Jump to content

GMF Peter Schrager LMAO


Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, NewEra said:

How many Super Bowls did parcels win without Belichick?  Belichick beat us in the SB when he was with the giants with a backup QB.

 

your take on the matter is inconsequential imo.  Only the biggest haters would agree with you that he’s not the greatest, if not one of the greatest coaches of all time.  He is absolutely a football genius, guru, mastermind....whatever you don’t want to call him.  He just is

Belichick is 20-23 in New England without Brady.

He’s 219-64 with Brady

 

Take away that overrated 11-5 season where Matt Cassel quartbacked a stacked team that went 16-0 and made it to a super bowl the previous year, he’s 10-18 without Mr. Brady.

Edited by streetkings01
  • Like (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, RoyBatty is alive said:

Shrager is not half as bad as Ted Bruschi is.  I suffered through part of his pre-game and he blamed the Pats laughable loss to the Broncos because they only had 3 practices and Belichek hates uncertainty and doesnt take anything to chance.  But hey, i guess the other 31 NFL HCs love uncertainty and take it all to chance.

 

I would love to hear Bruschi excuse the that embarrassment of a Patriot display versus San Fran yesterday.  Cam looks real bad, the early season magic has run dry.

This is what I have been waiting to see.

 

When New England signed Cam Newton, the media was going crazy and talking up how great Newton would look with Bellichick coaching him.

 

I was skeptical, because I wanted to see how Newton would last an entire season. Early on Newton looked very good, and people were saying that "Cam Newton is back!"

 

Now what are people saying? I know they will use Covid as an excuse, but let's be realistic. Cam Newton has regressed since he took the Panthers to the Super Bowl. His best days are behind him. I could be wrong, but I don't see a return to greatness for Newton.

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TigerJ said:

Frankly, I see more entertainment value is watching Bill Belichick's behavior in the midst of failure.  Now that's good stuff.

He doesn't care anymore.  Look at all the Subway commercials he's doing.  When Brady left, part of Bill left. He's still dangerous but very vulnerable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TroutDog said:


I’d dispute this. BB is an incredible coach, probably the best ever and, certainly, a HOF’er. 
 

I am as glad to see their apparent demise as much as the next Bills fan but will never underestimate BB. Once he clears out the cap and restocks the cupboard, he’ll turn them around...again. 

he will still need a Franchise QB.   No coach can win in the NFL without having a Franchise QB

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, NewEra said:

How many Super Bowls did parcels win without Belichick?  Belichick beat us in the SB when he was with the giants with a backup QB.

 

your take on the matter is inconsequential imo.  Only the biggest haters would agree with you that he’s not the greatest, if not one of the greatest coaches of all time.  He is absolutely a football genius, guru, mastermind....whatever you don’t want to call him.  He just is

He really is the worst “analyst” on tv.  This should  be his last

 

I watched the moronic segment :"Mossed up" with Randy Moss and Bruschi.  To me it was embarrassing to watch how over-reacting they both were.  I wonder who thinks "mossed up" is cool?  15 year olds?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Stank_Nasty said:

I can one up this.... This morning on "First things first" Nick Wright(a complete clown) claimed the Pats had nothing to worry about because after they beat the bills this week they'll be a game back and the Bills will implode. Said and 8 pt win against the Jets should actually register as a loss..... I had a chuckle.

 

He has an all-time punch-able face.  Putz Extraordinaire.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TroutDog said:


I’d dispute this. BB is an incredible coach, probably the best ever and, certainly, a HOF’er. 
 

I am as glad to see their apparent demise as much as the next Bills fan but will never underestimate BB. Once he clears out the cap and restocks the cupboard, he’ll turn them around...again. 

He's not the best ever. Tom Brady carried that team for years. They would never have had the success they did without him. While Cam was throwing multiple ints yesterday, Brady put 5 tds on the board. 

 

They will never have the success they had without him again, and Belichick will be exposed as a coach who succeeded simply because he happened to have the GOAT as his Qb. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, ganesh said:

he will still need a Franchise QB.   No coach can win in the NFL without having a Franchise QB

 

I remember the Ravens winning a SB with Trent Dilfer. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, NewEra said:

How many Super Bowls did parcels win without Belichick?  Belichick beat us in the SB when he was with the giants with a backup QB.

