Bill Belichick's new book.... Parcells diss

[Mike 1967]

Put yourself in Belichick's shoes.

You toiled for years. Your boss taught you a good deal about how to be a head coach. However, your hard work was never recognized. But the boss got the credit. Then you strike out on your own and accomplish things at a level and even above what your boss did.

It appears everyone wants Belichick to bow to Coach Parcells' genius, just like it is a given that he taught him everything he knows, which is making a statement knowing half the story.

I don't question another man's motives where and when to give credit, particularly where the waters are as muddied as these.

I hear what you are saying....but....lets be completely honest here.

If you really want the respect you are looking for.....then you need to give your target audience a little more credit than that.

To completely leave out any mention of Bills contributions is so obvious ! And it begs the question as too why it was left out.

If Billichek wants respect, then he should have man'd up to the table and laid it out like it is. Giving a measure of credit to Bill would not have undermined the legacy he has been creating for himself. But he has done completely the opposite by leaving out any positive reference to what will be a HOF coach.

 

[mr.jameswoods]

Belichek has done a great job with New England, but a lot of what he's learned came from the Tuna. If things were so bad with Bill, why would he go back to Bill in New England after failing in Cleveland and then follow him yet again to New York?

This is just Belichek's ego flashing-- nothing to get crazy about. What coach didn't/doesn't have an ego? You have to in order to exert your personality on the game.

I agree with this post. Of course Parcells taught him a thing or two. At the same time, Bellichek taught Parcells a thing or two as well. So we can't pretend that Parcells taught Bellichek everything simply because he was his boss. We all know assistants who are better than their head coaches. For years, everyone said Andy Reid was a better coach than Mike Holmgren. Look what Reid has done in Philly and look what Holmgren has done in Seattle. No one would argue Holmgren is a better coach than Reid. Even Brett Favre stated that Andy Reid was the genius behind the Packers' offense. Everyone knew Marvin Lewis was the brains behind that Ravens Superbowl despite Billick being the head coach. What did the great Mike Ditka accomplish without Buddy Ryan? George Seifert didn't look impressive without Mike Shanahan as his oc.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

When the Patriots played us in 2003, Bellichek just put on a clinic and exposed Parcells. And that was during Parcell's 10-6 season. I didn't get any indication that Parcells taugh Bellichek a thing or two. Those schemes didn't look like anything Parcells was implementing with Dallas at the time.

Dallas lost that game 16-0 at New England. New England had twice the talent and was in their FOURTH year with the same coaching staff.

If you want to get into the guy that really exposed that 2003 team, it was Monte Kiffin followed by Norv Turner. Belichick really didn't do anything except for have a far better team.

Rich.......

 

[Texas33]

Browns fans are still wondering why he became a *genius* in New England and not Cleveland.....

 

[Alexander]

I hear what you are saying....but....lets be completely honest here.

If you really want the respect you are looking for.....then you need to give your target audience a little more credit than that.

Who is Belichick marketing this book to? Dallas fans? New York fans? New England fans?

Let's be even more honest here. If Coach Parcells were not the coach of the Dallas Cowboys none, and I mean, none, of the emotional outpouring that is in this thread would be here. Nobody would care. But since it is a perceived snub to our coach, let the fur fly.

If Billichek wants respect, then he should have man'd up to the table and laid it out like it is. Giving a measure of credit to Bill would not have undermined the legacy he has been creating for himself. But he has done completely the opposite by leaving out any positive reference to what will be a HOF coach.

I completely disagree. If his motive is to distance himself, then I don't blame him a bit. There are very few times that he is mentioned in conversation in conjunction with Coach Parcells. And if it is so blatantly obvious, wouldn't it be complete overkill for him to ramble on and on about what an influence Parcells was? There is no reason to submerge himself more in the shadows that he has most assuredly tried to emerge from.

Nobody said he had to be classy. He is trying to sell a book.

 

[burmafrd]

We were exposed as a weak team by both tampa and NE- and TAMPA was first. So who exposed us? BB did nothing but copy what Tampa did. And one can also make the point that Charlie and Romeo had a lot to do with it. Is it any coincidence that thet Pats have looked so weak this year? Sure they have had some injuries, but does that explain it?

 

[Mike 1967]

Why does that speak volumes? That's just your interpretation. Sure, I see where you are coming from. You could see it as him being jealous or envious of Parcells and deliberately fails to give him any credit to spite him.

Or maybe, Bellichik is just being honest and doesn't feel indebted to providing Parcells credit simply because he was his boss for several years.

When the Patriots played us in 2003, Bellichek just put on a clinic and exposed Parcells. And that was during Parcell's 10-6 season. I didn't get any indication that Parcells taugh Bellichek a thing or two. Those schemes didn't look like anything Parcells was implementing with Dallas at the time.

Parcells is a HOF coach. And to claim that you learned nothing of value from a HOF coach speaks volumes. Some things are not difficult to interpret.

I beg to differ with you on the "clinic" that Bellichek "exposed" Parcells with.

I would not call 12-0 a clinic.

