Who's more responsible for the Patriots success, Brady or Belichick?

[William Lee]

9 minutes ago, NJerseypaint said:

Without Bill, Brady doesn't beat the top scoring offenses of our time. Mostly because he plays offense.

Wrong. Belichick defense was never able to stop balanced top offense. Peyton had no trouble to score against his defense once he started throwing to his 2nd tier receivers.

BTW, in SB against Bills, it was offense who played 40 minutes and won the game, not defense.

Against Rams, if the coach had given the balls to Marshall faulks, Pat's would have had no chance.

And his defense stopped Chiefs for 8 minutes, completely collapsed in 2nd half.

Belichick is great at taking away your best weapons, which is good enough in regular seasons against average offense and QBs.

Read my post about what makes Brady special and how he made Belichick.

[x0x]

It's 70-30 Belichick.

There's actually very few QBs that maintain despite coaching changes.

Montana, Warner, Favre, Marino, Peyton, Rivers, Moon and probably a few I'm forgetting are the exceptions. Even still, the peak years for some of those guys were under a particular coach. 

Then you have supporting cast. Great players minimize coach's impact. This is another notch on Belichick's belt. Gronkowski, Law, Samuel and Moss are arguably the only independent talents along with Brady that he's had.

Some years, Brady bailed Bill out but there's enough evidence to suggest Belichick is the greater impact. Whether you have 2008 Matt Cassell, 2016 four game QB-less or the many pedestrian playoff games by Brady the team still won.

Now, do you have 9 Super Bowls? I'll say no, but there's little to indicate they'd have 0 appearances. People now feed the myth that Brady saved Belichick in 2001 but I doubt he would have been fired understanding the Bledsoe situation. And even if he had or 2002 didn't work, Bill would have found work and made a name. 

[William Lee]

2 hours ago, William Lee said:

Brady. Without Brady, Belichick would have accomplished nothing.

1. Belichick changed the system in 2007, turned Brady's "taking what is given" to a system that was like Peyton's, a formula to lose in playoff.
2. Belichick didn't start "finding gold among stones" until after 2014 season, after he saw the emergence of Julian Edelmen. If he had started recruiting players like James White in 2007, Pats would have won at least 2 more SB.

People don't know what makes Brady special, so claim it must be Belichick, like earth must be flat because he can't see earth is round.

Here is what makes Brady is special:

"THROW THE BALLS SO QUICK THAT WHEN A DEFENDER OR DEFENDERS REACT, IT IS ALREADY TOO LATE". 

 

1. Watch this play, the first pass by Brady in SB, @6;35, ht tps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5HTJQE2BLBo&t=412s  IF Brady had thrown just 1/10th of a second later, there would be no YAC.
2. Watch this play, 4th and 3, @6:24, ht tps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNXUwjEO5bY If Kirk Cousin had thrown 1/10th of a second quicker, it would be 1st down.
3. @:051 in this video, ht tps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oBwrVOgNNsk&t=55s , Brady KNEW the middle field was open, and ANTICIPATED James White would make the cut. That is why he could throw just a tiny tiny bit quicker, and Jets defense was one step slower. Result?  an easy TD for James White. Brady does this every game, you people just assume his WR get open or some play designs by Belichick, never think that if Brady had thrown 1/10 or 2/10 of a second later, they won't be wide open.

That is why dink n dunk becomes such powerful system under Brady; that is why lot of his WR becomes nobody after going to other teams; that is why Belichick can try "find gold among stones"; that is why no other teams can copycat what Brady has done. That is why Brady's offense could score 380 pts before 2007 with WR from streets, no other QB could have done that.

 

 

Brady made Belichick.

Kindly stop "earth must be flat because I can't see it is round".

How can anyone believe that it is good for the team to change receivers like revolving doors. It is stupid of coaches to do that!!! Belichick can afford the risk because he has Brady.

[43M]

10 minutes ago, William Lee said:

Debunk my post about what makes Brady special.

A necessary condition for a team to become a dynasty is that the offense can score with cheap receivers. I showed you that it is Brady who turn those receivers into playmakers.

It is beyond me that soneone would naively believe that Belichick designs some plays that others can't copy. If one coach can't, then team can hire 20 coaches to figure it out. It is utterly foolish to think so, not mention that the system obviously changed over last 15 years.

First off, there is nothing in that post to debunk.    Literally your only argument in that post is "Brady gets rid of the ball quick".  Nothing you said even begins to prove that Brady would have the same success without Belichick or that Belichick wouldnt have success without Brady.

Secondly, Im not saying Brady isnt very good, or that Belichick is the only reason for his success.   I dont believe that at all.    I do, however, completely believe that Belichick has gotten the most out of him and helped mold him into what he is today.

Finally, the bolded is just ridiculous and nonsensical.     Who cares about copying plays?    If you dont know how or when to use said plays, they dont matter.   Belichick is a master at it.    His gameplanning, playcalling and ability to build a team around Brady is just as big of a reason for the Pats success as Brady is.

[43M]

1 minute ago, William Lee said:

Brady made Belichick.

Youre coming across as incredibly insecure.     

You dont need to bump your own post from a previous page, especially when it doesnt prove you right one bit.

[MikeT14]

I really want to see Belichick post Brady.

[William Lee]

6 minutes ago, FourThreeMafia said:

First off, there is nothing in that post to debunk.    Literally your only argument in that post is "Brady gets rid of the ball quick".  Nothing you said even begins to prove that Brady would have the same success without Belichick or that Belichick wouldnt have success without Brady.

