Jump to content
Gugny

Who's Most Responsible for Pats* Dynasty: Brady or Belichick?

Who's Most Responsible for Pats* Dynasty: Brady or Belichick?  

232 members have voted

  1. 1. Who's Most Responsible for Pats* Dynasty: Brady or Belichick?



Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Gugny said:

 

I think if you read through the first 9+ pages of this thread, you'll see why the, "BB was a losing coach before Brady," is such a weak, lazy, twisted and biased narrative.  There's a lot of higher quality dialogue happening with regard to the topic.  Soak it in, man.

Myself personally Gu, I think the odds of Brady teaming up with good coaching and supporting cast would be higher then BB finding another QB as good as Brady.( next to impossible )

 

with all due respect

  • Thanks! (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, mannc said:

Funny, NO and GB have had QBs as good as Brady the past 15 years, and yet they’ve been far less dominant than the Pats...there goes theory.

But are they as good ? Even removing the divisional advantage that Brady has enjoyed throughout the run ( no other good QBs in the East) , stats and talent alone don’t = winning football. I can’t stand Brady, but I know what I see. The guy just rarely has a bad day, makes very few mistakes and almost never makes more mistakes than the QB across from him. He does this more consistently than any QB I’ve seen. So, I’m not sure your theory holds water. Who says those QBs are as good as Brady, game in and game out ? Certainly the New England offensive staff/ system deserves some credit. Their system has arguably been the best and most consistent in the last dozen years or so. That’s not Belichick’s side of the ball ( let me guess , you’ll give him credit for the offense as well). The greater point though, is stats and media accolades don’t mean those QBs are interchangeable with Brady. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

So let’s just make up things like Brady (who never played for another coach other than Belichick) won’t have been good.  

 

This is crazy, and stick with me here, maybe Belichick became a much better coach when he got handed the best qb ever!  But clearly the coach who was 43-55 before Brady (career record 207-60) is the main reason for their success. 

 

Again.  Lazy.   There are plenty of reasons Belichick's HC record prior to Brady was not good.  Lots of justifications discussed upthread.  Just because you throw numbers into your argument doesn't make it any stronger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Boatdrinks said:

But are they as good ? Even removing the divisional advantage that Brady has enjoyed throughout the run ( no other good QBs in the East) , stats and talent alone don’t = winning football. I can’t stand Brady, but I know what I see. The guy just rarely has a bad day, makes very few mistakes and almost never makes more mistakes than the QB across from him. He does this more consistently than any QB I’ve seen. So, I’m not sure your theory holds water. Who says those QBs are as good as Brady, game in and game out ? Certainly the New England offensive staff/ system deserves some credit. Their system has arguably been the best and most consistent in the last dozen years or so. That’s not Belichick’s side of the ball ( let me guess , you’ll give him credit for the offense as well). The greater point though, is stats and media accolades don’t mean those QBs are interchangeable with Brady. 

Don’t get me wrong; Brady is the best ever, but the past 10 years or so, Rodgers and Brees have been nearly as good, and at times, better.  And yet their teams haven’t had nearly the success of NE.  There’s not much doubt that neither wins six Super Bowls without the other.  

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Figster said:

Myself personally Gu, I think the odds of Brady teaming up with good coaching and supporting cast would be higher then BB finding another QB as good as Brady.( next to impossible )

 

with all due respect

 

I'm not disagreeing with you at all, Figgy.  That's the reason for my wording including "MOST responsible."

 

I think everyone can agree that it takes two to tango and the dynasty has been a product of BOTH Belichick and Brady.

 

My main argument for Belichick is that he's not only the HC, but he's the GM.  Football is a team sport.  He's been responsible for assembling the team AND coaching it.

 

I look at the lack of success Belichick disciples have had after they left New England.  That tells me how instrumental BB is.

 

HOWEVER ... would there have been a dynasty without Brady?  Absolutely not.  It has taken both of them.

 

I do think Brady is good enough to have made any team in the NFL better; perhaps, even, a winning team.  But I don't think there is a dynasty in today's game without a mastermind at GM, a mastermind at HC and an elite QB.  Pats had them all and 2/3 of that formula has been Belichick.

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, mannc said:

Don’t get me wrong; Brady is the best ever, but the past 10 years or so, Rodgers and Brees have been nearly as good, and at times, better.  And yet their teams haven’t had nearly the success of NE.  There’s not much doubt that neither wins six Super Bowls without the other.  

Again, I’ll disagree. I could see Brady winning those Superbowls , perhaps even on two different teams. I cannot see the Head Coach pulling that off, though. I think Belichick could win a couple, but Brady would win more. The Superbowls they lost were the ones where the opposing QB was just a bit better that day than Brady. Two of the wins would almost certainly have been losses if not for the opposition choking / self destructing with terrible decisions.Those were on SEA and ATL , not Brady or B.B. I’d have to go back to the first SB win vs Rams to find one where I think B.B. gave them the deciding edge. I’m actually surprised at the results of this poll, as the Bills have needed a QB since Kelly retired. Yet the HC gets all the credit here. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, mannc said:

Don’t get me wrong; Brady is the best ever, but the past 10 years or so, Rodgers and Brees have been nearly as good, and at times, better.  And yet their teams haven’t had nearly the success of NE.  There’s not much doubt that neither wins six Super Bowls without the other.  

