Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Miss me yet?
Eagles Forum > Philadelphia Eagles Message Board > Philadelphia Eagles or Football Related Discussion
Pages: 1, 2
mcnabbulous
Eyrie
I said when I wanted him gone that the odds were against us getting someone better, but we knew that Reid couldn't finish the deal so it was time to call time on him.

#fireKelly and let's try again.
mcnabbulous
The lesson I hope we learned from both of these situations is that coaches shouldn't be GM's.

Andy was a great coach and bad GM. I think the same may be true for Chip, but the luster is so worn off this offense so quickly that I'm not sure what to think.

Andy's offense was always pretty consistently good. Even after Donnie's prime. Andy just had no idea how to draft on defense.

I'm not sure we can point to any positives for Chip after three years.
The Franchise
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 26 2015, 03:02 PM) *


No.

While I called Chip for the fraud he is early on, at least he gave us the possibility of going somewhere. Reid can keep his fat ass in KC, never winning a title.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (The Franchise @ Nov 26 2015, 02:47 PM) *
No.

While I called Chip for the fraud he is early on, at least he gave us the possibility of going somewhere. Reid can keep his fat ass in KC, never winning a title.

Why do you change your handle so frequently?

Andy's probably gonna be in the playoffs this year. I'm envious of that. After a disaster of a start, his team is still battling. I'm really envious of that.

Andy is a great coach. I hope he gets another excellent QB during his career, but the odds are long.
CT_Eagle
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 26 2015, 09:56 PM) *
Andy is a great coach.


Andy is a good, not great, coach. Where he excels is game day preparation. He is average on game day.
SAM I Am
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 26 2015, 03:23 PM) *
The lesson I hope we learned from both of these situations is that coaches shouldn't be GM's.

Bingo!!!

I just doesn't work. One of those two jobs is tough enough in this league.

Of course you want you GM and your Coach to be on the same page, but one person taking on both of those jobs is just too much.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (SAM I Am @ Nov 26 2015, 03:06 PM) *
Bingo!!!

I just doesn't work. One of those two jobs is tough enough in this league.

Of course you want you GM and your Coach to be on the same page, but one person taking on both of those jobs is just too much.

Yep. I've been bitching about it since I joined this board.

I wasn't fond of Howie, but giving Chip the keys was a bad move.
samaroo
I think Belichick and Jimmy Johnson would disagree with you.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (samaroo @ Nov 26 2015, 05:35 PM) *
I think Belichick and Jimmy Johnson would disagree with you.

Belichick really has been comparatively mediocre with total control. Johnson never coached in the salary cap era.
Phits
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 26 2015, 07:17 PM) *
Belichick really has been comparatively mediocre with total control.

How can you say that? He has his team consistently battling for the SB. He knows how to get the most out of his personnel, not just the offense but the defense as well.

With that said, he is clearly the exception to the rule.
HobbEs
Thanks, that actually made me laugh.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Phits @ Nov 26 2015, 06:23 PM) *
How can you say that? He has his team consistently battling for the SB. He knows how to get the most out of his personnel, not just the offense but the defense as well.

With that said, he is clearly the exception to the rule.

He has Tom Brady. His draft record is not any more impressive than anyone else. He's a very good coach with an all-time great QB. Nothing more.
The Franchise
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 26 2015, 07:17 PM) *
Belichick really has been comparatively mediocre with total control. Johnson never coached in the salary cap era.


You're a complete moron.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (The Franchise @ Nov 26 2015, 09:01 PM) *
You're a complete moron.

Yeah the Patriots just kill it in the draft.
The Franchise
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 26 2015, 10:37 PM) *
Yeah the Patriots just kill it in the draft.


We all hate him. To call him mediocre is just stupid. Their drafts aren't great, but his overall handle on their personnel has been brilliant for a long time.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (The Franchise @ Nov 26 2015, 09:43 PM) *
We all hate him. To call him mediocre is just stupid. Their drafts aren't great, but his overall handle on their personnel has been brilliant for a long time.

I didn't call him mediocre. I said his job as a GM has been comparatively mediocre. They won 3 titles in 4 years early in his tenure. Their success, despite having a decade of prime Tom Brady, has been dramatically less since he has been calling all the shots. His mediocre drafting is a large reason why.

