Belichick Told Kraft that Brady was Washed in 2019!

[NoHuddleKelly12]

(Thought this article was deserving of its own thread, but feel free to merge with one of the other Belichick vs. Brady Legacy threads)

 

Since I can't get enough schadenfreude watching NE's recent yearly implosions, how about this--

 

In his most recent FMIA article, Peter King references a piece by Seth Wickersham & Wright Thompson (behind ESPN + paywall), where Kraft is quoted as saying privately: "Bill had told me he couldn’t play anymore, and then he goes out and wins the f------ Super Bowl."

https://www.espn.com/nfl/insider/insider/story/_/id/39290103/it-was-patriot-way

 

That's the first I've really heard confirmed of Belichick being so dismissive of whatever he felt Brady had left (or didn't) in the tank, and why he pushed Kraft to let him jettison Brady when he did. This is just further evidence of Belichick's lacking personnel evaluation skills (poor drafting, questionable free agent hires) which were largely covered up when Tom was there, not so much after his departure as we all have seen, imho.

 

The Wickersham article has some great additional quotes:

 

"His seventh title meant Bill and Bob were now fighting not to be blamed. Both men sent Brady congratulatory texts, but they had lost control of the narrative of their own careers -- and they both knew that the team celebrating a seventh title should have been their team, and that wound began to fester."

 

"Belichick had sent clear signals internally for weeks that he thought he was coaching his final games for the Patriots. He also made it clear that he was ready to move on, telling confidants that Robert Kraft and his son, team president Jonathan Kraft, had eroded the culture he had built over two decades.

Belichick believed the erosion had been going on for a while, at least since Brady's last season in New England. Belichick and Kraft met multiple times after this season ended, which is custom, but this year's series of meetings was different. Both men had lists of things that needed to change. And both men knew it was unlikely they'd find a way forward. Three days after losing to the Jets, Belichick had started to move items out of his office."

 

Had no idea that long before 2019, there was already a stirring by Belichick that he wanted to win a SB without Brady:

 

"From 2006 to 2013, the Patriots plateaued at the highest level -- losing Super Bowls in the final minute to the Giants -- and relationships started to fray. Belichick internally discussed trading Brady and talked openly to associates about wanting to win a Super Bowl without him. Kraft, trying to manage the two of them -- trying to do what Jerry Jones couldn't and keep a dynasty together -- struck a quiet deal with Brady in 2010 that if Belichick ever decided to move on from him that he would give the quarterback a say in his next destination."

 

"A year later, in 2014, Belichick provided Kraft a study detailing how even the greatest quarterbacks drop off in their mid-30s. Belichick drafted Jimmy Garoppolo in the second round, setting him up to succeed Brady.

Brady found another gear, like his boyhood hero Joe Montana did after the arrival of Steve Young. Brady turned to friend and trainer Alex Guerrero and an obsessive anti-aging regimen to prove Belichick's study wrong. With the conflict between his two most important employees now out in the open, Kraft took on the job of making Brady happy, offering connection and compliments and joy in an otherwise dour Belichick atmosphere." 2 more SBs followed after that.

 

Sounds to me like one of those careful what you wish for type of things for Bill Belichick, as he's never been able to replicate what he was able to do with Tom at the reigns. It's almost as if Brady became who he was despite having Belichick as his coach? Don't know, but seems crazy to think that any other franchise may and I underline the word may, have enjoyed similar dynastic success with Tom as NE? 

 

Anyway, I for one believe that with Josh Allen, we have another unicorn goat in the making, who will deliver multiple titles before it's all said and done--and it doesn't appear at least surface level--that we have near the distracting intrigue between coach and owner as what was happening in NE. 

[Shaw66]

Great stuff.   The article doesn't quite say it, but I remember there was reporting at the time that Belichick wanted to move forward with Garoppolo.  It was Garoppolo's contract year, and something had to be done.   Bill wanted to go with his QB of the future, and Brady didn't want to go.  Kraft decided Brady would stay.  The year Jimmy left, the Pats lost the Super Bowl to the Eagles.   The following year, still with Brady, they won it over the Rams.  

