Belichick to UNC

[NKR1978]

He’s a genius who was a sub-.500 coach whenever he didn’t have TB12 playing for him.

83-104.
You are what your record says you are.

So - did he somehow have a TBI whenever Brady wasn’t in the games?

And is he going to be bringing TB12 to UNC with him?

And Brady won a Super Bowl with Tampa. The Pats success was mostly Brady. BB was good enough to not mess it up. That UNC game in the Dome has become way more interesting.

 

[bnoro]

And Brady won a Super Bowl with Tampa. The Pats success was mostly Brady. BB was good enough to not mess it up. That UNC game in the Dome has become way more interesting.

"BB was good enough to not mess it up" Do you actually believe this? Truly nonsense.

 

[NKR1978]

"BB was good enough to not mess it up" Do you actually believe this? Truly nonsense.

A lot of coaches and organizations mess up amazing situations and waste generational talent, so that's a compliment.

Without Brady he's a mediocre sub 500 coach. Isn't he?

 

[IthacaBarrel]

A lot of coaches and organizations mess up amazing situations and waste generational talent, so that's a compliment.

This is crazy

 

[NKR1978]

This is crazy

It's crazy to say that college and pro teams and coaches constantly waste amazing talent? Wasn't that the knock on JB for years? That he underperformed? Could probably say the same thing about Dean Smith. Legend after legend and he could only muster 2 titles?

BB didn't squander the talent he was lucky to coach and he should be credited for that. I don't understand why that's such a hot take.

 

[OrangePA]

In college, recruiting is key. He has no experience in that regard.

True.

But he has been around athletes his entire life. I have little doubt that he speaks their language and can be quite engaging. All of the kids know him and his record - they will be impressed by what he has to offer them.

He's too smart and too savvy not be a big success in my opinion.

And, it will be for the benefit of the ACC.

Can't wait to see his NC team in the Dome next fall.

 

[OrangePA]

He’s a genius who was a sub-.500 coach whenever he didn’t have TB12 playing for him.

83-104.
You are what your record says you are.

So - did he somehow have a TBI whenever Brady wasn’t in the games?

And is he going to be bringing TB12 to UNC with him?

I guess you could say the same thing about every successful coach.

Phil Jackson had Michael Jordon and Kobe Briyant. Vince Lombardi had Bart Starr, and Paul Horning. Paul Brown had Otto Graham and Jim Brown. Chuck Noll had Terry Bradshaw and Joe Greene. Bill Walsh had Joe Montana and Jerry Rice. And, John Wooden had Lew Alcindor and Bill Walton.

Jim Boeheim won one NC when he had the best college player that year - Carmello.

Obviously the players play the game. You need talent to win.

But Belichick gives great players the best chance to win.

And, of course, Belichick drafted and developed Tom Brady - and he made the decision to play a player with very little experience over an all-pro QB Drew Bledsoe when nobody would have done that.

The fact is that Bledsoe actually got the Pats to their SB against the Rams. And, I suspect that BB would have won plenty of SBs with Bledsoe has his quarterback.

Belichick's record is remarkable. It will never be duplicated.

He won six Super Bowls with the Pats - while losing two others on two crazy catches. And he was directly responsible for two additional Super Bowls wins with the Giants.

Any effort to minimize what he accomplished I think is a tough thing to do.

 

[richmondcuse03]

I guess you could say the same thing about every successful coach.

Phil Jackson had Michael Jordon and Kobe Briyant. Vince Lombardi had Bart Starr, and Paul Horning. Paul Brown had Otto Graham and Jim Brown. Chuck Noll had Terry Bradshaw and Joe Greene. Bill Walsh had Joe Montana and Jerry Rice. And, John Wooden had Lew Alcindor and Bill Walton.

Jim Boeheim won one NC when he had the best college player that year - Carmello.

Obviously the players play the game. You need talent to win.

But Belichick gives great players the best chance to win.

