Belichick's 'prove it' time table.

[Rob0729]

My vote would have been Law for SB36 MVP. It wasn't offense that won that game.

I agree. Despite the winning drive, the Patriots' offense in that game was mediocre. That game was all about how the defense totally shut down the Greatest Show on Turf and Law did have the pick 6 which was many TDs as the offense scored. Hell, the one TD the Pats' offense scored was only a 40 yard drive due to a forced fumble created by the Pats' defense.

 

[sb1]

I agree. Despite the winning drive, the Patriots' offense in that game was mediocre. That game was all about how the defense totally shut down the Greatest Show on Turf and Law did have the pick 6 which was many TDs as the offense scored. Hell, the one TD the Pats' offense scored was only a 40 yard drive due to a forced fumble created by the Pats' defense.

Antowain Smith also had a great game. Over 5 YPC on 18 carries against maybe the best run defense in football. If he scored I think he could have gotten a few MVP votes himself. Vinatieri could have been up there too - only 2 FGs but both of them mattered especially the last one. Having Smith there was huge for Brady's development in his first year.

 

[Steve102]

I wonder if Bill even went to bed last night.

why not?

i'd ration a guess he loses far more sleep over getting this team to the next level of the rebuild, is losing far more sleep over pre-draft and free agency than he does over how another team does in the playoffs.....that's the type of thinking that makes him what he is

All we have learned about Bill.... why the hell would he lose sleep over Brady's success? He's on to the combine... free agency... the draft. I would bet a large sum that Bill completely unplugged from that relationship the moment Tom left.

I am coaching the players that are here. I am focused on what we do, what we need to do, to be a better football team in 2021.

Tell me we can't hear Bill saying this.

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

The offenses in the first few years of Brady starting were not all that talented. I never denied that. But to say Brady was a elite player right off the bat and in at least the first two Super Bowls is re-writing history. In 2003, the Pats had four games where they didn't score a single TD including one where they were completely shut out. That is one quarter of the season. In another game against the Giants, the defense scored as many TDs and three less points than the offense, Against Miami, they only scored 13 points in regulation. In their loss to Washington, they only scored 17 points. Right there, that is half the season. If Brady was elite at that point, the offense would have done better.

Brady was 3rd in NFL MVP voting in 2003 with 8 votes, despite having zero offensive weapons and perks like Manning or McNair (tied with 16 votes). Even with of the games you brought up with the 2003 offense, the fact is that Brady still stood out as an elite player despite an anemic running game and very little talent. It speaks to how little talent the offense had when you have a clear cut MVP candidate unable to score a touchdown in four games.

Brady was elite; the offensive unit was not elite. Both of those things can be (and were) true.

And I wouldn't say Brady was the most valuable player on either 2001 or 2003. In 2003, I would say Ty Law was the MVP of the team especially in the playoffs. They don't get by the Titans and Colts without that defense and the defense shutdown both teams. Again, that defense was one of the best defenses of all time. That is primary reason the Pats went 14-2 and won the Super Bowl. And I don't know if there was an MVP in 2001 because it really was a bunch of nobodies and castoffs working together putting the team first to win.

The Patriots offense was incredibly weak and yet carried their weight, beginning at Game 3 of the 2001 season. "Nobodies and castoffs" don't work together to win Super Bowls. That's my entire point. What changed suddenly that those same nobodies and castoffs, 5-13 under Belichick, suddenly turned it around and went 14-3? Anything signficant stand out at exactly that point in time where they suddenly would become a .750+ winning team? Did the coaching staff become really smart overnight? Ty Law decided to carry the team to greater heights? Adam Vinatieri's new workout tape? Hmmm....

Law was the MVP of the 2003 team, and yet, the defense was fine after he got injured in 2004? I'm sure if Brady had missed a postseason, they still would have won a Super Bowl Why did the team go 5-11 in 2000 with Ty Law? You know that comparing an all-pro cornerback is not nearly as valuable as a franchise altering quarterback. Not even worth debating...and not even unique to Brady.

The Patriots defense was great, absolutely. They were the stronger unit. But a lot of defenses that were that good - or even better - would never have won championships because their offense didn't carry their weight too. And the Patriots were a garbage offense led by an elite player.

It is great to go back and recreate history, but back in 2003 and 2004 people were still calling Brady a system QB and a product of Belichick. And it was clear the Pats still subscribed to the win on defense and the offense just don't screw up philosophy. And I guess you forget how much more defenses were to the game before the league changed the rules to counter how the Patriots totally mugged Manning and the Colts' offense in the AFCCG in the 2003 season.