What decides it for me is who stands to have more success without the other and its Tom Brady IMO. If say Brady teamed up with Harbaugh and the Ravens by way of example.

 

BB is a great coach, but does he beat Harbaugh/Brady?

 

We have a few Championship caliber HC's in my humble opinion. Only one GOAT in Tom Brady.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Gugny said:

 

I'm not disagreeing with you at all, Figgy.  That's the reason for my wording including "MOST responsible."

 

I think everyone can agree that it takes two to tango and the dynasty has been a product of BOTH Belichick and Brady.

 

My main argument for Belichick is that he's not only the HC, but he's the GM.  Football is a team sport.  He's been responsible for assembling the team AND coaching it.

 

I look at the lack of success Belichick disciples have had after they left New England.  That tells me how instrumental BB is.

 

HOWEVER ... would there have been a dynasty without Brady?  Absolutely not.  It has taken both of them.

 

I do think Brady is good enough to have made any team in the NFL better; perhaps, even, a winning team.  But I don't think there is a dynasty in today's game without a mastermind at GM, a mastermind at HC and an elite QB.  Pats had them all and 2/3 of that formula has been Belichick.

Compelling argument GU

  • Thanks! (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, Figster said:

Compelling argument GU

 

Bottom line (to me) is that they are both the GOATs in their respective fields.  

 

There's a reason that none of the other elite QBs during Brady's tenure has more than 2 Super Bowl wins.  I think that reason is that none of the other QBs have had a coach/GM like Brady had.

 

 

Edited by Gugny
  • Like (+1) 1
  • Awesome! (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Gugny said:

 

Bottom line (to me) is that they are both the GOATs in their respective fields.  

 

There's a reason that none of the other elite QBs during Brady's tenure has no more than 2 Super Bowl wins.  I think that reason is that none of the other QBs have had a coach/GM like Brady had.

 

Seems to be the most likely explanation.  The Pats have the right combination of coach, GM, QB, and an owner who did not get in the way.  

  • Like (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Gugny said:

 

Bottom line (to me) is that they are both the GOATs in their respective fields.  

 

There's a reason that none of the other elite QBs during Brady's tenure has more than 2 Super Bowl wins.  I think that reason is that none of the other QBs have had a coach/GM like Brady had.

 

 

Alas, we get stuck playing them twice a year and in all likeihood a 3rd time to advance in the playoffs.

 

Yippee!

 

Then along came Josh/McD...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
25 minutes ago, Happy Gilmore said:

 

Seems to be the most likely explanation.  The Pats have the right combination of coach, GM, QB, and an owner who did not get in the way.  

Assuming Belichick sticks around after Brady retires, we may finally get an answer to this question.  Me, I’m expecting the Pats to continue to dominate in the post-Brady era.  With their new emphasis on the ground game, Belichick is already setting the stage.  And every year, the Pats seem to have more draft picks than anyone else.  It’s very frustrating because there never seems to be any light at the end of this particular tunnel.

Edited by mannc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Everybody knows the refs are the most responsible giving them all the calls, not calling the obvious holding calls, and continuous second chances!!!! 

 

😎                                                                                           💪

Edited by Patrick_Duffy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Boatdrinks said:

But are they as good ? Even removing the divisional advantage that Brady has enjoyed throughout the run ( no other good QBs in the East) , stats and talent alone don’t = winning football. I can’t stand Brady, but I know what I see. The guy just rarely has a bad day, makes very few mistakes and almost never makes more mistakes than the QB across from him. He does this more consistently than any QB I’ve seen. So, I’m not sure your theory holds water. Who says those QBs are as good as Brady, game in and game out ? Certainly the New England offensive staff/ system deserves some credit. Their system has arguably been the best and most consistent in the last dozen years or so. That’s not Belichick’s side of the ball ( let me guess , you’ll give him credit for the offense as well). The greater point though, is stats and media accolades don’t mean those QBs are interchangeable with Brady. 

If thats not Belichicks side of the ball, then who is it?  If you say McDaniels. Who made him the coach that he is today. That entire organization is BB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, mannc said:

Assuming Belichick sticks around after Brady retires, we may finally get an answer to this question.  Me, I’m expecting the Pats to continue to dominate in the post-Brady era.  With their new emphasis on the ground game, Belichick is already setting the stage.  And every year, the Pats seem to have more draft picks than anyone else.  It’s very frustrating because there never seems to be any light at the end of this particular tunnel.