And, of course, Belichick drafted and developed Tom Brady - and he made the decision to play a player with very little experience over an all-pro QB Drew Bledsoe when nobody would have done that.

The fact is that Bledsoe actually got the Pats to their SB against the Rams. And, I suspect that BB would have won plenty of SBs with Bledsoe has his quarterback.

Belichick's record is remarkable. It will never be duplicated.

He won six Super Bowls with the Pats - while losing two others on two crazy catches. And he was directly responsible for two additional Super Bowls wins with the Giants.

Any effort to minimize what he accomplished I think is a tough thing to do.

But you also can't eliminate what he did without Brady either. Yes, he was an amazing DC with the Giants. But he also flamed out with the Browns as HC and quit on the Jets via a paper napkin.

Brady still won without Bill. The same can't be said the other way around. It is what it is.

I think it's more likely they worked very well together for a number of years and shared the same mindset in terms of sacrificing for the team, work ethic, etc. There's nothing wrong with that. But you have to acknowledge Brady's contributions just as much as Bill's.

 

[721Comstock]

I guess you could say the same thing about every successful coach.

Phil Jackson had Michael Jordon and Kobe Briyant. Vince Lombardi had Bart Starr, and Paul Horning. Paul Brown had Otto Graham and Jim Brown. Chuck Noll had Terry Bradshaw and Joe Greene. Bill Walsh had Joe Montana and Jerry Rice. And, John Wooden had Lew Alcindor and Bill Walton.

Jim Boeheim won one NC when he had the best college player that year - Carmello.

Obviously the players play the game. You need talent to win.

But Belichick gives great players the best chance to win.

And, of course, Belichick drafted and developed Tom Brady - and he made the decision to play a player with very little experience over an all-pro QB Drew Bledsoe when nobody would have done that.

The fact is that Bledsoe actually got the Pats to their SB against the Rams. And, I suspect that BB would have won plenty of SBs with Bledsoe has his quarterback.

Belichick's record is remarkable. It will never be duplicated.

He won six Super Bowls with the Pats - while losing two others on two crazy catches. And he was directly responsible for two additional Super Bowls wins with the Giants.

Any effort to minimize what he accomplished I think is a tough thing to do.

Yeah, except I managed to do it with a :10 second Google search.

Which, as I was typing it, pre-populated - so clearly I'm not the first person ever to search for what his record was without Brady at QB.

Mind you - I do think he was a defensive mastermind, as I am a G-Men fan.

Meanwhile...

Brady went to a moribund Bucs franchise, and made them winners.
While Hoodie Bill started losing lots more games than he was winning, and eventually got canned.

 

[OrangePA]

But you also can't eliminate what he did without Brady either. Yes, he was an amazing DC with the Giants. But he also flamed out with the Browns as HC and quit on the Jets via a paper napkin.

Brady still won without Bill. The same can't be said the other way around. It is what it is.

I think it's more likely they worked very well together for a number of years and shared the same mindset in terms of sacrificing for the team, work ethic, etc. There's nothing wrong with that. But you have to acknowledge Brady's contributions just as much as Bill's.

Belichick won two Super Bowls with the Giants - without Brady. In fact, in 1991 the Giants beat the favored Bills with a second string QB - Jeff Hostetler - because of Belichick's magnificent defensive game plan - one that was actually enshrined in the Hall of Fame.

In Cleveland BB took a horrible team and got them to 9-5 - and made them a Super Bowl contender - until disaster followed when the owner, Art Model, announced in the early season that the Browns were leaving Cleveland.

Brady won one time with the Bucs and lost twice.

Regarding the Jets both Parcells and Belichick "quit"

BB was cornered into the job - by contract - by Parcells - who was attempting to prevent him from taking a job with NE. BB knew that a new owner - Woody Johnson - was taking control of the team and did not want to be saddled with someone he did not know and someone who did not hire him. Looking back, he clearly made the right call as Johnson has revealed himself to be an inept owner - perhaps the worst in the League.

