How Belichick lost his place in posterity

[TheRainMaker]

Is McNabb a HOF QB? He was a good QB, but nobody compares him with Brady, Mahomes, Montana, or any of the other elite QBs.

Reid had a hell of a record in PHI (6 Div, 9 playoff appearances, a SB) in 14 years.

This what I'm saying, you guys love to excuse all of Belichick's losing seasons and then make excuses for the winning seasons of other HCs.

In 25 years, Reid had a total of 3 losing seasons. That's pretty amazing. That's with multiple QBs, and only 1 will make it to the HOF (6 seasons). It is what it is.

Sure, he may not be in the All time great conversation, but McNabb was a 6 time Pro Bowl QB. He was very good. Reid had a reputation in the NFL as a horrible game manager and a guy who couldn't get over the hump losing 3 straight NFCCG's choking twice at home. The Eagles main weakness was at WR and they dominated the 2004 season when they got Owens.

I have my issues with Bill in regards to roster building/drafting, benching a guy in the Super Bowl, etc., but there's no way you'd take Reid over Belichick if both teams were equal.

 

[Tunescribe]

Now you're yelling. Get a hold of yourself Francis.

Your imagination is leading you around by the nose.

 

[ahmed]

The bottom line technically was that Tom still had a choice, he COULD have chosen to stay in New England in spite of it all. WHY he left is understandable -- he didn't get what he wanted, didn't like the circumstances and would have compromised himself. But he wasn't cut or traded and could've decided to just ride it out.

Yes, in retrospect the Patriots ill-advisedly enabled his decision. But at the time they thought it was the right thing for him and the team's interests. It's easy to understand why they came to that conclusion, also easy with the benefit of hindsight to see they got it wrong and should have held onto him.

See your rational I understand. If Brady forced their hand, they would not have done anything but keep him because neither Bill nor Kraft would have wanted to deal with the PR nightmare that would have unleashed. But the fact is everything logical and publicly beat to death says they thought he was done and wanted to move on from him.

But people just putting their head in the sand and pretending the team wanted him and he did not, given everything we know drives me nuts.

 

[ahmed]

Not really enough to go on since a QB playing for a franchise 20 years had not happened up until that point.

It is what is, obviously they chose wrong in hindsight but the state of the franchise wasn’t going to help Brady get another ring. **** happens, I’m surprised they were able to hold it together as long as they did even with Brady at the helm. Most teams go through terrible years. Picking 28-32 every year, signing the wrong free agents or letting the right ones go, some bad drafting finally caught up to them. It was a miraculous run up to the bitter end.

Montana, Favre, Manning and just recently Rodgers are just a handful of greats that didn’t finish with the team that drafted them. Why is anyone surprised he didn’t finish with the Patriots? It’s what we all wanted but it was always unlikely based on history. Take your 6 championships and savor them instead of being all butt hurt about it.

I can savour the 6 SBs and still be butthurt about the end. The 2 are not mutually exclusive and people can't seem to grasp that. I am grateful to Bill for 6 SBs but does not mean he gets to do whatever he wants free of consequence which is what some people on here demand.

 

[Tunescribe]

See your rational I understand. If Brady forced their hand, they would not have done anything but keep him because neither Bill nor Kraft would have wanted to deal with the PR nightmare that would have unleashed. But the fact is everything logical and publicly beat to death says they thought he was done and wanted to move on from him.

But people just putting their head in the sand and pretending the team wanted him and he did not, given everything we know drives me nuts.

Tom did himself no favors in 2019, he had his part in making the situation tougher than it should have been. And I don't think he would have made that much difference in 2020 with the roster attrition. What I regret is not seeing what Brady could've done with that 2021 Patriots team.

 

[Patriot Missile]

I can savour the 6 SBs and still be butthurt about the end. The 2 are not mutually exclusive and people can't seem to grasp that. I am grateful to Bill for 6 SBs but does not mean he gets to do whatever he wants free of consequence which is what some people on here demand.

I don’t agree that Bill was above the law. He just got a pass and it expired by poor decisions on free agents, unexplainable coaching hires and bad drafts. Oh and also the inability to polish a turd into a diamond which was multiplied x10 with the bizarre Patricia hiring.

 

[ahmed]

Tom did himself no favors in 2019, he had his part in making the situation tougher than it should have been. And I don't think he would have made that much difference in 2020 with the roster attrition. What I regret is not seeing what Brady could've done with that 2021 Patriots team.