 

Now, some would like to say that history proved Kraft was right, but I think it's important to remember that Belichick had a long history of letting his top talent go after their peak but before they were ready to retire.  Lawyer Milloy was the first, but there were a lot of guys along the way.  Belichick was always moving younger guys into the lineup, and that's what kept him on top.   He wanted to do it with Brady, because he thought he could get it done with Garoppolo, and maybe he was right.  If he WAS right, the Pats would still have a franchise QB at the top of his game.  (I know, Jimmy hasn't gotten it done elsewhere, but there are a lot players who played their best football when they played for the Patriots.)  

 

Thanks for posting this.   It's interesting.  

[djp14150]

10 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

Great stuff.   The article doesn't quite say it, but I remember there was reporting at the time that Belichick wanted to move forward with Garoppolo.  It was Garoppolo's contract year, and something had to be done.   Bill wanted to go with his QB of the future, and Brady didn't want to go.  Kraft decided Brady would stay.  The year Jimmy left, the Pats lost the Super Bowl to the Eagles.   The following year, still with Brady, they won it over the Rams.  

 

Now, some would like to say that history proved Kraft was right, but I think it's important to remember that Belichick had a long history of letting his top talent go after their peak but before they were ready to retire.  Lawyer Milloy was the first, but there were a lot of guys along the way.  Belichick was always moving younger guys into the lineup, and that's what kept him on top.   He wanted to do it with Brady, because he thought he could get it done with Garoppolo, and maybe he was right.  If he WAS right, the Pats would still have a franchise QB at the top of his game.  (I know, Jimmy hasn't gotten it done elsewhere, but there are a lot players who played their best football when they played for the Patriots.)  

 

Thanks for posting this.   It's interesting.  

part of that was contract costs for cap management.  They only kept a handful of veterans and replaced others snd went out to UFA to target certain talent levels.

 

I understand the logic of moving on at QB to a new person.

 

I also know Bellichek really want to prove he was the winner without Brady

 

maybe he felt as an outsider for not getting included in the Kraft  “side sauce”

[Man with No Name]

Brady didn't do all that DESPITE bill belichick. He did it TO SPITE bill belicheck. He's the michael jordan of football. 

Also, NE wasn't gonna get a 7th with Brady. That TB team he went to was a juggernaut, and everybody knew what was coming. 

[NoHuddleKelly12]

Just now, Man with No Name said:

Brady didn't do all that DESPITE bill belichick. He did it TO SPITE bill belicheck. He's the michael jordan of football. 

The motivational gift/tool that kept on giving for the Patsies way, way too long. You're probably on to something there.  

[Ridgewaycynic2013]

Kraft is a doddery old man.  Probably misconstrued Belichick saying Kraft and Brady should wash after visiting 'Orchids of Asia'. 🤔

[Beast]

20 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

Great stuff.   The article doesn't quite say it, but I remember there was reporting at the time that Belichick wanted to move forward with Garoppolo.  It was Garoppolo's contract year, and something had to be done.   Bill wanted to go with his QB of the future, and Brady didn't want to go.  Kraft decided Brady would stay.  The year Jimmy left, the Pats lost the Super Bowl to the Eagles.   The following year, still with Brady, they won it over the Rams.  

 

Now, some would like to say that history proved Kraft was right, but I think it's important to remember that Belichick had a long history of letting his top talent go after their peak but before they were ready to retire.  Lawyer Milloy was the first, but there were a lot of guys along the way.  Belichick was always moving younger guys into the lineup, and that's what kept him on top.   He wanted to do it with Brady, because he thought he could get it done with Garoppolo, and maybe he was right.  If he WAS right, the Pats would still have a franchise QB at the top of his game.  (I know, Jimmy hasn't gotten it done elsewhere, but there are a lot players who played their best football when they played for the Patriots.)  

 

Thanks for posting this.   It's interesting.  

Belichick wasn’t right.