Recreating history isn't the same thing as reevaluating history. Those people were wrong. Many believed it wholeheartedly, until Charlie Weis bumbled around just like he has previously, Scott Pioli came up bust, all of the "scrappy, clutch" Patriots receivers turned out to be minimially talented, and then Brady got some actual talent, dominated, and showed how ridiculous those takes were. The 2020 season is just another hammer to the remaining dust mites.

 

[Rob0729]

Brady was 3rd in NFL MVP voting in 2003 with 8 votes, despite having zero offensive weapons and perks like Manning or McNair (tied with 16 votes). Even with of the games you brought up with the 2003 offense, the fact is that Brady still stood out as an elite player despite an anemic running game and very little talent. It speaks to how little talent the offense had when you have a clear cut MVP candidate unable to score a touchdown in four games.

Brady was elite; the offensive unit was not elite. Both of those things can be (and were) true.



The Patriots offense was incredibly weak and yet carried their weight, beginning at Game 3 of the 2001 season. "Nobodies and castoffs" don't work together to win Super Bowls. That's my entire point. What changed suddenly that those same nobodies and castoffs, 5-13 under Belichick, suddenly turned it around and went 14-3? Anything signficant stand out at exactly that point in time where they suddenly would become a .750+ winning team? Did the coaching staff become really smart overnight? Ty Law decided to carry the team to greater heights? Adam Vinatieri's new workout tape? Hmmm....

Law was the MVP of the 2003 team, and yet, the defense was fine after he got injured in 2004? I'm sure if Brady had missed a postseason, they still would have won a Super Bowl Why did the team go 5-11 in 2000 with Ty Law? You know that comparing an all-pro cornerback is not nearly as valuable as a franchise altering quarterback. Not even worth debating...and not even unique to Brady.

The Patriots defense was great, absolutely. They were the stronger unit. But a lot of defenses that were that good - or even better - would never have won championships because their offense didn't carry their weight too. And the Patriots were a garbage offense led by an elite player.



Recreating history isn't the same thing as reevaluating history. Those people were wrong. Many believed it wholeheartedly, until Charlie Weis bumbled around just like he has previously, Scott Pioli came up bust, all of the "scrappy, clutch" Patriots receivers turned out to be minimially talented, and then Brady got some actual talent, dominated, and showed how ridiculous those takes were. The 2020 season is just another hammer to the remaining dust mites.

I don't get why people have to make Brady elite from day one.

And who cares if he finished third in voting? In 2017, Carson Wentz finished third in MVP voting and he wasn't elite. Had a pretty good year, but wasn't elite. The Pats finished 14-2 in 2003r. The QB gets a lionshare of the credit for a successful season whether he deserves it or not.

And Law got hurt in the 2004 and the Pats' defense wasn't nearly as good in 2004 as it was in 2003. The difference was the Pats turned into a balanced team with the offense carry more of the weight of the team. Every year is different. The Pats won very differently in 2004 than they did in 2003. The Pats have won the Super Bowl playing differently in many different seasons,

And 2001, the team played over its head. That is why the team fell apart in 2002 and Belichick had to almost completely rebuild it in 2003.

 

[SVN]

This tweet about sums it up

 

[RobertWeathers]

This tweet about sums it up

...as a reminder, Humphries chose not to come here because he questioned how good Tom would be in his old age.

This Toscano guy is a absolutely moron...."BB didn't build around Tom Brady correctly.." Wow.

Someone teach this little turn a lesson about what happened between 2001-2019

 

[jmt57]

I see post like these all the time, and I don't understand why. I've literally never seen anyone argue it is 100% Brady and that the coach, defense, DC, OC, offensive cast, yada yada, didn't matter.

My internet must connect me to a different PatsFans.com than the one you are on.

For example, check out the post history of the forum member one comment below your comment.

 

[d312]

Maybe you're being sarcastic. But if you're not, that take is completely off. In no way is Brady like LeBron the way LeBron has moved around the NBA chasing superstar teams.

Lebron Brady just did when he picked Tampa Bay.

 

[d312]

Can't people just accept the fact that it took both BB and Brady to have this success? Why does it always have to be zero or a hundred? BB either has to be the sole reason we had success or hes a complete idiot who drools into a cup. Weird logic.

I firmly believe it was both not one over the other.