Doug Marrone did the same thing in Buffalo - he did not want to work for an owner who did not hire him. Actually, Parcells felt the same way - he left NE because he could not work for the new owner who did not hire him.

Brady was a great, great player. And Bill Belichick drafted him and developed him - when nobody else saw what he could become.

I give the players all their due - they play and win the games.

But BB is unique. He is a prodigy who was raised to coach football by a brilliant football mind - Steve Belichick - and has been uniquely successful over the years.

Maybe he'll flame out at NC. But, I doubt it.

Anyway, interesting discussion.

 

[bnoro]

A lot of coaches and organizations mess up amazing situations and waste generational talent, so that's a compliment.

Without Brady he's a mediocre sub 500 coach. Isn't he?

Brady did not win the Pats the first 3 Super Bowls. Bill Belichick's defense did.

 

[NKR1978]

Brady did not win the Pats the first 3 Super Bowls. Bill Belichick's defense did.

And his seasons without Brady?

You guys are right. Coaches are at their peak when they're 72.

 

[sufandu]

I guess you could say the same thing about every successful coach.

Phil Jackson had Michael Jordon and Kobe Briyant. Vince Lombardi had Bart Starr, and Paul Horning. Paul Brown had Otto Graham and Jim Brown. Chuck Noll had Terry Bradshaw and Joe Greene. Bill Walsh had Joe Montana and Jerry Rice. And, John Wooden had Lew Alcindor and Bill Walton.

Jim Boeheim won one NC when he had the best college player that year - Carmello.

Obviously the players play the game. You need talent to win.

But Belichick gives great players the best chance to win.

And, of course, Belichick drafted and developed Tom Brady - and he made the decision to play a player with very little experience over an all-pro QB Drew Bledsoe when nobody would have done that.

The fact is that Bledsoe actually got the Pats to their SB against the Rams. And, I suspect that BB would have won plenty of SBs with Bledsoe has his quarterback.

Belichick's record is remarkable. It will never be duplicated.

He won six Super Bowls with the Pats - while losing two others on two crazy catches. And he was directly responsible for two additional Super Bowls wins with the Giants.

Any effort to minimize what he accomplished I think is a tough thing to do.

Come on. Everyone knows Brady carried them in that first superbowl. There's no way the greatest show on turf was overcoming those 145 passing yards he had.

 

[bnoro]

And his seasons without Brady?

You guys are right. Coaches are at their peak when they're 72.

He coached 20 seasons at the peak of his career with Brady. He didn't coach 4 seasons with him. Come on lol.

I'm not arguing he'll be a success at UNC because he's on the Boeheim decline right now but it's not just because of Tom.

 

[Toga]

And his seasons without Brady?

You guys are right. Coaches are at their peak when they're 72.

That's what she said. Apparently.

 

[NKR1978]

He coached 20 seasons at the peak of his career with Brady. He didn't coach 4 seasons with him. Come on lol.

I'm not arguing he'll be a success at UNC because he's on the Boeheim decline right now but it's not just because of Tom.

Do you think you might be a little bit biased? Are you looking objectively?

Andy Reid in my opinion is and has always been a great football coach. But he got slapped with the underachiever, choker, overrated label for decades. And then he got Mahomes and now he’s on top of the world.

He’s a 72 year-old former coach on the downslope of his career who took a job to get his son a guaranteed head coach position. I will say, it’s great for the ACC to have a program that’s going to be in the spotlight for better or worse. Hopefully UNC will get the Prime treatment and get the conference some eyeballs. And hopefully we beat them silly in the Dome. We can at least all agree on that!

 

[Cusefan95]

Belichick won two Super Bowls with the Giants - without Brady. In fact, in 1991 the Giants beat the favored Bills with a second string QB - Jeff Hostetler - because of Belichick's magnificent defensive game plan - one that was actually enshrined in the Hall of Fame.