Their drafts have been average for a decade. That's on their coach/GM. The job is way easier when you have a HOF QB.
Phits
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 26 2015, 10:58 PM) *
I didn't call him mediocre. I said his job as a GM has been comparatively mediocre. They won 3 titles in 4 years early in his tenure. Their success, despite having a decade of prime Tom Brady, has been dramatically less since he has been calling all the shots. His mediocre drafting is a large reason why.

Their drafts have been average for a decade. That's on their coach/GM. The job is way easier when you have a HOF QB.

Why do you call his drafts mediocre? Consider that they have been drafting near the bottom for more than a decade. Consider that the players selected (drafted players and free agents) fit into his system and they have continued success. These players may not have the same success on another team. They (successfully) draft for their system isn't that the mark of a good GM?

The Pats are like the Detroit Red Wings or the SA Spurs for the NFL. Solid foundation combined with smart draft picks.

mcnabbulous
This is such a silly discussion. We are talking about two of the most demanding jobs in sports. Belichick spend the vast majority of the year coaching his team. How is he supposed to balance that with evaluating both college and pro players from every other team?

It's not possible.

His drafts have been mediocre. If they didn't have Tom Brady, they would be an 8 win team.
CT_Eagle
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 27 2015, 04:37 AM) *
Yeah the Patriots just kill it in the draft.


There is more to being a good GM than just the draft. For example, the Pats rarely, if ever overpay for players.

Brady is an all time great QB, no doubt. In my opinion he is the best ever. However, it takes more than a great QB to do what the Pats have done. They have been to 6 Super Bowls and have won 4 of them in the last 14 years. They are in great position to make it 7 in 15 years. Think about that. Averaging close to a SB every other year over a 15 year period. Not to mention that they came within 1 game of having a perfect season and have a chance to do it again this year. That does not happen under a mediocre GM.
Phits
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 27 2015, 09:21 AM) *
This is such a silly discussion. We are talking about two of the most demanding jobs in sports. Belichick spend the vast majority of the year coaching his team. How is he supposed to balance that with evaluating both college and pro players from every other team?

It's not possible.

His drafts have been mediocre. If they didn't have Tom Brady, they would be an 8 win team.

You have yet to explain how his drafts have been mediocre. Based on the draft experts and the team's results you're sorely misguided.
QUOTE
During his time in New England, Belichick has taken advantage of the misguided general managers and personnel men of the NFL by trading down over and over and over again. Some of the moves havenít worked out, because Belichick isnít a soothsayer, and there have been times when Belichick has traded up and been happy with his return. In terms of the Approximate Value from his assorted draft maneuverings, though, Belichick has built a monstrous record of success. It is impossible to imagine the Patriots appearing in this yearís Super Bowl without his massive returns in the trading market.

How Belichick Rules the Draft

I don't know how he balances 2 of the most challenging roles in professional sports, but he has proven to be more than "mediocre" as a talent evaluator and a coach. The results go well beyond their QB.
Phits
QUOTE (CT_Eagle @ Nov 27 2015, 09:36 AM) *
There is more to being a good GM than just the draft. For example, the Pats rarely, if ever overpay for players.

Brady is an all time great QB, no doubt. In my opinion he is the best ever. However, it takes more than a great QB to do what the Pats have done. They have been to 6 Super Bowls and have won 4 of them in the last 14 years. They are in great position to make it 7 in 15 years. Think about that. Averaging close to a SB every other year over a 15 year period. Not to mention that they came within 1 game of having a perfect season and have a chance to do it again this year. That does not happen under a mediocre GM.

well said.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Phits @ Nov 27 2015, 08:49 AM) *
You have yet to explain how his drafts have been mediocre. Based on the draft experts and the team's results you're sorely misguided.

Based on the roster. I imagine how praised Chip would be if he were forced to start two rookies on his OL right now. Or if his receiving core featured Danny Amendola as his current #1.

Belichick is a very good coach, but you sorely underestimate the flexibility he has with Brady as his QB. Imagine if Andy Reid had a better version of 2004 Donovan, but for 10+ years.

QUOTE

This talks more about his trades than nothing else. But it's a lot easier to be patient and not desperate when you have the luxury of a great QB who has regularly taken less money throughout his career to benefit the overall team. Most GMs aren't so lucky.

http://www.businessinsider.com/tom-brady-l...contract-2013-2

It also makes your draft and free agency misses significantly easier to swallow.

QUOTE
I don't know how he balances 2 of the most challenging roles in professional sports, but he has proven to be more than "mediocre" as a talent evaluator and a coach. The results go well beyond their QB.

