Jump to content
Starless

Predict the Patriots' future post-Tom Brady

Recommended Posts

37 minutes ago, Trentwannabe said:

I'm really not sure what your point is here. 

I already said that having stable ownership helps, but that doesn't guarantee a successful HC hire. 

I am pretty sure that the NE owner will replace BB with a solid new HC. Stable ownership usually means they are very good at spotting FO talent!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Jakuvious said:

If Belichek remains post-Brady, they'll remain a threat then, but it's difficult to say how much of a threat. We don't really have much of a history of them drafting and grooming a high end prospect at QB, so it's hard to say what they could do, and even then it's a crap shoot half the time. And the QB that replaced Brady will set a bit of a ceiling and floor for the team, as that position does for everyone.

If Belichek retires as well, then it's completely a question mark. Coaching hires are about as much of a crap shoot as drafted QBs, so they could stay the course as the Pats or get closer to the Browns. It's pretty much impossible to know IMO. Maybe you get it right like the 49ers with Young and Seifert, or maybe you go the way of the Packers post-Lombardi and Starr and spend a decade or two on failed coaches and QBs until you get it right again. Who knows? Kind of futile to the debate how their future will go when we don't even know whose future it will be.

I agree on one thing, it will depend on how fast they can find a replacement franchise QB. Nobody wins in the NFL without one. However, there are potentially 7 or 8 1st round talented QB's in the 2013 draft, so NE may find one out of that group and not miss a beat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Starless said:

McDaniels and Patricia have been viewed as prime HC candidates elsewhere for two years in a row.

lol

tim-tebow-2010-25-draft-pick_u-L-F3WNF60

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, lancerman said:

1. Lot's of people stopped the unstoppable Bills. Parcell's gets credit for those Super Bowls unless you want to credit Romeo Crennel with shocking the world by stopping the Greatest Show on Turf. By the way Romeo Crennel HOF coach there. Josh McDaniels was offensive coordinator. He was the offensive coordinator for what many people consider the best offense ever. Tanked as a head coach. And in that case you can say his HC was actually a defensive guy so he had more autonomy on the offense.

2. This shows an astounding lack of knowledge of Browns history. The Cleveland Browns pre going to Baltimore were not the trash franchise that people like to pretend they were when they like to go "ZOMG Bill Belichick got Cleveland a playoff win". They won plenty of playoff games and made the playoffs plenty of times prior. 

IN FACT: In the Super Bowl era prior to Bill Belichick becoming the Browns head coach the team as a whole only had 7 seasons with losing records. Belichick by himself had 4. So Belichick accounted for a third of the Brown's losing seasons in the Super Bowl era prior to Art Modell moving. In fact aside from two transitional coaches (Forest Gregg with two seasons, and Jim Shofner with one season) Belichick actually had the WORST win percentage in Browns's history of any longterm coach in the Super Bowl era. So this idea that because Belichick won a playoff game he was some super hero who did the impossible and was beloved in Cleveland is revisionist AT BEST. He was the worst long term coach in Brown's history when he left. By a substantial margin too. And the fans hated him for dropping Bernie Kosar. 

So I have NO CLUE where this idea that getting one playoff win in Cleveland (who had a playoff win literally two years before Belichick got there) is some feat that should be defiied in the face of 4 losing records and the worst longterm win percentage in franchise history up to that point. Yeah if you compare them to what is essentially a completely different team that started from scratch because everyone moved to Baltimore that was under completely different leadership that got the benefit of keeping an old name, then yeah. But that's not the team Belichick coached. 

3. Bill Parcell's set up Belichick as his successor on the Jets. And that owner was basically out the door anyways. Belichick was largely regarded as a great defensive coordinator who failed as a head a coach. Kraft was the only owner in the league who was willing to give up a draft pick at the time. Ironically, Art Modell was telling Kraft that hiring Belichick would be the biggest mistake in his life. And just for posterity sake this would be at a time where Modell just successfully moved his franchise to Baltimore and was going to win the Super Bowl the following year.

 

It takes an astonishing lack of history to get to t he point you got to.

Not a NE fan, but I would say you are stretching the truth by quite a bit. BB probably had an awful lot to do with Parcels winning his SB's, BB was successful in Cleveland and that is a simple fact and then went on to NE and dominated pro football for a decade.