In Cleveland BB took a horrible team and got them to 9-5 - and made them a Super Bowl contender - until disaster followed when the owner, Art Model, announced in the early season that the Browns were leaving Cleveland.

Brady won one time with the Bucs and lost twice.

Regarding the Jets both Parcells and Belichick "quit"

BB was cornered into the job - by contract - by Parcells - who was attempting to prevent him from taking a job with NE. BB knew that a new owner - Woody Johnson - was taking control of the team and did not want to be saddled with someone he did not know and someone who did not hire him. Looking back, he clearly made the right call as Johnson has revealed himself to be an inept owner - perhaps the worst in the League.

Doug Marrone did the same thing in Buffalo - he did not want to work for an owner who did not hire him. Actually, Parcells felt the same way - he left NE because he could not work for the new owner who did not hire him.

Brady was a great, great player. And Bill Belichick drafted him and developed him - when nobody else saw what he could become.

I give the players all their due - they play and win the games.

But BB is unique. He is a prodigy who was raised to coach football by a brilliant football mind - Steve Belichick - and has been uniquely successful over the years.

Maybe he'll flame out at NC. But, I doubt it.

Anyway, interesting discussion.

Giving a defensive coordinator credit for two Super Bowl wins as if that is perfectly equivalent to being a head coach is a huge stretch on your part. And saying he turned the Browns into a Super Bowl contender is absurd - he had one winning season and was a 5-11 catastrophe his last year. Lots of guys have one winning season - you’re claiming it’s certain he would have had more except for the Browns disfunction at the time. Not any evidence for that.

Somehow Belichick manages to be both overrated and underrated simultaneously, with few making anything I think is a reasonable assessment. He was an amazing DC, and he deserves a lot of credit for going with Brady, and you can’t discount his Super Bowl wins as a HC. So he’s not entirely a product of Brady - and even if there’s truth to that, it overlooks how much flack he took for going with Brady when Bledsoe was healthy. But painting him as the best coach ever who has always been and always will be a success is a little bit of overkill as well. Good coach, belongs in the top 5 and in arguments for best ever - but he’s not a clear cut superior coach to Walsh, Lombardi, or Shula. And he had a lot of bad years, too.

I think he’s not a great fit for college either - he’ll probably be able to get UNC to 8-9 wins a year…but I don’t think that will be viewed as success by their fans or the media. Anything less than consistent top 10 and playoff appearances will be viewed as failure.

 

[bnoro]

Giving a defensive coordinator credit for two Super Bowl wins as if that is perfectly equivalent to being a head coach is a huge stretch on your part. And saying he turned the Browns into a Super Bowl contender is absurd - he had one winning season and was a 5-11 catastrophe his last year. Lots of guys have one winning season - you’re claiming it’s certain he would have had more except for the Browns disfunction at the time. Not any evidence for that.

Somehow Belichick manages to be both overrated and underrated simultaneously, with few making anything I think is a reasonable assessment. He was an amazing DC, and he deserves a lot of credit for going with Brady, and you can’t discount his Super Bowl wins as a HC. So he’s not entirely a product of Brady - and even if there’s truth to that, it overlooks how much flack he took for going with Brady when Bledsoe was healthy. But painting him as the best coach ever who has always been and always will be a success is a little bit of overkill as well. Good coach, belongs in the top 5 and in arguments for best ever - but he’s not a clear cut superior coach to Walsh, Lombardi, or Shula. And he had a lot of bad years, too.

I think he’s not a great fit for college either - he’ll probably be able to get UNC to 8-9 wins a year…but I don’t think that will be viewed as success by their fans or the media. Anything less than consistent top 10 and playoff appearances will be viewed as failure.

He has the second most HC wins of all time, and he did it in an era with the salary cap. He was consistently the best over a 20 year period where the Pats didn't have ANY off years, which will most likely never be done again. He's the best ever.

"He had a lot of bad years too" a bad year for Bill was going out of the playoffs before the AFC Championship game.

