to be able to admit that the 2000's and the 2010's NE teams have been good/great....

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

6 minutes ago, Iron Maiden said:

When the vast majority of former players, coaches and analysts all agree that Brady is the GOAT, that BB is one of the best ever, and their run is historic, I feel bad for the few Bills fans who keep bringing up the silliness of cheating......it makes our fan base look ignorant....yeah, sure, you can find a former player here and there who lost to them and are claiming they cheat....but there's about 10 players for everyone of them that will say they are the real deal...Ever since 2009, when Brady came back from his 2008 knee injury, I've been waiting for the decline.....I thought they were done then.....2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016.....it hasn't happened...2017 does not look promising either....

 

It does not make you a bad Bills fan to be able to admit that the 2000's and the 2010's NE teams have been good/great....

 

...damn you're good...best ever calling "a spade a spade"...

[Boatdrinks]

9 minutes ago, Iron Maiden said:

When the vast majority of former players, coaches and analysts all agree that Brady is the GOAT, that BB is one of the best ever, and their run is historic, I feel bad for the few Bills fans who keep bringing up the silliness of cheating......it makes our fan base look ignorant....yeah, sure, you can find a former player here and there who lost to them and are claiming they cheat....but there's about 10 players for everyone of them that will say they are the real deal...Ever since 2009, when Brady came back from his 2008 knee injury, I've been waiting for the decline.....I thought they were done then.....2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016.....it hasn't happened...2017 does not look promising either....

 

It does not make you a bad Bills fan to be able to admit that the 2000's and the 2010's NE teams have been good/great....

  I don't think Bills fans care what anyone thinks about their take on the Patriots, Brady or the hoodie. We have our opinions and are fine with them. While our opinions likely vary  a bit on the subject, Bills fans also don't care much about what anyone else's opinion is on the matter either. Mostly because we just don't like the Patriots and are largely concerned with our own team becoming good again. You, however seem extremely bothered by what Bills fans think about a team that they do not root for or follow. 

Edited December 2, 2017 by Boatdrinks

[Iron Maiden]

2 minutes ago, Boatdrinks said:

  I don't think Bills fans care what anyone thinks about their take on the Patriots, Brady or the hoodie. We have our opinions and are fine with them. While our opinions likely vary  a bit on the subject, Bills fans also don't care much about what anyone else's opinion is on the subject either. Mostly because we just don't like the Patriots and are largely concerned with our own team becoming good again. You, however seem extremely bothered by what Bills fans think about a team that they do not root for or follow. 

 

I am a proud Bills fan...I do care about the fact that some fan bases are more knowledgeable than others...I like to think we are are one of those....

[Boatdrinks]

8 minutes ago, Iron Maiden said:

 

I am a proud Bills fan...I do care about the fact that some fan bases are more knowledgeable than others...I like to think we are are one of those....

It's largely irrelevant. I do think there are a lot of knowledgeable Bills fans out there, I don't think their opinion on the Pats or Brady is a factor in that at all. 

[Iron Maiden]

1 hour ago, Boatdrinks said:

It's largely irrelevant. I do think there are a lot of knowledgeable Bills fans out there, I don't think their opinion on the Pats or Brady is a factor in that at all. 

 

I do agree there's a lot of knowledgeable fans on this site....I just don't think the ones screaming cheater in every NE thread is a good representation of that particular group....we'll agree to disagree on that subject...

1 hour ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said:

 

...damn you're good...best ever calling "a spade a spade"...

 

Thanks buddy ! I hate them, but damn...to pretend that their success is because deflated balls or because a camera was placed in the wrong spot 10 years ago is plain stupid....

Edited December 3, 2017 by Iron Maiden

[reddogblitz]

3 hours ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said:

 

....and the other 31 are "lily white innocent", right?......try just not stupid enough to get caught....but one must find obvious (COUGH) reasons for their tainted success.....right.....

 

If you have some evidence that the other 31 teams were doing the same stuff I'd be happy to consider it.

 

But, I'm going to try to follow your logic. All 31 other teams do the same stuff y'all do.  But none of them, except the Broncos and McDaniels have been caught. So how do we know they do?  Are the Patriots, the smartest team in football too stupid to pull off what every other team does? Really?

 

They got caught red handed and punished by the league twice. They were punished after an investigation. Remember the destroyed tapes  and testimony where the Patriots could present thier side of the story.   Why would the league go after thier best team? Thier Cash cow?  All for something they all do anyway?

 

They only cheated twice and got caught both times. 

 

[OJ's Glove]

14 hours ago, reddogblitz said:

 

If you have some evidence that the other 31 teams were doing the same stuff I'd be happy to consider it.