So they will continue to dominate by running the ball ? Why would they try to do this? Oh , because : no Brady. There’s your answer right there. You appear to be shell shocked by the Pats beyond all logic. This isn’t 1975, no team is going to dominate with a ground game in this era. Anyway, I think B.B. doesn’t risk tarnishing his legacy and exits around the same time as Brady. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, mannc said:

Assuming Belichick sticks around after Brady retires, we may finally get an answer to this question.  Me, I’m expecting the Pats to continue to dominate in the post-Brady era.  With their new emphasis on the ground game, Belichick is already setting the stage.  And every year, the Pats seem to have more draft picks than anyone else.  It’s very frustrating because there never seems to be any light at the end of this particular tunnel.

 

Once Brady retires, I would suspect they will still be competitive but not dominant like they have been; assuming BB sticks around.  Brady is a smart QB who has seen every defense thrown at him, executes their version of the E-P system to perfection, will be near impossible to replace.  

  • Thanks! (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Boatdrinks said:

So they will continue to dominate by running the ball ? Why would they try to do this? Oh , because : no Brady. There’s your answer right there. You appear to be shell shocked by the Pats beyond all logic. This isn’t 1975, no team is going to dominate with a ground game in this era. Anyway, I think B.B. doesn’t risk tarnishing his legacy and exits around the same time as Brady. 

Modern defenses are designed to stop the pass.  Belichick is creating an offense that will exploit that tendency, while at the same time relying less on QB brilliance, as Brady’s limitations become more apparent and the team transitions to a new QB.  That may change if and when they find a new franchise QB.   The run-first post-Brady Pats might not be dominant, but they certainly won’t be the pushover many Bills fans seem to expect.

Edited by mannc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t understand how Belichick is ahead here.  Prior to Brady he had done nothing as a head coach.  Aside from one playoff season his record with the Browns was lousy.  5-10 in his first season with NE.  0-2 to begin his 2nd season.  Then Brady takes over and suddenly he finally starts winning.  Yes they have been great ever since but that has been with Brady.  What am I missing here?

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Talley56 said:

I don’t understand how Belichick is ahead here.  Prior to Brady he had done nothing as a head coach.  Aside from one playoff season his record with the Browns was lousy.  5-10 in his first season with NE.  0-2 to begin his 2nd season.  Then Brady takes over and suddenly he finally starts winning.  Yes they have been great ever since but that has been with Brady.  What am I missing here?

Years of media driven conditioning to believe in the mystical powers of Belichick, rather than just believing what your eyes see. It’s overridden common sense at this point. The closest parallel in the modern passing era is the 49ers. Their success continued under a lesser HC due to the QB and an incredibly good immediate replacement.  That Brady has done it without anything close to a Jerry Rice at WR is even more astounding. He’s the most consistent performer I’ve ever seen at QB. His few bad outings are the only time they lose. Other than that it takes a truly superior performance by the opposing QB , such as Foles in the SB vs Eagles. . 

  • Like (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've never thought Brady was special. Any QB who has half an hour to throw the ball can make the completion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, stuvian said:

I've never thought Brady was special. Any QB who has half an hour to throw the ball can make the completion

 

Brady doesn't have half an hour to throw the ball.  Though it does seem like it some times.

  • Like (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, stuvian said:

I've never thought Brady was special. Any QB who has half an hour to throw the ball can make the completion

Agreed.  Brady is obviously JAG.  Great take.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

There’s zero evidence of this and Belichick was a losing head coach before Brady.  Those are proven facts. 

The 1994 11-5 Cleveland Browns beg to differ... and that was with Vinnie Testaverde at QB!  11-5 with that roster of bums...

 

The 1995 Browns went into the tank the next season for very specific reasons. They started the 95 season 3-1. Although, there were significant rumors about the team needing to be sold because the owner was in deep financial trouble. The Browns started to falter and by the time week 9 arrived they were 4-4. After the next game the Browns owner, Art Modell suddenly announced the team was moving from Cleveland to Baltimore after the season. 

 

Needless to say, the team stunned by that news, the floor fell out and the team collapsed. After that the Browns only won one game and Belichick was fired. 

 

Had Modell kept Belichick as HC with the Baltimore Ravens and with Ozzie Newsome as director of pro personnel who move to director of football operations, later to GM.  I think the history/story of both the Patriots/Ravens would be very, very different today. 

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/20/2019 at 1:21 PM, Boatdrinks said:

The Bills defense lost the game by allowing 40 minutes of possession time to a plodding, dinosaur offense. Many tackles were missed and execution was sloppy.  The Bills offense scored 17 points in 19 minutes of possession. I’ve always thought the legend of Belichicks role in Supe XXV was vastly exaggerated. Seriously, a kick drifts two feet to the left and B.B. is a footnote in that game. 

 

Fans in all sports usually look at results as a credit or indictment of their team, disregarding the other team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Kemp said:

 

Fans in all sports usually look at results as a credit or indictment of their team, disregarding the other team.

That would include NYG and Belichick fans. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...