 

The Patriots never would have accomplished what they did during Garopplo’s time there if he was the starter. No way, no how.

Edited January 18 by Beast

[TheFunPolice]

of course, then there's the other question: did Belichick looking to replace Brady in his mid 30's cause him to turn into a freakishly obsessed avocado smoothie and yoga guy that he wasn't before?

 

Maybe if that never happened Brady doesn't decide in his mid 30's that he is going to make those types of sacrifices and we all could have been saved a lot of heartache and trouble. 

 

Yet another reason to be annoyed with Bill

 

 

 

 

Edited January 18 by TheFunPolice

[NoHuddleKelly12]

10 minutes ago, Ridgewaycynic2013 said:

Kraft is a doddery old man.  Probably misconstrued Belichick saying Kraft and Brady should wash after visiting 'Orchids of Asia'. 🤔

And Ridgeway all the way from 3pt. land for the dunk!

[CA OC Bills Fan]

41 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

Great stuff.   The article doesn't quite say it, but I remember there was reporting at the time that Belichick wanted to move forward with Garoppolo.  It was Garoppolo's contract year, and something had to be done.   Bill wanted to go with his QB of the future, and Brady didn't want to go.  Kraft decided Brady would stay.  The year Jimmy left, the Pats lost the Super Bowl to the Eagles.   The following year, still with Brady, they won it over the Rams.  

 

Now, some would like to say that history proved Kraft was right, but I think it's important to remember that Belichick had a long history of letting his top talent go after their peak but before they were ready to retire.  Lawyer Milloy was the first, but there were a lot of guys along the way.  Belichick was always moving younger guys into the lineup, and that's what kept him on top.   He wanted to do it with Brady, because he thought he could get it done with Garoppolo, and maybe he was right.  If he WAS right, the Pats would still have a franchise QB at the top of his game.  (I know, Jimmy hasn't gotten it done elsewhere, but there are a lot players who played their best football when they played for the Patriots.)  

 

Thanks for posting this.   It's interesting.  

Actually, I think it started long before this. When BB was in Cleveland, he benched a very popular Bernie Kosar for Vinnie F'ing Testaverde who at that point in his career was a complete bust. As it turns out, Kosar was done and BB was right and Vinnie had a decent back half of his career with the Browns and Jets.

[Gman10]

Brady is the GOAT. 

[KDIGGZ]

Belichick is Rex Ryan without Brady. He's no genius.

 

 

Sorry, I sold Rex short. Rex has a much better win/loss record than Bill without Brady. Bill is a bum

Edited January 18 by KDIGGZ

[Gman10]

38 minutes ago, djp14150 said:

part of that was contract costs for cap management.  They only kept a handful of veterans and replaced others snd went out to UFA to target certain talent levels.

 

I understand the logic of moving on at QB to a new person.

 

I also know Bellichek really want to prove he was the winner without Brady

 

maybe he felt as an outsider for not getting included in the Kraft  “side sauce”

Is it true Brady took less money than he was worth to build the team, but once he actually wanted to get paid they pretty much told him to go pound sand?

Edited January 18 by Gman10

[Generic_Bills_Fan]

2 minutes ago, KDIGGZ said:

Belichick is Rex Ryan without Brady. He's no genius

He seems to always get a ton out of mediocre defensive players…the problem is he handpicked those mediocre players as the gm 😂.  

[CA OC Bills Fan]

1 hour ago, KDIGGZ said:

Belichick is Rex Ryan without Brady. He's no genius.

 

 

Sorry, I sold Rex short. Rex has a much better win/loss record than Bill without Brady. Bill is a bum

I hate to use the word genius, but BB is a great defensive coach, maybe the best defensive coach ever. And, he had the good sense to allow Brady to flourish for many years which many defensive coaches would never do. In the year Bledsoe got injured and they won their first SB, as I remember the Patsies were predicted to get the first pick in the draft the next year and BB would be fired. The defense would have kept them from coming close to that but replacing Bledsoe with Brady was the only way they became good enough to make the playoffs and ultimately beat the Lambs.