The answer is...he doesn't balance them any better than anyone else.
CT_Eagle
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 27 2015, 04:12 PM) *
Based on the roster. I imagine how praised Chip would be if he were forced to start two rookies on his OL right now. Or if his receiving core featured Danny Amendola as his current #1.


If Chip made those decisions and then led the team to a 10-0 record you would be among a large group of people, including me, talking about how well Chip handled his GM duties.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (CT_Eagle @ Nov 27 2015, 08:36 AM) *
There is more to being a good GM than just the draft. For example, the Pats rarely, if ever overpay for players.

Brady is an all time great QB, no doubt. In my opinion he is the best ever. However, it takes more than a great QB to do what the Pats have done. They have been to 6 Super Bowls and have won 4 of them in the last 14 years. They are in great position to make it 7 in 15 years. Think about that. Averaging close to a SB every other year over a 15 year period. Not to mention that they came within 1 game of having a perfect season and have a chance to do it again this year. That does not happen under a mediocre GM.

The 49ers did something similar, which spanned two HCs. The commonality is HOF QB play.

In a league that prides itself on parity, when games are constantly won by less than 7 points, I can't believe how you can undervalue having "the best ever" (your words) player, at the most important position.

That is the difference maker. That is why Belichick can toggle between OC's without missing a beat. They excel in NE, they fail elsewhere, they come back and excel again. It's no coincidence. Brady is the glue that holds it all together.

People were calling for Andy's head long before a decade of no SB's had passed. Belichick went a decade with the best QB ever, while at the same time, being a genius head coach, without winning one.

If they had a dedicated GM, they would have a better, deeper roster. And likely more SBs to show for it.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (CT_Eagle @ Nov 27 2015, 09:19 AM) *
If Chip made those decisions and then led the team to a 10-0 record you would be among a large group of people, including me, talking about how well Chip handled his GM duties.

I likely would not be doing so. I've been consistently critical of poor draft decisions for as long as I've been posting, and I'm about as big of an Andy fan as you will find.

Almost everyone thought Andy should be removed as a coach and limited to GM duties at one point. I was on the complete opposite end of the spectrum.
CT_Eagle
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 27 2015, 04:28 PM) *
The 49ers did something similar, which spanned two HCs. The commonality is HOF QB play.

This has no bearing on whether or not Belichick is a good GM. Most teams that win a super bowl have HOF QB play. I have not looked it up but I would be willing to bet that a HOF QB was under centre for the winning team in more than 75% of super bowl victories.

QUOTE
I can't believe how you can undervalue having "the best ever" (your words) player, at the most important position.

Just because you keep saying I and others are undervaluing the value of having Brady does not make it true. It is an assumption on your part, nothing more.

QUOTE
That is the difference maker. That is why Belichick can toggle between OC's without missing a beat. They excel in NE, they fail elsewhere, they come back and excel again. It's no coincidence. Brady is the glue that holds it all together.

Everything you just typed is the sign of a good GM. You call Brady the glue. I think he is one component, with Belichick being the other, in a good epoxy that holds NE together.

QUOTE
People were calling for Andy's head long before a decade of no SB's had passed. Belichick went a decade with the best QB ever, while at the same time, being a genius head coach, without winning one.

This has nothing to do with the evaluation of Belichick as a GM. However, if Andy had won 3 out of 4 SBs before going on a 10 year SB drought, he would have been giving more rope. I like how you neglect to state that even though Belichick did not win a SB in that decade, he still managed to make it twice.

QUOTE
If they had a dedicated GM, they would have a better, deeper roster. And likely more SBs to show for it.


Pure conjecture of course but you are entitled to it. Do you realize how high of a bar you are setting with that statement? The Pats have had the best 15 year run since the inception of the Super Bowl era.

All I have to say is I can only hope that someday the Eagles get the type of mediocre GM that leads to just one SB never mind 4 titles while averaging a trip to the SB every other year over a 15 year period.
Phits
You severely undervalue the role of Belichick the GM. I am not sure if you know it, but he has been voted as the NFL's best GM (by Rotoworld) 2 years running.

Here's a perfect summary:
QUOTE
No other general manager is better able to acquire the depth of talent required to be an annual contender, and no coach is better able to use the players on hand to the best of their ability.


The Patriots success is largely tied to Brady's calibre, but even the best QB needs well functioning parts around him.