 

[d312]

Maybe you're being sarcastic. But if you're not, that take is completely off. In no way is Brady like LeBron the way LeBron has moved around the NBA chasing superstar teams.

He just did in choosing Tampa Bay.

 

[d312]

This tweet about sums it up

Agreed

 

[skinnydog]

I don't get why people have to make Brady elite from day one.

And who cares if he finished third in voting? In 2017, Carson Wentz finished third in MVP voting and he wasn't elite. Had a pretty good year, but wasn't elite. The Pats finished 14-2 in 2003r. The QB gets a lionshare of the credit for a successful season whether he deserves it or not.

And Law got hurt in the 2004 and the Pats' defense wasn't nearly as good in 2004 as it was in 2003. The difference was the Pats turned into a balanced team with the offense carry more of the weight of the team. Every year is different. The Pats won very differently in 2004 than they did in 2003. The Pats have won the Super Bowl playing differently in many different seasons,

And 2001, the team played over its head. That is why the team fell apart in 2002 and Belichick had to almost completely rebuild it in 2003.

Because he was an elite player who always did what it takes to win, even then. Go back and look at the 4th quarter of SB in 2003. The Pats defense that was so good all year basically fell apart, but Brady turned it up a notch and led them to the win. It’s thing like that, that made him elite and separated him from players like Manning

 

[PatsDeb]

Meh. BB doesn't have to prove anything to me. Although I am/was mad at him for letting Brady go and not working harder to keep him in NE, he's certainly earned his stripes elsewhere and can stay as long as he wants. I just wish he got Brady to stay with him.

 

[Sciz]

...as a reminder, Humphries chose not to come here because he questioned how good Tom would be in his old age.

Perhaps Humphries should have considered how good Humphries would be in his prime ages. He's almost definitely getting cut this offseason after earning over $19 million for two disappointing seasons there.

Which kinda goes back to a post I had on a different thread...do we credit Belichick for setting a limit and not offering more money to change Humphries' mind, or do we blame him for being interested at somewhere around that price point at all? There's just a lot of randomness involved in all of these decisions.

 

[DaBruinz]

So Brady goes to a stacked team and he's already proven he doesn't need Belichick? ROFLMAO.
Let's see what Brady does in 2021 when he doesn't have Godwin, Gronk, and a good defense to support him.. Bucs have only 35 players under contract for 2021 and their cap space is shrinking because of the incentives that Gronk and Brady had in their contracts.

 

[PatsWSB47]

Yes he did. He's LeBron Brady. No loyalty to the team that made him. His move is like LeBron James looking at all times to move around to get to where he can win or recruit like minded types. The NFL with Brady pulling this move is turning into the NBA. Is this what the NFL has really turned into.
I can't wait to see/hear from the critics who will surely attack. Have at it.

Not too get all hyperbolic but a once loved wife who becomes neglected, unappreciated and mistreated just because shes getting older is going to seek comfort elsewhere. Why would anyone accuse her of being disloyal for seeing the writing on the wall?

 

[Kdo5]

If Brady wins the Super Bowl and Belichick doesn't at least make it back to the AFCCG in the next few years, his legacy and mystique definitely takes a good hit. People are already going at it which I don't think is fair. But it is so obvious that Brady was the driving force behind our success.

 

[d312]

If Brady wins the Super Bowl and Belichick doesn't at least make it back to the AFCCG in the next few years, his legacy and mystique definitely takes a good hit. People are already going at it which I don't think is fair. But it is so obvious that Brady was the driving force behind our success.

Perhaps

 

[RobertWeathers]

Perhaps Humphries should have considered how good Humphries would be in his prime ages. He's almost definitely getting cut this offseason after earning over $19 million for two disappointing seasons there.

Which kinda goes back to a post I had on a different thread...do we credit Belichick for setting a limit and not offering more money to change Humphries' mind, or do we blame him for being interested at somewhere around that price point at all? There's just a lot of randomness involved in all of these decisions.

Great post. Thought provoking as well.

As much of a BB butt-smoocher I am, I think he genuinely wanted Humphries but was both outmaneuvered by Vrabes/Robinson on the negotiations and the draw of playing closer (Hump is from Spartansburg) to home was too enticing to pass up. I think the Brady -age thing had something to do with his decision but it was #5 on the top reasons he chose TN.

To your point, if BB went $5m more guaranteed than TN, would he have come here? Tough to say. One thing BB is not is a frivolous spender in FA.