I disagree. IMO it was clear that part of why Tom was miserable in 2019 was because he knew he was done. I believe he would have not been that way had he got the contract he wanted. I am not saying he had an excuse either.

I also disagree that nothing could have been done with the 2020 team. Brady never had back to back crappy seasons. His two comparable ones were 2009 and 2013 and he followed up with great years.

Instead, I was forced to become a Bucs fan and watched 3 years of their games when I had only ever watched them once every 4 years prior to that.

 

[OldEngland]

Excellent breakdown.

Despite all the so-called context that @Ian and everyone wants to assign to Bill's terrible record (you can do that with everyone), your list conclusively shows that Bill was a sub .500 HC w/o Brady, which isn't the case for any of the other HCs you listed. There's something to be said of that.

Bill was also the HC & GM during his entire time w/o Brady, which not all of these other HCs were.

Finally, and this is more telling, Bill had 8 losing seasons w/o Brady. That's an extraordinary amount of losing. None of those HCs had 8 losing seasons in their entire career.

Lossing seasons:

Bill Belichick: 8 in 29 years (.276)

Andy Reid: 3 in 25 years (.120)
Mike Tomlin: 0 in 17 years (.000)
Mike McCarthy: 4 in 17 years (.235)
Tony Dungy: 1 in 13 years (.077)
Sean Payton: 5 in 16 years (.312)
Mike Holmgren: 3 in 17 years (.176)

This is an interesting comparison, thank you for developing the topic.

If you don't mind I'm going to move the goalposts slightly. The reason is x4 of these coaches are still active and with a decade less coaching than BB, also Holmgren and Dungy had shorter coaching careers. I also prefer to measure by non-winning seasons as a 0.500 record doesn't get you a shot at the SB. Therefore I'm going to suggest a fairer comparison is non-winning seasons compared to retired HOF coaches, as we could theorise non-winning seasons come at the beginning/end/change of a career.

So how does BBs % record of non-winning seasons compare within the top 8 winningmost coaches of all time?

Don Shula = 6 non-winning seasons in 36 seasons (0.166). X2SBs
Tom Landry = 9 in 29 seasons (0.310). X2SBs
George Halas = 6 in 40 seasons (0.100). x6championships
Bill Belichick = 8 in 29 seasons (0.276). x6SBs
Chuck Noll = 8 in 23 seasons (0.347) x4SBs
Curly Lambeau = 7 in 33 seasons (0.212). x6championships
Paul Brown = 5 in 25 seasons (0.250). x7championships
Andy Reid = 5 in 25 (0.200). x3 SBs.

Honourable mention for some other HOF coaches with multiple SBs.
Bill Parcels 6 in 19seasons (0.316) x2SB
Bill Walsh 3 in 10seasons (0.300) x3SB
Joe Gibbs 4 in 16seasons (0.250) x3SB

I'd conclude BBs amount of non-winning seasons is relatively consistent with the greatest coaches ever to be involved in the game. Halas, Shula and Reid are the only ones to go <0.200, while other HOF coaches such as Landry, Noll, Parcells and Walsh >0.300. While his x6 championships are unparalleled in the SB era and can only be compared with Brown, Halas and Lambeau. I'm not remotely suggesting BB's final seasons weren't poor and disappointing, but it seems this isn't that unusual even among HOF coaches.

 

[1960Pats]

Any other coaches have 8 rings?

There might be a coach out there with a few. The Pats had a conditioning coach who may have picked up another after moving on, which is what we should be doing with this topic.

I've said all that I have to say about Bill vs Tom, but as I mentioned to Ian a while back, that discussion and Brady leaving will be talked about forever.

 

[1960Pats]

This is an interesting comparison, thank you for developing the topic.

If you don't mind I'm going to move the goalposts slightly. The reason is x4 of these coaches are still active and with a decade less coaching than BB, also Holmgren and Dungy had shorter coaching careers. I also prefer to measure by non-winning seasons as a 0.500 record doesn't get you a shot at the SB. Therefore I'm going to suggest a fairer comparison is non-winning seasons compared to retired HOF coaches, as we could theorise non-winning seasons come at the beginning/end/change of a career.

So how does BBs % record of non-winning seasons compare within the top 8 winningmost coaches of all time?