QUOTE
Here's what Daugherty had to say about his selection of Belichick as No. 1:

"Bill Belichickís blind spots as a personnel man are well known. The greatest football mind of the 21st century canít draft wide receivers or cornerbacks to save his life. But when Belichick looks in the rear-view mirror, the only object closer than it appears is his fourth Super Bowl title. Even the best have weaknesses, but no one in todayís NFL can match Belichickís strengths. Polishing his fourth Lombardi, Belichick didnít get sentimental. He passed on a bidding war for 30-year-old Darrelle Revis, and one-year-too-earlyíd instead of one-year-too-lateíd 33-year-old nose tackle Vince Wilfork. Popular sentiment would have allowed for a victory lap in New England, but Belichick knows thereís no such thing. If you donít stay ahead of the curve in the salary-cap era NFL, youíre going to slam into it. No one understands this better than Belichick."

Link
Phits
QUOTE (CT_Eagle @ Nov 27 2015, 10:56 AM) *
All I have to say is I can only hope that someday the Eagles get the type of mediocre GM that leads to just one SB never mind 4 titles while averaging a trip to the SB every other year over a 15 year period.

The Franchise
QUOTE (Phits @ Nov 27 2015, 08:17 AM) *
Consider that they have been drafting near the bottom for more than a decade.


Yup, the last time they even had a top-10 pick was 2008, and before that 2001. Most of the time their first pick is in the 20s.
CT_Eagle
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 27 2015, 04:32 PM) *
I likely would not be doing so. I've been consistently critical of poor draft decisions for as long as I've been posting, and I'm about as big of an Andy fan as you will find.

Almost everyone thought Andy should be removed as a coach and limited to GM duties at one point. I was on the complete opposite end of the spectrum.


That is surprising because acquiring a player like Amendola and having him be a solid contributor to a 10-0 team is what good GMs do. I know, Brady is throwing the ball to Amendola. That does not mean that Belichick did not do a good job providing Brady with that tool.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (CT_Eagle @ Nov 27 2015, 11:16 AM) *
That is surprising because acquiring a player like Amendola and having him be a solid contributor to a 10-0 team is what good GMs do. I know, Brady is throwing the ball to Amendola. That does not mean that Belichick did not do a good job providing Brady with that tool.

Every team has several Danny Amendolas. Acquiring a guy like him takes virtually no ability.

The Patriots have been great for the past 15 years. That's what happens when you have the best QB of all time. Or at least our generation.

The 49ers had the same kind of success. The Colts were in the same boat. Then when Manning went down, they were the worst team in football. It's pretty easy to see the common theme here.

Brady isn't just a great QB. He's an all-time great QB. One of those rare athletes who makes everyone around him better.

Belichick wasn't some wizard for picking up Dion Lewis off the streets. Lewis is just incredibly more effective when his QB is the best.
CT_Eagle
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 27 2015, 05:57 PM) *
Every team has several Danny Amendolas. Acquiring a guy like him takes virtually no ability.

Really? Do the Eagles have 1? Amendola was picked up off of the street after being released by several teams and now teams have to account for him on nearly every passing down. The point is that Belichick has found "Amendola" consistently for more than a decade.

QUOTE
The Patriots have been great for the past 15 years. That's what happens when you have the best QB of all time. Or at least our generation.

Where we disagree is I think it is more than Brady. Based on your responses you think Brady would be just as successful regardless of the who the GM is.

QUOTE
The 49ers had the same kind of success. The Colts were in the same boat. Then when Manning went down, they were the worst team in football. It's pretty easy to see the common theme here.

True regarding the 49ers. The Colts have never had the type of run that the Pats are currently on and don't belong anywhere near this conversation. Thanks for making the point that a team needs a good QB. I feel enlightened already.

QUOTE
Brady isn't just a great QB. He's an all-time great QB. One of those rare athletes who makes everyone around him better.

You keep bringing up Brady as if I am disagreeing with you. For the last time, I think he is the greatest ever. He still needs good players around him to succeed. He can thank Belichick the GM for that.

QUOTE
Belichick wasn't some wizard for picking up Dion Lewis off the streets. Lewis is just incredibly more effective when his QB is the best.

You mean Belichick is not perfect when it comes to acquiring talent? That changes my opinion of him drastically.

mcnabbulous
QUOTE (CT_Eagle @ Nov 27 2015, 12:11 PM) *
Really? Do the Eagles have 1? Amendola was picked up off of the street after being released by several teams and now teams have to account for him on nearly every passing down. The point is that Belichick has found "Amendola" consistently for more than a decade.