[Buffalo03]

Lol and this guy is considered a genius

[BullBuchanan]

Bill knew the odds. If he came to that conclusion every time he'd be right a hell of a lot more than he was wrong. In New England, Brady was the centerpiece of the team around which everything else revolved. In Tampa he was just the final piece of the puzzle - not unlike Stafford with the Rams. He did win one Super Bowl, then had a career season and then promptly looked like a shell of himself. It was worth it for Tampa. Would it have been for New England? I guess Kraft says yes, which is easy in hindsight.

I don't fault a coach for looking at an all time great player and deciding that he has more years behind him than in front. It was Bill's job to make sure the team is perpetually in a state to win, not just year by year.

Edited January 18 by BullBuchanan

[FilthyBeast]

The thing with this is that he wasn't necessarily wrong.

 

It's not like Brady was dominant during his time with the Bucs, even when they won the SB in 2020 during his first season there it was behind a physical team that ran the football extremely well (i.e. Playoff Lenny) and a defense that caught fire at the right time. Remember Bucs were 7-5 coming off a loss to the chiefs at home before winning out, including 3 straight road games as a WC, then dominating the Chiefs the 2nd time around in the SB.

 

I think what Belichik underestimated is that even though Brady was well past his prime, you can never truly measure his leadership and how he went to a brand new team and made everyone around him that much better.

[2020 Our Year For Sure]

Belichick is the greatest football coach to ever live.

 

If the Bills paired Belichick with Josh Allen it would be no more screwing around, instant Superbowl parade.

[Shaw66]

2 hours ago, Beast said:

Belichick wasn’t right.

 

The Patriots never would have accomplished what they did during Garopplo’s time there if he was the starter. No way, no how.

Well, yes, Belichick probably was wrong about Garoppolo.   I think that's an open question, thought, because Garoppolo's failures in the league were based on his team's expecting him to be more than he was.  Part of Belichick's gift was to win by building around guys who were good and consistent, and by not asking them to do things they couldn't do.  There's no way to know whether Garoppolo would have succeeded under Belichick's tutelage. 

 

But my point wasn't that Belichick was right or wrong about Garoppolo.  My point was that Belichick's system was to move on from talent a few years too early rather than a year or two too late.  He did it with Gilmore and with the stud corner before him.   Someone else, said that he also did it for cap reasons, which is true.   But the point's the same - Belichick was willing to move on from talent before they were done.  Look at Wilfork.  They were paying him $7 million a year, declined their option for another year, and he signed with Houston for $4.5 million per year.   So, they presumably could have kept him for $4.5 million and didn't bite.    

[mykidsdad]

They were all taking turns on the table.

 

[transient]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alex_Guerrero_(alternative_medicine)

 

Granted, it’s Wikipedia, but watch footage from Brady’s last few seasons in NE, and then watch some from TB and the way he’s throwing the ball. Now ask yourself, with someone’s history of following the rules such as Brady, what’s more likely, that it was the avocado ice cream… or that it was the same handful of pills that got Edelman busted. 

[K-9]

7 hours ago, Ridgewaycynic2013 said:

Kraft is a doddery old man.  Probably misconstrued Belichick saying Kraft and Brady should wash after visiting 'Orchids of Asia'. 🤔

[hondo in seattle]

21 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

Well, yes, Belichick probably was wrong about Garoppolo.   I think that's an open question, thought, because Garoppolo's failures in the league were based on his team's expecting him to be more than he was.  Part of Belichick's gift was to win by building around guys who were good and consistent, and by not asking them to do things they couldn't do.  There's no way to know whether Garoppolo would have succeeded under Belichick's tutelage. 

 

But my point wasn't that Belichick was right or wrong about Garoppolo.  My point was that Belichick's system was to move on from talent a few years too early rather than a year or two too late.  He did it with Gilmore and with the stud corner before him.   Someone else, said that he also did it for cap reasons, which is true.   But the point's the same - Belichick was willing to move on from talent before they were done.  Look at Wilfork.  They were paying him $7 million a year, declined their option for another year, and he signed with Houston for $4.5 million per year.   So, they presumably could have kept him for $4.5 million and didn't bite.    