Don Shula = 6 non-winning seasons in 36 seasons (0.166). X2SBs
Tom Landry = 9 in 29 seasons (0.310). X2SBs
George Halas = 6 in 40 seasons (0.100). x6championships
Bill Belichick = 8 in 29 seasons (0.276). x6SBs
Chuck Noll = 8 in 23 seasons (0.347) x4SBs
Curly Lambeau = 7 in 33 seasons (0.212). x6championships
Paul Brown = 5 in 25 seasons (0.250). x7championships
Andy Reid = 5 in 25 (0.200). x3 SBs.

Honourable mention for some other HOF coaches with multiple SBs.
Bill Parcels 6 in 19seasons (0.316) x2SB
Bill Walsh 3 in 10seasons (0.300) x3SB
Joe Gibbs 4 in 16seasons (0.250) x3SB

I'd conclude BBs amount of non-winning seasons is relatively consistent with the greatest coaches ever to be involved in the game. Halas, Shula and Reid are the only ones to go <0.200, while other HOF coaches such as Landry, Noll, Parcells and Walsh >0.300. While his x6 championships are unparalleled in the SB era and can only be compared with Brown, Halas and Lambeau. I'm not remotely suggesting BB's final seasons weren't poor and disappointing, but it seems this isn't that unusual even among HOF coaches.

There's a difference when you count actual losing seasons, which is what I did here a while back. For instance, Bill would stay at 8 but Reid would fall from 5 to 3.

The only coach, with or without a SB ring who's close to Bill is Tom Landry, also at 8, whose record is very similar to Bill's. They both started and ended with losing seasons with a great run in between.

It's too bad Lombardi didn't get to have a career. He was off to an incredible start.

 

[1960Pats]

Bill Walsh had a worse record before Montana became the initial GOAT.

Andy Reid lucked out getting McNabb. He was 5-11 before McNabb took over full time in 2000. Even then, he was known as a terrible game manager who chocked in big games. Alex Smith was competent in KC, but they were never going anywhere until they struck gold with Mahomes. In fact, like Bill, Reid had to be convinced to take him.

Bill has shown they were virtually unbeatable when they had talent, but very mortal without it.

Tom and the Bucs would’ve won 2 straight if it weren’t for major injuries. I don’t what the heck happened year 3. They all looked like they wanted the season to end.

Toilet Bowles flushed Brady's chances at another SB with his call at the end.

 

[1960Pats]

He messed up his last two seasons here with personnel and coaching decisions, and landed the wrong QB(s) who both imploded and the guy they had to succeed Brady also wasn’t the guy. Period. Can’t win without a decent QB who is smart with the ball and can make a play.

Also, people talk like they won with blowouts thanks to Brady over 20yrs and Bill played little part in the wins. I don’t know the number of close games they won over that span, but I thought the bit about the Rams game where Bill decided to completely change the defense and run a scheme they hadn’t run all year was a reminder of just how great he really was.

So for those who want to kill the guy over moving on from Brady, I guess it is what it is. But the fact we had them both here at the same time is why they have six rings, albeit they should have seven and I’m also p****d at him about that.

I don’t think Brady wins six with another guy. Maybe he finishes like Manning/Roethlisberger or gets 4, but Bill absolutely made a difference there. Coaches absolutely lose games and I’ve said it before, Dungy didn’t do Manning many favors and there’s no way he should only have one ring during that time in Indy with the players he had.

But be glad it happened during our lifetimes and we can tell our grandkids about it. Because it definitely won’t happen again. It’s just odd we keep getting caught in this cycle. Most of you guys all saw it in real time, you saw the turnovers, you watched and listened to guys like Bruschi, Law, Harrison, etc. it wasn’t exactly all Brady and the offense.

In general, the first half of the dynasty was anchored by the defense and the second half the offense. The sad part is that the Pats' exceptional defense had it's last year without Brady. The timing of that was horrible.

 

[1960Pats]

That was a little different. Josh put his faith in Tebow, and then had a lot of other disfunction he created that led to his getting fired. Bill’s was out of his control.

Bill upset the Kosar fanatics by moving on to Testeverde who went on to win a playoff game there, and it’s not like he was a one-year wonder. He then went on to have success again under Parcells and other coaches. Again, another reminder that having a good QB helps.

But he also had an all star group of coaches and he did a great job flipping that roster. That’s not a myth. Again, if you watched the documentary, they were absolutely headed in the right direction.

Bill had a great staff in Cleveland but the owner screwed that up when he dumped them. What a huge mistake.

I have a vivid memory of attending the Pats 2000 game in Cleveland and I couldn't believe the amount of vitriol there was for Bill. They were great to me but boy did they hate him. The owner made him the fall guy (sound familiar?).