I am a Brown's fan and BB rebuilt that team into a serious contender that went on to win a SB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, steadypimpin said:

What dynasty? The dynasty of being terrible???

You know the NFL existed before the Super Bowl, Right?

14 hours ago, wwhickok said:

When Brady retires I think BB does as well. I expect them to remain competitive while also dropping off considerably at the QB position (simply based on what they currently have behind TB at the position).

I suspect several of the higher paid players will find themselves on new teams for somewhat of a NE rebuild.

Pretty much this. 

14 hours ago, Slateman said:

An 8-10 win season, followed by a 9-11 win season with them finishing strong. After that, they go back to dominating.

I highly doubt this. What I expect to see is them gradually decline little by little for 3-4 years, then they go through a genuine rebuild. Their first coach to take over Bellichik won't be the long term answer and they'll hire someone else after rather than improving year-to-year they regress. Losing Brady will hurt more immediately, losing Belichik will hurt more over time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Starless said:

This is in no way to suggest that I think the end of the Brady era might be upon us. But it's definitely something that's been on my mind ever since the Garoppolo trade. Clearly the team held out hope that they could keep both QBs until the very end, and Garoppolo's play through two starts in San Francisco has validated the concern of many Patriots fans that the team basically gave away their QBotF. Further compounding matters is the earlier trade of Jacoby Brissett, who, despite facing the type of struggles one would expect from a raw 2nd year QB playing behind a terrible offensive line, has shown that he at least belongs in the NFL. 

So I wonder how other fan bases see things playing out when the day finally comes and Brady decides to leave.

Reasons for pessimism:

-No Garoppolo or Brissett, so the future QB situation is a complete unknown.

-Track record of drafting QBs between Brady and Garoppolo has not been good (best pick was Matt Cassel, who was a 7th round flier; other high picks were Kevin O'Connell and Ryan Mallett, who were disasters).

-Belichick will be 66 next season and might go even before Brady does.

-No guarantee Belichick will be able to pass the team off to one of his preferred successors, as McDaniels and Patricia have been viewed as prime HC candidates elsewhere for two years in a row.

-Rest of the roster isn't all that great right now. Especially the defensive front-7.

 

Reasons for optimism:

-Netting that 2nd rounder in the Garoppolo trade means they can go after a QB pretty early in the 2018 draft, which is looking like a strong QB class (2019 looks solid as well, at least at the moment).

-Belichick and Brady almost certainly won't be retiring before next season, which means that if they do take a QB high in the next draft he can have at least a year of learning at the feet of the best.

-The other core talent on the roster is still relatively young and there aren't many big contracts currently eating up cap space so they have the freedom to spend for the next few seasons to bolster the roster and make the transition to the next QB smoother.

-Even if McDaniels and Patricia leave, there are a lot of other assistant coaches on the roster who have been in the system a long time and can be promoted from within readily to preserve continuity.

-Solid, stable ownership.

Jimmy Garoppolo is still an unproven QB, and Matt Cassell turned out to be the player most thought he was exiting USC. It will be difficult to have postseason success without a franchise QB, especially since Brady was the central reason for that success. As the Patriots have said many times, had they had an inkling of Brady's potential, he would not have been picked in the sixth round. But the organization is strong, and the Steelers have proven you can have elite success with different head coaches. And New England's weak division should remain that way for some time, with no worthy challengers, the Pats should continue to benefit for years.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, HorizontoZenith said:

Won 10 games without Brady in 2008.  Has had a top 10 scoring defense in all but 4 years since 2003.  Never finished below 19th in points allowed.  Won a Super Bowl with a first year starting second year 6th round backup QB.  Is the head coach and the GM of the team.  Went 3-1 when Brady was suspended.  Quit being a **** and instead of crapping on other opinions, back up your own or keep it to yourself.  I'm frequently a **** on this site, but one thing I don't do is insult an opinion without backing up my own.  This kind of crap statement is the worst thing about this site.  I can take criticism of my opinions if somebody has the ability or brain to back up the criticism. 

 

And that year we had a joke schedule and Cassel inherited a team that went 16-0 and, at the time, the highest scoring offense of all time. We also missed the playoffs for the first time since 2002. Had Brady not gotten injured, we likely would have gotten HFA.

