Belichick Vs Brady
- Thread starter producingfire
- Start date
Equal, and you can add Robert Kraft in there as well as he stayed back and let Belichick do his job, other than possibly the Jimmy G trade situation.
Many have strong opinions both ways. Both are the GOAT at their respective positions (*waits for Jmoney24 to come in crying about Montana*), and each contributed greatly to the franchises success. I will say too many Patriots fans do not give Belichick enough credit, and are more Brady fans than anything.
Do I think any QB would have led those comebacks against the Seahawks and Saints? No.
Do I think any coach would have had his defense hold an explosive Rams offense to THREE points in the Super Bowl, and hold the Chiefs offense to NOTHING at half-time in the AFCCG? Absolutely NOT.
Whatever happens this season doesn't prove much either way. If Brady does well, that is because he is an all-time GOAT. If he struggles, that's no surprising for someone of his age.
If the Patriots suck (they won't), then it just means the team is re-tooling after losing the GOAT that was there for 20 years. If the Patriots do well, it shows what we've known for years.......that they have a great organization with a great coach.
Many have strong opinions both ways. Both are the GOAT at their respective positions (*waits for Jmoney24 to come in crying about Montana*), and each contributed greatly to the franchises success. I will say too many Patriots fans do not give Belichick enough credit, and are more Brady fans than anything.
Do I think any QB would have led those comebacks against the Seahawks and Saints? No.
Do I think any coach would have had his defense hold an explosive Rams offense to THREE points in the Super Bowl, and hold the Chiefs offense to NOTHING at half-time in the AFCCG? Absolutely NOT.
Whatever happens this season doesn't prove much either way. If Brady does well, that is because he is an all-time GOAT. If he struggles, that's no surprising for someone of his age.
If the Patriots suck (they won't), then it just means the team is re-tooling after losing the GOAT that was there for 20 years. If the Patriots do well, it shows what we've known for years.......that they have a great organization with a great coach.
I want to say Equal as well, but when Brady was outl Bill was able to lead them to a winning record with Matt Castle and I believe they were 3-1 during that 4 game suspension Brady suffered.
Formerly known as...
Collector
There are things Bill can do that Brady can't and things Brady can do that Bill can't. It's not unusual that they both brought things to table, mixed it together and cooked up 6 rings.
010101
C L O N E*0690//////
belichick influences way more*
I agree to that statement
but Belichick built the whole team as GM. When you add coach beside that it's just scary. He had a winning record in New England without Tom Brady, and was the last person to bring the Lowly Cleveland Browns to the playoffs. I mean I barely remember the Browns being in the Playoffs.
Add to that him taking the Browns to the playoffs and I'm sold.
Coaches are more important in football. The Pats are always the most prepared team and they have a ridiculous TO forced:TO ratio and they get big, timely plays from all phases. All you have to do is look at other elite QBs...constantly forced to carry shyt and make up for the errors of others and put in fukked up positions which often lead to there own errors. Brady has never sat on the sideline while the other team ran the ball down their throat. Brady has never lost a game that was clearly in the bag because of coaching errors. Pats have been run off the field in what...one playoff game in 20 years? No matter who they are playing you never see the Pats look outclassed. They always have a counter punch or an adjustment. They always have a shot late in the game. Brady has not been static these last 20 years...he's been a various levels. And interestingly enough, the Pats have won all their chips when he was either ascending or descending.
I think Belichick would have had a career more like Andy Reid without Brady (unless he had a Rodgers/Brees/Mahomes alternative from the get-go). Whereas I think Brady could have won like 3-4 SBs with a number of teams, like the Saints. I think they each made each other better, and Belichick is going to learn that there's a difference between having a solid winning record, and being a perennial Super Bowl favorite.
R.E.N. Spells Ren
Veteran
This is such a an overblown argument imo
In your heart of hearts, if Beli would’ve suffered a season ending stroke in preseason, and Brady remained healthy do you really believe Brady wouldn’t have led a team that won all 16 games the previous year to a winning record whilst missing the playoffs?
Bryan Danielson
Jmare007 x Bryan Danielson x JLova = King Ghidorah
Beli
BLAZO da GAWD
Superstar
Not to mention Matt Cassell made a Pro Bowl with the Chiefs, indicating he wasn’t a bad player.
I'm not sure bro, I've seen Belichick without Brady, but i've never seen Brady without Belichick.