 

[1960Pats]

Again, when it comes to Belichick and Brady, you basically had two guys who didn’t freeze under pressure. Belichick could have easily knelt on the ball in that first Super Bowl and gone to overtime, but he went against what most other coaches would have done knowing he had a guy he could trust. And then Brady went out and did exactly what he was supposed to do, which can’t always be said for most quarterbacks. That was a clutch drive any way you look at it.

Having two guys who are both clutch in big moments is so unusual, and we were all very fortunate to witness it. We had two of the best to ever do it. That’s really all any of us can sort of take away from it and trying to pin it one way or the other is just something that takes away from that dynamic.

It was the perfect storm of a big-brained taskmaster HC joining up with a big-brained, respect for authority QB. Every time I think back to those days a big grin comes to my face.

 

[1960Pats]

Of late it seems like torturing ourselves over it has become the entire point for half the inmates of this partricular asylum

If I can get over it anyone can.

 

[DarrylS]

This is an interesting comparison, thank you for developing the topic.

If you don't mind I'm going to move the goalposts slightly. The reason is x4 of these coaches are still active and with a decade less coaching than BB, also Holmgren and Dungy had shorter coaching careers. I also prefer to measure by non-winning seasons as a 0.500 record doesn't get you a shot at the SB. Therefore I'm going to suggest a fairer comparison is non-winning seasons compared to retired HOF coaches, as we could theorise non-winning seasons come at the beginning/end/change of a career.

So how does BBs % record of non-winning seasons compare within the top 8 winningmost coaches of all time?

Don Shula = 6 non-winning seasons in 36 seasons (0.166). X2SBs
Tom Landry = 9 in 29 seasons (0.310). X2SBs
George Halas = 6 in 40 seasons (0.100). x6championships
Bill Belichick = 8 in 29 seasons (0.276). x6SBs
Chuck Noll = 8 in 23 seasons (0.347) x4SBs
Curly Lambeau = 7 in 33 seasons (0.212). x6championships
Paul Brown = 5 in 25 seasons (0.250). x7championships
Andy Reid = 5 in 25 (0.200). x3 SBs.

Honourable mention for some other HOF coaches with multiple SBs.
Bill Parcels 6 in 19seasons (0.316) x2SB
Bill Walsh 3 in 10seasons (0.300) x3SB
Joe Gibbs 4 in 16seasons (0.250) x3SB

I'd conclude BBs amount of non-winning seasons is relatively consistent with the greatest coaches ever to be involved in the game. Halas, Shula and Reid are the only ones to go <0.200, while other HOF coaches such as Landry, Noll, Parcells and Walsh >0.300. While his x6 championships are unparalleled in the SB era and can only be compared with Brown, Halas and Lambeau. I'm not remotely suggesting BB's final seasons weren't poor and disappointing, but it seems this isn't that unusual even among HOF coaches.

Note there are only three coaches listed above in the post salary cap era..
Who deserves an asterisk the ones prior to salary cap or post salary cap??
Without regard many of these comparisons need qualification and are like comparing raisins to grapefruit.

 

[PATSNUTme]

Vince Lombardi did not win a championship without Bart Starr.
Maybe it should be the Starr Trophy.

 

[signbabybrady]

Excellent breakdown.

Despite all the so-called context that @Ian and everyone wants to assign to Bill's terrible record (you can do that with everyone), your list conclusively shows that Bill was a sub .500 HC w/o Brady, which isn't the case for any of the other HCs you listed. There's something to be said of that.

Bill was also the HC & GM during his entire time w/o Brady, which not all of these other HCs were.

Finally, and this is more telling, Bill had 8 losing seasons w/o Brady. That's an extraordinary amount of losing. None of those HCs had 8 losing seasons in their entire career.

Lossing seasons:

Bill Belichick: 8 in 29 years (.276)

Andy Reid: 3 in 25 years (.120)
Mike Tomlin: 0 in 17 years (.000)
Mike McCarthy: 4 in 17 years (.235)
Tony Dungy: 1 in 13 years (.077)
Sean Payton: 5 in 16 years (.312)
Mike Holmgren: 3 in 17 years (.176)

This is an interesting comparison, thank you for developing the topic.

If you don't mind I'm going to move the goalposts slightly. The reason is x4 of these coaches are still active and with a decade less coaching than BB, also Holmgren and Dungy had shorter coaching careers. I also prefer to measure by non-winning seasons as a 0.500 record doesn't get you a shot at the SB. Therefore I'm going to suggest a fairer comparison is non-winning seasons compared to retired HOF coaches, as we could theorise non-winning seasons come at the beginning/end/change of a career.