As for 2016, Garappolo played very well for 5 quarters and has since proven to be a legit QB. He gets injured in Miami and Brissett nearly allows them to come back. We then shut out Brock Osweiler before getting shut out in Buffalo. Brady returns and later on 28-3 happens. 28-3 would never happen with Polo and Brissett.

Belichick values Brady so much he practically laughed at John Lynch when Lynch asked about a Brady trade: http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/11/05/how-john-lynch-reportedly-tried-to-trade-for-tom-brady/

My overall reaction to this post:

Image result for bill belichick eye roll gif

Edited by everlong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, biletnikoff said:

who may well die soon. I mean,you know,that whole age catches up with you thing.

Yes, none of  us are getting out of here alive...   ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MWil23 said:

@lancerman

As per usual 

Anyone else’s point 

 

 

Your head 

 

I forgot more about Browns and NFL history brushing my teeth this morning than you’ll ever know.

LOL at your hot takes before you were even born.

Then you would no that in the Super Bowl era Belichick had the worst resume of any Browns head coach before the move. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO, if Brady retires, he does have a very sore ACL which may never heal perfectly, BB will retire as well and even if NE finds another franchise QB quickly and a solid HC, the rest of the team will likely have to undergo a rebuild, which can take 3 years to accomplish provided everything goes well, before they will be a serious SB contender again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

maybe we'll actually have a good draft position for the first time in, 15 (?) years? So, we'll have to have a couple of poor seasons - be in a position to draft an actual top 5 running back for once, a top WR and some pass rushers. BB makes us into a solid unit with barely passable players most of the time. We rarely enjoy the services of a Le'veon Bell, a Luke Keuchley, a DeAndre Hopkins etc. Only one we really have is Gronk, and that's only because people passed on his injuries.

Don't get me wrong, I'd never swap BB for some elite talent, but it may come to just that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, LaserFocus said:

Jimmy Garoppolo is still an unproven QB, and Matt Cassell turned out to be the player most thought he was exiting USC. It will be difficult to have postseason success without a franchise QB, especially since Brady was the central reason for that success. As the Patriots have said many times, had they had an inkling of Brady's potential, he would not have been picked in the sixth round. But the organization is strong, and the Steelers have proven you can have elite success with different head coaches. And New England's weak division should remain that way for some time, with no worthy challengers, the Pats should continue to benefit for years.  

I don't think it is a coincidence Garoppolo and Cassell looked very good when they filled in for Brady.  Jimmy looks promising in SF but Matt hasn't performed as well as he did in 2008 with other clubs.   IMO it is BB who makes NE the force it has been since 2000.  The Pats might struggle for a while after Bill retires.

Edited by Pugger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Iamcanadian said:

Not a NE fan, but I would say you are stretching the truth by quite a bit. BB probably had an awful lot to do with Parcels winning his SB's, BB was successful in Cleveland and that is a simple fact and then went on to NE and dominated pro football for a decade.

I am a Brown's fan and BB rebuilt that team into a serious contender that went on to win a SB.

Yeah he did have a lot to do with the Giants winning Super Bowls. That's irrelevant because there's more very successful coordinators who failed as a HC. Belichick was regarded as a great defensive coordinator but not a great HC. 

Belichick had one winning season out of 4 on the Browns. That's not a good head coach. Two years before Belichick got there they were in the playoffs and capable of winning games in it. Belichick has the worst win percentage as a Browns coach outside of two guys who didn't last more than one and two seasons, before they disbanded and came back. There's no barometer where you can look at what he did and what the Brown's history to that point was and say he was successful. 

If you want to say what he did led to the Ravens winning a Super Bowl, well it was 5 years removed and 3 losing seasons and one .500 season and two coaching changes before they did that. Oh and not a single linebacker or defensive back on that defense were there when Belichick coached the Browns. Only two defensive players were. Larry Webster and Rob Burnett. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, tonyto36 said:

To be fair, Boston in the non-winter months is pretty good.

Girls on the cape, man. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's happening quicker than we realize, I get the feeling Brady will retire within the next year or 2. As to what the Patriots should do. They should draft a QB early in 2018, have him learn behind Brady next year and he'll be ready to go for 2019.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×