Especially in light of the fact of the talent levels between those two rosters. Following that game I was suprised that we were actually in that game. In my opinion it showed exactly the opposite picture that you are trying to paint

 

[AtlCB]

Parcells has not shown he can be dominat without Bellichik.

You could say the same thing about Belichick without Charlie Weiss and Romeo Crennel. Let's face it - the Patriots aren't exactly burning up the league this year. They are 4-3 and only have a 1 game lead in one of the league's worst divisions. You might as well put them at 4-4, since they play the Colts this week. The Patriots have not looked like a superbowl team at all this season. They were trounced by San Diego and looked bad in losses to Denver and Carolina. Their only quality win came against Pittsburgh (I do not consider a win over the Vick-less Falcons a quality win). They have only one win by 7 points or more and have three losses by 7 points or more.

 

[Mike 1967]

Dallas lost that game 16-0 at New England. New England had twice the talent and was in their FOURTH year with the same coaching staff.

If you want to get into the guy that really exposed that 2003 team, it was Monte Kiffin followed by Norv Turner. Belichick really didn't do anything except for have a far better team.

Rich.......

Exactly ... I just read your reply after posting mine.

My translation and perception following that game was exactly the same.


And regardless......even if Billichek had schooled Bill....it does not answer the question at hand.

Why would Billichek not give one iota of credit to Bill ? Am I expected to believe that Billichek learned ZERO from Bill ?

 

[Alexander]

So far the only thing I've seen about Parcells is that he said they had contrasting styles and because of that Parcells didnt really influence his coaching career.

So is the rest of the book completely devoid of any of the credit that he owes Coach Parcells or have you not finished it yet?

 

[Qwickdraw]

Would anyone read Mike Tice's book?

Yes because I'll bet it has nude centerfolds in it and a coupon for free beer in the back.

 

[Alexander]

Would anyone read Mike Tice's book?

They publish books written in fingerpaint?

 

[MapleLeaf]

...route is to keep your opinions to yourself. The league, the coaches, the staff and the fans are a fairly closed community. It's best not to expose yourself.

 

[NovaCowboy]

So is the rest of the book completely devoid of any of the credit that he owes Coach Parcells or have you not finished it yet?

\

Havent finished it yet but just glancing through the final chapters they are mainly dedicated to players who he's been associated with.

 

[Zman5]

I would have no problem with him saying they had contrasting styles.

But to say Bill had no influence on him is just silly.

Even if Bill jr decided to do MANY things directly opposite of the Tuna because of contrasting styles...that is still influencing.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

We were exposed as a weak team by both tampa and NE- and TAMPA was first. So who exposed us? BB did nothing but copy what Tampa did.

Here's what happened.

In the first game of the year against Atlanta, Wade Phillips put 8 in the box and blitzed Quincy Carter heavily. Everybody thought Phillips was a genius for doing so, but in reality Carter played decent that game and beat the Falcons from time to time with the deep ball. The team just had a lot of mental errors that hamstringed them in the game.

Other teams followed suit and failed miserably. Mainly because Carter was very good against the blitz since he threw a great deep ball, there was speed at WR (Glenn, Galloway, and Bryant) and Hambrick was superb against picking up the blitz.

Dallas was 5-1 going into the Tampa Bay game. Kiffin devised a game plan where they would sit their LB's deep for most of the game and make Dallas beat them with the running game and the short passes. As we know, Hambrick stunk and Carter was lousy with the short stuff. It also didn't help that we didn't have a possession WR either.

After that, Dallas went 5-5 the rest of the year.

Against Miami Norv Turner showed that you can have to pound the ball up the middle and throw the ball deep since the Dallas CB's (Mario Edwards and Newman the rookie) had problems with the deep ball.

What's so odd is that the New England game was pretty close for the most part and didn't get out of reach until midway through the 4th quarter. New England got a big score off of a questionable pass interference call on Newman, but other than that didn't move the ball very well.

Despite Belichick and staff being in their 4th year with the Pats versus Parcells being in the 1st year with the Cowboys and with 1/2 the talent, Dallas was able to keep it close for the most part.


Rich......

 

[NovaCowboy]

He does talk about Troy Aikman a bit and about his quest to find a game manager in that mold. Believes Brady is every bit as good.

 

[Alexander]

What's so odd is that the New England game was pretty close for the most part and didn't get out of reach until midway through the 4th quarter. New England got a big score off of a questionable pass interference call on Newman, but other than that didn't move the ball very well.

Despite Belichick and staff being in their 4th year with the Pats versus Parcells being in the 1st year with the Cowboys and with 1/2 the talent, Dallas was able to keep it close for the most part......

And we had a great chance to win because we played conservatively. Our problem was that Hambrick got stuffed on the 4th down and Carter threw costly interceptions.

 

[ddh33]

I think Belichick is a great coach. But given the choice, I'd take Parcells every time.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

And we had a great chance to win because we played conservatively. Our problem was that Hambrick got stuffed on the 4th down and Carter threw costly interceptions.

One INT wasn't Carter's fault as it hit Witten in the hands and popped out into Ty Law. The other INT came when Carter had to force the issue and the game was pretty much out of reach at that point. Carter played excellent in the first half. Dat Nguyen was phenomenal the entire game.


Rich.......