He is no better or more successful than when he was in St. Louis. Allen Barbre is a comparable talent to Danny Amendola.

QUOTE
Where we disagree is I think it is more than Brady. Based on your responses you think Brady would be just as successful regardless of the who the GM is.

He has been just as successful regardless of his OC. I don't know why GM would be any different.

QUOTE
True regarding the 49ers. The Colts have never had the type of run that the Pats are currently on and don't belong anywhere near this conversation. Thanks for making the point that a team needs a good QB. I feel enlightened already.

The only thing stopping the Colts from having the same amount of success is that they consistently faced a better coach/QB combo in New England.

QUOTE
You keep bringing up Brady as if I am disagreeing with you. For the last time, I think he is the greatest ever. He still needs good players around him to succeed. He can thank Belichick the GM for that.

And my point is that literally anyone could have surrounded him with this level of talent. And a high quality, dedicated GM would have been better at it.

QUOTE
You mean Belichick is not perfect when it comes to acquiring talent? That changes my opinion of him drastically.

I am not using perfection as a standard. I'm saying that he is average. There is absolutely nothing special about his ability to acquire talent. If you remove Tom Brady from that roster, they are in the bottom half of the league as it relates to talent.

Much like the Colts when you removed Manning.
Phits
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 27 2015, 12:23 PM) *
And my point is that literally anyone could have surrounded him with this level of talent. And a high quality, dedicated GM would have been better at it.

At this point you're just arguing to hold your point. While it is true a separate GM and HC is the better way to go, Belichick is the rare exception to this rule. It's obvious and there is no valid argument against it.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Phits @ Nov 27 2015, 12:44 PM) *
At this point you're just arguing to hold your point. While it is true a separate GM and HC is the better way to go, Belichick is the rare exception to this rule. It's obvious and there is no valid argument against it.

Well that settles it!
Reality Fan
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 26 2015, 07:17 PM) *
Belichick really has been comparatively mediocre with total control. Johnson never coached in the salary cap era.


Absolutely one of the dumbest things ever posted here...lets review...

While Belichick has had Scott Pioli and Nick Caserio to help him as GM the patriots have been to 6 Super Bowls and won 4.
They have also been in 3 other AFC Championship games....all in 16 years.....what fucked up criteria for success do you use to measure GM performance?

I may not like the guy but he is consistently successful with shrewd drafting and good FA signings.
mcnabbulous
My fucked up criteria for GMs is good drafting. He's not good at that small part of the job.
Phits
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 27 2015, 02:04 PM) *
My fucked up criteria for GMs is good drafting. He's not good at that small part of the job.

That's your contention, despite the fact that he gets good draft grades every year?
CT_Eagle
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 27 2015, 05:23 PM) *
He is no better or more successful than when he was in St. Louis. Allen Barbre is a comparable talent to Danny Amendola.

You mean Brady didn't lift his level of play? Good thing Bilichick provided Brady with other options.

QUOTE
He has been just as successful regardless of his OC. I don't know why GM would be any different.

Nobody is saying that Bilichick the GM made Brady successful all by himself. He has surrounded Brady with the talent to succeed. He has provide Brady with OCs that he could excel with.

QUOTE
The only thing stopping the Colts from having the same amount of success is that they consistently faced a better coach/QB combo in New England.

Using an assumption (that the Colts would be just as good) to prove your opinion (Bilichick is a mediocre GM) is not going to get you far. Maybe if the Colts had a GM as good as Bilichick they would have more hardware to show for it. The reality is the Colts still do not belong in this conversation. Stick with the 49ers. At least that run is comparable.

QUOTE
And my point is that literally anyone could have surrounded him with this level of talent. And a high quality, dedicated GM would have been better at it.

Bilichick literally did surround Brady with the talent and he deserves the credit. You keep saying a high quality GM would have been better but that in and of itself is not proof that Bilichick is himself not a quality GM. It is your opinion that he is not and throughout all of these posts you have not stated one thing that was not an opinion or an assumption on your part to counter Bilichick is a good GM.

QUOTE
I am not using perfection as a standard. I'm saying that he is average. There is absolutely nothing special about his ability to acquire talent. If you remove Tom Brady from that roster, they are in the bottom half of the league as it relates to talent.

You used a single player to counter the argument that Bilichick is a good GM. What else should be assumed other than it takes perfection? Perhaps you should have resorted to a larger sample size?