Secondly, Im not saying Brady isnt very good, or that Belichick is the only reason for his success.   I dont believe that at all.    I do, however, completely believe that Belichick has gotten the most out of him and helped mold him into what he is today.

Finally, the bolded is just ridiculous and nonsensical.     Who cares about copying plays?    If you dont know how or when to use said plays, they dont matter.   Belichick is a master at it.    His gameplanning, playcalling and ability to build a team around Brady is just as big of a reason for the Pats success as Brady is.

Wrong again.

A LB is great because he is quick.

A receiver is average because he can't create throwing windows that last long enough for his QB.

So without a QB who can throw ahead of defender reaction, the receivers won't make big impact.

So with other QB, the offense simply won't be able to score enough.

There is nothing a coach can do to change it.

[LieutenantGains]

Ernie Adams.

[43M]

2 minutes ago, William Lee said:

Wrong again.

A LB is great because he is quick.

A receiver is average because he can't create throwing windows that last long enough for his QB.

So without a QB who can throw ahead of defender reaction, the receivers won't make big impact.

So with other QB, the offense simply won't be able to score enough.

There is nothing a coach can do to change it.

Okay, its becoming clear you have no clue what youre talking about.

Your only rebuttal is saying "wrong" to everyone who disagrees with you, and again, you havent even begun to prove anything, despite acting like you have.

If you want to blindly believe Brady made Belichick, so be it....but the only person believing the "flat earth theory" example you're pushing, is you.  

[Buckweath]

Definitly Belichick. No doubt in my mind.

 

[rfournier103]

Tough to say, really. 

Paul Brown had Otto Graham. Vince Lombardi had Bart Starr. Tom Landry had Roger Staubach. Chuck Noll had Terry Bradshaw. Bill Walsh had Joe Montana. 

How would any of these coaches fared without their star quarterbacks?  How great would these quarterbacks have been without their coaches?  

Every now and again a good coach wins a Super Bowl with a good quarterback, and a good quarterback can get a decent coach over the hump once in a while. SUSTAINED success comes when the right coach and the right quarterback come together on the right team. 

So, I guess my answer has to be that it’s a team effort - just like the rest of the game of football. 

[William Lee]

14 minutes ago, FourThreeMafia said:

Okay, its becoming clear you have no clue what youre talking about.

Your only rebuttal is saying "wrong" to everyone who disagrees with you, and again, you havent even begun to prove anything, despite acting like you have.

If you want to blindly believe Brady made Belichick, so be it....but the only person believing the "flat earth theory" example you're pushing, is you.  

Lol, do you know what makes Brady special? You don't know because you can't see.

Even if it is Belichick, there must be something special about Brady, that is common sense.

and you make a comment without knowing what makes Pats offense work.

Are you claiming that opponent defenses have to leave some spaces for Brady to throw to because Belichick is standing across fields?

[JAF-N72EX]

30 minutes ago, William Lee said:

Lol, do you know what makes Brady special? You don't know because you can't see.

Even if it is Belichick, there must be something special about Brady, that is common sense.

I don't think anyone is arguing that Brady is not special. 

31 minutes ago, William Lee said:

Are you claiming that opponent defenses have to leave some spaces for Brady to throw to because Belichick is standing across fields?

By this same logic, Brady's WR's should get more credit than Brady because Brady is not the one actually catching the balls.

It sounds to me like you are confusing the difference between a coaches scheme and game plan vs player execution.

Just because Belichick is not the one actually out there throwing the ball does not mean that he shouldn't get credit for the offenses success.

Belichick is great at bringing in players who fit his team strategy and getting the most out of them by better utilizing their strengths and putting those guys in the best position as possible to succeed. No other coach in the league is as good as he is in this apsect. Nor is there any coach in the league who is as good as he is at game day preparation, game planning and play-calling.

Belichick puts the game plan together and asks his guys to execute it on Sunday. This includes Brady. It just so happens that Brady is also great at what he does by executing the game plan better than most QB's, if not all.

 

 

[BleedTheClock]

Bill, but I'm still calling Brady the GOAT QB.

[William Lee]

51 minutes ago, JustAnotherFan said:

I don't think anyone is arguing that Brady is not special. 

By this same logic, Brady's WR's should get more credit than Brady because Brady is not the one actually catching the balls.

It sounds to me like you are confusing the difference between a coaches scheme and game plan vs player execution.

Just because Belichick is not the one actually out there throwing the ball does not mean that he shouldn't get credit for the offenses success.

Belichick is great at bringing in players who fit his team strategy and getting the most out of them by better utilizing their strengths and putting those guys in the best position as possible to succeed. No other coach in the league is as good as he is in this apsect. Nor is there any coach in the league who is as good as he is at game day preparation, game planning and play-calling.

Belichick puts the game plan together and asks his guys to execute it on Sunday. This includes Brady. It just so happens that Brady is also great at what he does by executing the game plan better than most QB's, if not all.

 

 

Read my post with 3 links. Watch the last one.

Edelmen is great, he deserves HOF status, but do you think he can gain extra yds after catching a short pass if he has not started the forward momentum when he is being tackled? the difference? His QB throws the balls 1/10th or 2/10th of a second quicker

He needs his QB throwing to him quickly so he has the space to manuenver, just like Reggie Wayne needed Peyton to great.

Belichick has nothing to do with the quickness. His game plan won't work if his QB can't throw 1/10th of a second quicker. That is why no other team can copycat what Pat's offense has done.