So how does BBs % record of non-winning seasons compare within the top 8 winningmost coaches of all time?

Don Shula = 6 non-winning seasons in 36 seasons (0.166). X2SBs
Tom Landry = 9 in 29 seasons (0.310). X2SBs
George Halas = 6 in 40 seasons (0.100). x6championships
Bill Belichick = 8 in 29 seasons (0.276). x6SBs
Chuck Noll = 8 in 23 seasons (0.347) x4SBs
Curly Lambeau = 7 in 33 seasons (0.212). x6championships
Paul Brown = 5 in 25 seasons (0.250). x7championships
Andy Reid = 5 in 25 (0.200). x3 SBs.

Honourable mention for some other HOF coaches with multiple SBs.
Bill Parcels 6 in 19seasons (0.316) x2SB
Bill Walsh 3 in 10seasons (0.300) x3SB
Joe Gibbs 4 in 16seasons (0.250) x3SB

I'd conclude BBs amount of non-winning seasons is relatively consistent with the greatest coaches ever to be involved in the game. Halas, Shula and Reid are the only ones to go <0.200, while other HOF coaches such as Landry, Noll, Parcells and Walsh >0.300. While his x6 championships are unparalleled in the SB era and can only be compared with Brown, Halas and Lambeau. I'm not remotely suggesting BB's final seasons weren't poor and disappointing, but it seems this isn't that unusual even among HOF coaches.

There's a difference when you count actual losing seasons, which is what I did here a while back. For instance, Bill would stay at 8 but Reid would fall from 5 to 3.

The only coach, with or without a SB ring who's close to Bill is Tom Landry, also at 8, whose record is very similar to Bill's. They both started and ended with losing seasons with a great run in between.

It's too bad Lombardi didn't get to have a career. He was off to an incredible start.

Note there are only three coaches listed above in the post salary cap era..
Who deserves an asterisk the ones prior to salary cap or post salary cap??
Without regard many of these comparisons need qualification and are like comparing raisins to grapefruit.

Your arguments falls apart the minute you start manipulating numbers. Let's look at seasons of X without Y, or only non-winning, or losing, or games played on Mars during a space storm. You know what doesn't require any manipulation:

 

[OldEngland]

There's a difference when you count actual losing seasons, which is what I did here a while back. For instance, Bill would stay at 8 but Reid would fall from 5 to 3.

The only coach, with or without a SB ring who's close to Bill is Tom Landry, also at 8, whose record is very similar to Bill's. They both started and ended with losing seasons with a great run in between.

It's too bad Lombardi didn't get to have a career. He was off to an incredible start.

Completely agree Tom Landry is a really good comparison to BB's success arc bookended by lesser seasons, although BBs heights were a lot higher with x6SBs compared to x2. I'd also say Chuck Noll is also a good comparison as follows a similar career pattern with x4 SBs, but wasn't as consistent as BB getting to the big game. Curly Lambeau tailed off similar to BB and was under 0.400 his last 6 seasons. Paul Brown had the best decade of all in his first 10 seasons, but struggled the first x4 seasons in Cinnicinati and didn't make a championship game in his last 13. Shula was more consistent in regular season overall, but his playoff (0.514) and SB (2/7) record was average at best and didn't win a SB in the final 20years of coaching, or get to one in the last 10. Reid bookended with bad seasons at the Eagles. George Halas stands above in longitivity, % winning seasons and championships, but even he only had x1 championship game in the last 20years and had x2 losing seasons in his last 4.

The point is we are discussing all-time legendary coaches, and all had unsuccessful spells to some degree, and most retired a few years too late, except unfortunately for Lombardi as you say (I've always loved the book strive to excel about him).

 

[Ivan]

I'm sure the people that advised him on Wynn, Sony, Harry, Thornton, and whoever else comes to mind are clamoring to tell everyone all about it. Like you said they were all Bills picks for better or worse. The Rhebein story was always a nice a story about someone who unfortunately passed too soon but that doesn't take it away from Bill.

I have no doubt that Rehbein made a case for taking Brady, but pretending that it wasn’t Belichick who made the decision, when everyone knows he always did what he wanted with picks is really dishonest. Especially when those making that claim are the same people who have claimed Belichick was always responsible for every bad pick, and there were plenty of those for them to ***** about.