QUOTE
Much like the Colts when you removed Manning.


I didn't remove Manning. The Colts GM did.
CT_Eagle
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 27 2015, 07:04 PM) *
My fucked up criteria for GMs is good drafting. He's not good at that small part of the job.


So drafting is a small part of the job and since, in you opinion, Bilichick is not good at it, he is not a good GM regardless of the effectiveness of his other GM duties? Are you sure perfection is not the standard?
For the record, Bilichick has done a good job drafting over the years.
CT_Eagle
Here are the starters on NE's offense this season.

WR Amendola - FA signing
WR LaFell - FA Signing
WR Slater - Drafted by NE
LT Cannon - Drafted by NE
LG Mason - Drafted by NE
C Andrews - Undrafted FA
RG Kline - Undrafted FA
RT Vollmer - Drafted by NE
QB Brady - Drafted by NE
TE Gronkowski - Drafted by NE
RB Blount - FA

That is a good amount of homegrown talent on offense, drafted by Bilichick. He went into the free agency pool to bring in the 2 of the Wrs and Blount. Andrews and Kline were signed as rookies.

This is only one seasons worth of offensive starters but it does not appear that Bilichick has a problem drafting players for his team.
mcnabbulous
I'll be honest, man. You give that offense to almost any other QB in football and they struggle, mightily. Belichick has been awful at drafting offensive skill position guys.

I heard the same shit about Polian when he was running the Colts. "He must be great, look at all their success!"

We saw what happened we when Manning when down with injury.
CT_Eagle
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 27 2015, 10:10 PM) *
I'll be honest, man. You give that offense to almost any other QB in football and they struggle, mightily. Belichick has been awful at drafting offensive skill position guys.

I heard the same shit about Polian when he was running the Colts. "He must be great, look at all their success!"

We saw what happened we when Manning when down with injury.



2008 is the only season that Brady missed significant time. He was injured in the season opener and missed the entire year. The Pats finished 11-5, with no Brady. There must have been more talent on the team than just Brady. I wonder how many of those players were drafted by NE.
Phits

mcnabbulous
QUOTE (CT_Eagle @ Nov 27 2015, 04:28 PM) *
2008 is the only season that Brady missed significant time. He was injured in the season opener and missed the entire year. The Pats finished 11-5, with no Brady. There must have been more talent on the team than just Brady. I wonder how many of those players were drafted by NE.

Yeah, the team without Tom Brady lost 5 more games than the one with him. Out of 16...

Randy Moss was the primary weapon on both teams. What an astute eye for talent that BB had to identify that diamond in the rough.
samaroo
What I'm getting out of this discussion is basically this: Culture can trump talent.
Eyrie
QUOTE (samaroo @ Nov 28 2015, 08:23 AM) *
What I'm getting out of this discussion is basically this: Culture can trump talent.

And as we saw with the "Dream Team", talent isn't always enough.

Much of Belichick's success has been built on identifying the correct mid-level players who will succeed in his system and provide the proper support to the stars rather than expecting the stars to carry the rest of the team. Both parts are needed, as we've found to our cost this season with the OL where injuries to Peters and a loss of form by Kelce have been compounded by a lack of talent at G and depth at T. Mathis was a good example of a journeyman who played at a higher level in the right system, and the failure to properly replace him or Herremans has hindered the entire offense. It's worth remembering that Herremans in his prime (now long past) provided solid depth at T for us.

CT_Eagle
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 28 2015, 08:56 AM) *
Yeah, the team without Tom Brady lost 5 more games than the one with him. Out of 16...

Randy Moss was the primary weapon on both teams. What an astute eye for talent that BB had to identify that diamond in the rough.


So we are back to perfection being necessary? 16 wins is the barometer? I am starting to think that you are just having a little fun with me.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (CT_Eagle @ Nov 28 2015, 06:51 AM) *
So we are back to perfection being necessary? 16 wins is the barometer? I am starting to think that you are just having a little fun with me.

No, 16 wins isn't the barometer. My point is, and always has been, that Tom Brady hides Belichick's flaws as both a coach and GM.

I think Belichick is a better coach than GM. He's a very good coach and an average talent evaluator. The responsibilities of both jobs makes it impossible to excel at both. He's not any better at doing it than others who have tried and failed before him.

Much like with Andy, people have a difficult time separating one from the other. Andy was also a very good coach and poor GM. He just didn't have Tom Brady to make up for his deficiencies.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2017 Invision Power Services, Inc.