 

Belichick was aware, of course, of how Bill Walsh moved on from Montana before Montana was completely done.  A lot of 49er fans were upset at the time.  But Walsh ended up winning Lombardi's with two different QBs: Montana and Young.  In Walsh's case, moving on from an aging HOFer worked out well.  

[NoHuddleKelly12]

48 minutes ago, hondo in seattle said:

 

Belichick was aware, of course, of how Bill Walsh moved on from Montana before Montana was completely done.  A lot of 49er fans were upset at the time.  But Walsh ended up winning Lombardi's with two different QBs: Montana and Young.  In Walsh's case, moving on from an aging HOFer worked out well.  

You're def not wrong about the moving on part with the 9ers, but going off the cuff, I believe that Young won his only SB under Seifert in '94? Walsh's last SB was also with Joe Cool in '89, but then helped push him out the door in 92/93? 

[hondo in seattle]

13 minutes ago, NoHuddleKelly12 said:

You're def not wrong about the moving on part with the 9ers, but going off the cuff, I believe that Young won his only SB under Seifert in '94? Walsh's last SB was also with Joe Cool in '89, but then helped push him out the door in 92/93? 

 

You're right, of course.  

 

As I recall, Walsh wasn't the coach anymore during most of Young's run but was still the power behind the scenes - unofficially at first and then officially.

 

Seifert, his DC, took over as HC in 1989 and simply kept the same systems in place - the same West Coast offense, the same defense, the same philosophy to training camp, etc.    Seifert's lack of success outside of SF suggests, to me anyway, that Seifert's two Lombardis with the 49ers owed more to Walsh - the passing game developed, the organization he built, the players he acquired, and the mentorship & guidance he provided - than Seifert. 

 

It was Walsh who traded for Young to be Montana's successor even though Montana was still in his prime.   

I wonder if Belichick had this in mind when he drafted Garoppolo.   You can't be loyal and sentimental in this business if you want to maintain success.  And normally a QB's play does start to decline once he's somewhere in his 30s.  Walsh moved on from Montana and the 49er dynasty continued with Young.  Maybe this was Belichick's mental model when he was thinking of moving on from Brady.    But the pieces didn't fall into place and ended up with Mac Jones.  

[somnus00]

Brady doesn't make it to, much less win, all of those Superbowls without Belichick's excellent defense. Belichick doesn't make it without Brady.

[Generic_Bills_Fan]

On 1/18/2024 at 12:12 PM, Beast said:

Belichick wasn’t right.

 

The Patriots never would have accomplished what they did during Garopplo’s time there if he was the starter. No way, no how.

Exclusively playing devils advocate here as I agree with you haha. But they would’ve had a ton of picks/cap to play with if they traded Brady at the right time and had a qb on a rookie contract which is what I’m sure bill was pushing for.  Very doubtful they would’ve won it all but they did win 11 with cassell and 10 with mac jones so I could at least see why the friction happened.  Bill probably thought he was gonna show the world how right he was this season and they absolutely flopped 😂

Edited January 19 by Generic_Bills_Fan

[Big Turk]

Guess Brady showed what he could do when he was not having to carry replacement level offensive skill position talent in TB.

[Brand J]

22 minutes ago, somnus00 said:

Brady doesn't make it to, much less win, all of those Superbowls without Belichick's excellent defense. Belichick doesn't make it without Brady.

Agreed on both accounts, but I’d tip percentages for success higher in Brady’s favor. Maybe 70% Brady, 30% Belichick’s defense. Can’t dismiss the amount of clutch throws Brady made that gave that defense a chance to close out opposing teams. Simply put, without Brady there is no New England dynasty. 

[stuvian]

There is an exception to every rule including better to get rid of players too early rather than too late. Brady is one exception, Rod Woodson was another.