 

[bnoro]

UNC HC Bill Belichick has heard from multiple teams, including Raiders minority owner Tom Brady, to gauge interest in return to NFL

 

[NKR1978]

Lots of guys have one winning season - you’re claiming it’s certain he would have had more except for the Browns disfunction at the time. Not any evidence for that.

It's like the SEC being 1000-0 in hypothetical games.

 

[Cusefan95]

He has the second most HC wins of all time, and he did it in an era with the salary cap. He was consistently the best over a 20 year period where the Pats didn't have ANY off years, which will most likely never be done again. He's the best ever.

"He had a lot of bad years too" a bad year for Bill was going out of the playoffs before the AFC Championship game.

Belichick had 21 seasons with winning records, & 8 losing records. Lombardi had ten winning seasons, none with losing records. Shula had 27 winning seasons, 2 losing (4 at .500).

So yes - Bill had a lot of bad years compared to Lombardi and Shula. I realize as a Patriots fan you’re not going to accept there is a viable argument there were others who were better…but the numbers don’t lie. That he couldn’t win without Brady while Shula won with some pretty mediocre guys in some of those 27 years could mean Bill had a higher ceiling than Shula, but couldn’t coach up weaker rosters into a competitive team like Shula could and so his floor was much lower. What Lombardi did from St Cecilia HS all the way through to his last year with the Redskins is absurd - If I had to pick one guy to coach for a season or a game, I’m taking Lombardi over Bill and feeling really good about it. That Bill didn’t burn out is impressive though.

Let’s keep in mind that - like many have said here - for Bill, a bad year was not having Brady. That he never really won squat with anyone else factors in to how he is and will be viewed historically. Does he belong in the discussion of best ever? Sure. Is it clear cut? Not a chance.

 

[orange79]

UNC HC Bill Belichick has heard from multiple teams, including Raiders minority owner Tom Brady, to gauge interest in return to NFL

Laughing at UNC, not you or BB.

 

[Cusefan0307]

Brady did not win the Pats the first 3 Super Bowls. Bill Belichick's defense did.

The defense most definitely did not win the SB against Carolina. If Bledsoe stayed the starter there's a good chance he would have been gone a long time ago.

 

[orangepassion]

UNC HC Bill Belichick has heard from multiple teams, including Raiders minority owner Tom Brady, to gauge interest in return to NFL

He would never leave without coaching a game, right Woody Johnson?

 

[bnoro]

Belichick had 21 seasons with winning records, & 8 losing records. Lombardi had ten winning seasons, none with losing records. Shula had 27 winning seasons, 2 losing (4 at .500).

So yes - Bill had a lot of bad years compared to Lombardi and Shula. I realize as a Patriots fan you’re not going to accept there is a viable argument there were others who were better…but the numbers don’t lie. That he couldn’t win without Brady while Shula won with some pretty mediocre guys in some of those 27 years could mean Bill had a higher ceiling than Shula, but couldn’t coach up weaker rosters into a competitive team like Shula could and so his floor was much lower. What Lombardi did from St Cecilia HS all the way through to his last year with the Redskins is absurd - If I had to pick one guy to coach for a season or a game, I’m taking Lombardi over Bill and feeling really good about it. That Bill didn’t burn out is impressive though.

Let’s keep in mind that - like many have said here - for Bill, a bad year was not having Brady. That he never really won squat with anyone else factors in to how he is and will be viewed historically. Does he belong in the discussion of best ever? Sure. Is it clear cut? Not a chance.

Once again, neither Lombardi or Shula did it in an era of free agency, a salary cap, and competitive balance rules. Bill couldn't coach up weaker rosters into a competitive team?

Look at some of the offensive and defensive starters in the Super Bowl seasons. Look at the lower round/undrafted players that played key roles. He won a super bowl with these "offensive weapons": Kevin Faulk, Antowain Smith, David Givens, Deion Branch, Troy Brown, Daniel Graham, Christan Fauria, and Bethel Johnson.