 

your take on the matter is inconsequential imo.  Only the biggest haters would agree with you that he’s not the greatest, if not one of the greatest coaches of all time.  He is absolutely a football genius, guru, mastermind....whatever you don’t want to call him.  He just is

He really is the worst “analyst” on tv.  This should  be his last

It doesn't matter if parcells didn't win Super Bowls without Belichick. Parcells was an amazing head coach and turned around every franchise he took over. Even the Cowboys with no Belichick. He took over for Dave Campo and took Quincy freaking Carter to the playoffs his first year in Dallas. Who knows what would have happened in his last year there if Romo doesn't mess up holding the snap on a field goal to win the game in the playoffs. And as far as Belichick being on that Giants team that beat us in the SB, if the Bills weren't so stubborn and actually took what Belichick was giving them, that "amazing" game plan wouldn't even exist. Belichick said himself that they were "inviting" us to run the football and he was hoping we didn't because they knew they were gonna be in trouble. Thurman Thomas only ran the ball like 15 times and had over 130 yards. Imagine if we would have stuck with that more in the game, it could have been a lot different. The Bills from back then said, it didn't matter what the Giants did, they were living and dying with what got them there. If we weren't so stubborn, could have been a big difference 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Buffalo03 said:

He needs to get to a SB without Brady to prove he didn't ride on Brady. Brady is the best QB ever. Any coach could have ridden Brady to even a couple SBs. Adam Gase would look great with Brady. He did nothing in Cleveland and didn't do anything his first year and two games in NE before Bledsoe got hurt and Brady came in and started history for them. People bring up the 2008 season where Brady was gone the whole year but that was also the year coming off a 16-0 season with pretty much the same team as the year before. No matter what QB he had, he was not gonna win 5 games after a 16-0 season. If he coaches for 5 more years and never sees another SB or doesn't get to the playoffs a couple times.or is one and done a few times, I think it proves he rode on the greatest QBs back his whole career

 

I think the relationship between Brady and Belichick was symbiotic.  I think Brady had a lot of innate talent and drive.  But I think Belichick and his coaching staff helped Brady develop his full potential.  Neither Brady nor Belichick would be as great without the other.

 

You look at HOF coaches and they all had great QBs.   Levy had Kelly.  Landry had Staubach.   Bud Grant had Tarkenton.  Jimmy had Aikman.   Noll had Bradshaw.  Walsh had Montana and Young.

 

It's the which-came-first-the-chicken-or-egg argument.  Do great coaches make qbs great?  Or do great qbs make coaches great?  It's a little of both, I think. 

 

.

Edited by hondo in seattle
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, hondo in seattle said:

 

I think the relationship between Brady and Belichick was symbiotic.  I think Brady had a lot of innate talent and drive.  But I think Belichick and his coaching staff helped Brady develop his full potential.  Neither Brady nor Belichick would be as great without the other.

 

You look at HOF coaches and they all had great QBs.   Levy had Kelly.  Landry had Staubach.   Bud Grant had Tarkenton.  Jimmy had Aikman.   Noll had Bradshaw.  Walsh had Montana and Young.

 

It's the which-came-first-the-chicken-or-egg argument.  Do great coaches make qbs great?  Or do great qbs make coaches great?  It's a little of both, I think. 

 

.

I don't think Belichick had any part in Brady's development. Brady was just naturally good. He didn't do anything else with any other QB he had, Kosar, Testaverde, Bledsoe, Cassel, Newton, Stidham. But he figured it out with Brady? Belichick gets too much credit for that. As I stated before, Adam Gase could have went to Super Bowls and had great success with Brady as his QB. Peyton Manning gave Gase the only success he has ever had in this league and he has gotten two head coaching jobs because of it. It was 20 years of Brady, not Belichick of why they had so much success. If you think the Pats even make the playoffs the year Bledsoe got drilled by Moe Lewis to make way for Brady and get to the SB, you're insane

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, hondo in seattle said:

 

I think the relationship between Brady and Belichick was symbiotic.  I think Brady had a lot of innate talent and drive.  But I think Belichick and his coaching staff helped Brady develop his full potential.  Neither Brady nor Belichick would be as great without the other.

 

You look at HOF coaches and they all had great QBs.   Levy had Kelly.  Landry had Staubach.   Bud Grant had Tarkenton.  Jimmy had Aikman.   Noll had Bradshaw.  Walsh had Montana and Young.