 

But, I'm going to try to follow your logic. All 31 other teams do the same stuff y'all do.  But none of them, except the Broncos and McDaniels have been caught. So how do we know they do?  Are the Patriots, the smartest team in football too stupid to pull off what every other team does? Really?

 

They got caught red handed and punished by the league twice. They were punished after an investigation. Remember the destroyed tapes  and testimony where the Patriots could present thier side of the story.   Why would the league go after thier best team? Thier Cash cow?  All for something they all do anyway?

 

They only cheated twice and got caught both times. 

 

 

I guess you missed all those other infractions where teams and players get fined for things like tampering, salary cap violations, PEDs, pumping in crowd noise, etcetera. It's ALL "cheating".

 

The Raiders for 40 years openly bragged about trying to cheat. It was part of their ethic as a franchise. What do people think of them now and their three Super bowls? Well, everyone watches NFL Films about the old days and has a good laugh and a backslap about how cute and funny that all was. "Cheating is encouraged" and "if you aint cheatin', you aint tryin'!" Right John Madden? Right George Atkinson? Right Phil Villapiano? Just ask them. The double-standard is embarrassing.

 

Everybody thinks Goodell and his gang of idiots are royal screw-ups and can't find their asses with both hands, but they were supposedly right on the money and in the right when they went after the Patriots? Come on. Goodell fouls everything he touches when it comes to discipline matters. Why would they go after their best team? Because Roger thinks his office and his authority are more important than any one team. Rivals in other places like Hempstead and Indy wanted them taken down a peg and pressured the League office to be harsh. You guys can't be this dumb to not realize stuff like this.

 

"Spygate" was a minor infraction that was blown up because Belichick ignored a League memo to stop doing it, because he knew other teams did it and thought it was no big deal (which Jimmy Johnson and others also admitted) , and he figured he could justify it based of how the actual rule was worded. BB and Goodell's underling snakes in the League office hate each other (always have), the Patriots were a dominant team, Goodell felt like someone was thumbing their nose at his authority. That's all that was necessary. Despite the constant rule-bending that all teams do at one time or another, this nonsense never happened under Rozelle or Tagliabue, because they were actually good at their job and knew how to treat petty squabbles between rival teams as the whiny nonsense situations they were, rather than letting them blow up into national stories.

 

"Deflategate" was ginned up, and when the evidence wasn't there to even show an infraction had even happened, Roger punished them anyway because AGAIN he was getting pressure from other owners to make sure they were found guilty. Mostly because they had the nerve to continue to win at historic proportions and stopping them from taping had had no effect at all on that (almost as if it didn't matter! Aw shucks!). NOBODY tries to do this to the Cleveland Browns or some 8-8 team. The paranoia around the League about the Patriots is palpable, ridiculous and embarrassing. Taking away the tapes and draft picks didn't work. So they tried to take away Brady and that didn't work. Deflategate was a legal victory but a massive PR nightmare and black eye over nothing. Maybe they've learned their lesson, but I doubt it. Park Avenue is too ignorant, vindictive and stupid.

 

Quote

to pretend that their success is because deflated balls or because a camera was placed in the wrong spot 10 years ago is plain stupid...

 

.

Correct.

 

Edited December 3, 2017 by OJ's Glove

[Buffalo Barbarian]

11 hours ago, inaugural balls said:

I'm trying to figure out which of your 2 posts is dumber.

 

Tough call.

 

 

 

Get a grip dude , obviously being facetious.

 

And if you don't want to win 10 Super Bowls then you're the dumb one.

[Mr. WEO]

17 hours ago, Dan said:

Yes because Brady took the field by himself and won all those games single handedly.  I stand corrected.  But for the record, I'm not saying he sucks... I was pointing out the fact that without Brady, Belichick still gets the team to winning records; indicating that he appears to be more important in their success then Brady.  So, yes, Brady is a certain first ballot HOFer, but Belichick has proven he can win without Brady. The same cannot be said in reverse.  

 

Contrast that to a QB like Manning who proved he could win with multiple coaches and teams.  Granted we can't say Brady couldn't do it, because he's never had the opportunity.  I would suggest that its completely unknown how he would perform if you take away the team and coach he's played his entire career with.

 

Winning record, no playoffs. 

 

Winning records in the regular season are nice, but it's playoff wins that define the best of the best.  Look at Manning; he won a ton of regular season games in Indy, but his playoff record there was barely over.500 with a HOF HC and several HOF candidates on offense. 

 

BB  doesn't run the offense, Brady does.  He's not just trotting out there running the various schemes dreamed up by all of the OC's he has played for over 18 seasons.  Yes, he is blessed to have played for far and away the best NFL HC ever, but in the end, it will be true that Brady will have achieved more with far less (offensive star players) than any top QB ever.

Edited December 3, 2017 by Mr. WEO