 

It's the which-came-first-the-chicken-or-egg argument.  Do great coaches make qbs great?  Or do great qbs make coaches great?  It's a little of both, I think. 

 

.

When it comes to Brady and Belicheat I would go 80% Brady and 20% Belicheat. 

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Buffalo03 said:

It doesn't matter if parcells didn't win Super Bowls without Belichick. Parcells was an amazing head coach and turned around every franchise he took over. Even the Cowboys with no Belichick. He took over for Dave Campo and took Quincy freaking Carter to the playoffs his first year in Dallas. Who knows what would have happened in his last year there if Romo doesn't mess up holding the snap on a field goal to win the game in the playoffs. And as far as Belichick being on that Giants team that beat us in the SB, if the Bills weren't so stubborn and actually took what Belichick was giving them, that "amazing" game plan wouldn't even exist. Belichick said himself that they were "inviting" us to run the football and he was hoping we didn't because they knew they were gonna be in trouble. Thurman Thomas only ran the ball like 15 times and had over 130 yards. Imagine if we would have stuck with that more in the game, it could have been a lot different. The Bills from back then said, it didn't matter what the Giants did, they were living and dying with what got them there. If we weren't so stubborn, could have been a big difference 


Ok, you’re right.  Belichick isn’t good.  MY BAD.

 

 

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, hondo in seattle said:

When I first heard Brady was leaving NE, I still believed the Patriots would be competitive because of their strong defense and excellent coaching staff.

 

I only began to doubt them when they led the NFL in COVID opt outs.   Belichick is a great coach.  But even a great coach can't win without good players and right now the Pats just don't have enough of them.  

 

Some people are just conservative by nature.  They have trouble believing in change until it happens.  I'm a bit that way.  I'm not surprised the Bills are leading the AFCE at this point but I am surprised the Pats are in 3rd.  I was predicting Bills, Pats, Fins, Jets.  It's just hard to imagine - despite contrary predictive evidence - a Pats fall of this magnitude.  

 

Even now, I'm not putting next week's game in the win column just yet.  Belichick has ruined too many Sundays for me to discount him.  

 

Exactly right.   👍

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, TigerJ said:

Frankly, I see more entertainment value is watching Bill Belichick's behavior in the midst of failure.  Now that's good stuff.

Remember the game, in OP, with Chan Gailey as our HC?  We beat the Patriots with some clever last minute game management and working the clock/scoring timing to perfection.

 

BB realized what was happening, knew he was being fed his own medicine, and that he couldn't do anything about it.

 

He ranted and raved and behaved like a child, then stormed off the filed as a poor loser.

 

That was great to see.  Good entertainment.

 

 

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Rk_Bills86 said:

I mean - I'm sure there are a lot of people on this board that will agree.... Until we beat them - their record and our record means nothing.If we want to be crowned the true kings of our division we need to at least split the games we play this season.


I agree. The patriots are still the patriots. Bellichick is still the greatest NFL coach in at least modern history, if not all time. The pats got embarrassed yesterday. They will be prepared next Sunday

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Buffalo03 said:

I don't think Belichick had any part in Brady's development. Brady was just naturally good. He didn't do anything else with any other QB he had, Kosar, Testaverde, Bledsoe, Cassel, Newton, Stidham. But he figured it out with Brady? Belichick gets too much credit for that. As I stated before, Adam Gase could have went to Super Bowls and had great success with Brady as his QB. Peyton Manning gave Gase the only success he has ever had in this league and he has gotten two head coaching jobs because of it. It was 20 years of Brady, not Belichick of why they had so much success. If you think the Pats even make the playoffs the year Bledsoe got drilled by Moe Lewis to make way for Brady and get to the SB, you're insane

 

I'm actually impressed with what Belichick did with Cassel.  Here's how Wikipedia sums up Cassel's year as Brady's replacement:

 

By the end of the 2008 season, Cassel had become the first quarterback in NFL history to record at least 10 wins, 325 completions, a 63% completion mark, 3,600 passing yards, 20 touchdown passes, 11 or fewer interceptions, and 250 rushing yards in a single season.

 

Cassel didn't reprise that level of excellence with the Bills.  Or with any other team he played for.  His best year was under Belichick because Belichick is a mastermind.

 

When Charlie Weis was Belichick's  OC, people thought he was a genius.  I think his post-Belichick record disproves that opinion.  

 

As a great head coach, Belichick makes his players and coaches look good - better than they'd be somewhere else.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...