Brady or Belicheat?

[Captain43Crash]

Who would you rather have in their prime, arguably the best HC of his era, or arguably the best QB of his era?

Without question, I take Belicheat.

Of course Brady plays the most important position, and does it extremely well, but bottom line, Brady like all great QB’s, only plays on one side of the ball.

Football is the ultimate team sport. So it should go without being said, coaching is extremely important to the success of the team. Belicheat prepares every facet of the game. A great HC, like Belicheat, consistently puts his players in positions, to make it easier, for them to make plays.

 

[Cebrin]

Who would you rather have in their prime, arguably the best HC of his era, or arguably the best QB of his era?

Without question, I take Belicheat.

Of course Brady plays the most important position, and does it extremely well, but bottom line, Brady like all great QB’s, only plays on one side of the ball.

Football is the ultimate team sport. So it should go without being said, coaching is extremely important to the success of the team. Belicheat prepares every facet of the game. A great HC, like Belicheat, consistently puts his players in positions, to make it easier, for them to make plays.

Can I have both?

 

[Yobwocs]

I mean..... Bledsoe was a good QB but he wasn't impossible to beat out. Brady didn't have to beat out Favre or Marino or anything. Brady is obviously a very good Quarterback, and it's quite possible he didn't really get his chance at Michigan and his lack of playing time could be why a 3rd round talent ordinarily fell all the way to the 6th round.

This reminds me of Dak Prescott in a way. While Dak played more than Brady ever did in college, he also wasn't supposed to ever be a 4th rounder. There was something about the way he was perceived. Maybe he wasn't seen as a true Quarterback or something.....but he obviously was much better than a 4th rounder, as we saw he was an instant success in the NFL. If you watched him in college this should've never been in doubt.

But let's be serious now. Belichick is way more valuable than Brady. It's not even close.

 

[Zekeats]

Why are we still doing this? It's not even close.

 

[Aerolithe_Lion]

Almost Every all time head coach who had sustained success in the nfl did so because he had an all time QB.

Vince Lombardi won all of his NFL championships with Bart Starr, none without. What did Bill Walsh win without Joe Montana? Chuck Knoll without Terry Bradshaw? Tom Landry was regular season successful after Staubach, but he didn’t exactly have a hall of fame career without him.

The guys who don’t get enough credit for never having all time QBs are Parcells and Gibbs. Both win during SF’s heyday, and Parcells went on to turn around 4 different franchises... all without even a HoF QB. Ironically they’re not viewed as highly as the other list, and it’s quite possibly because they never had that spotlight QB to prop up their reputation.

So the question is: is Joe Montana nothing without Walsh? Wouldn’t he have at least won 1, maybe even 2 rings without him? Remember he won 1 with George Seifert just as Troy won one with Switzer. Yes they’re the teams those coaches built, but they didn’t literally have to be there to coach them. Belichick is not a offensive coach; Brady would have likely been Brady without Belichick. But would Belichick have been Belichick without Brady? Bill Belichick has now been head coach for 8 seasons where he did not have Tom Brady starting 10+ games for him. He missed the playoffs in 7 of those seasons.

It’s entirely possible Bill Belichick is ringless if he never found Tom Brady. It is not possible Tom Brady has no hardware by 42 in any scenario. So yeah, Brady

 

[BourbonBalz]

Well, based on this past season........I mean one had a losing record and the other took a previously under .500 team to the title, so.....

They’re both obviously the best ever at their respective crafts, but given his longevity, Ill take Brady. Only one of the two has won a title without the other.

 

[TheSkaven]

It’s clearly Tom Brady, as evidenced by Belichick’s playoff record with and without him going back to Cleveland, and Brady’s ability to continue winning once he left.

I wanted Brady last year, which would have meant Gronk too. A Brady+Gronk Cowboys team in 2020 might very well have gone deep into the playoffs if not won it all.

 

[MyFairLady]

Brady is a God. Who would you rather have Lebron James or Tyronn Lue. Same question.

 

[nobody]

Almost Every all time head coach who had sustained success in the nfl did so because he had an all time QB.

Vince Lombardi won all of his NFL championships with Bart Starr, none without. What did Bill Walsh win without Joe Montana? Chuck Knoll without Terry Bradshaw? Tom Landry was regular season successful after Staubach, but he didn’t exactly have a hall of fame career without him.

The guys who don’t get enough credit for never having all time QBs are Parcells and Gibbs. Both win during SF’s heyday, and Parcells went on to turn around 4 different franchises... all without even a HoF QB. Ironically they’re not viewed as highly as the other list, and it’s quite possibly because they never had that spotlight QB to prop up their reputation.

So the question is: is Joe Montana nothing without Walsh? Wouldn’t he have at least won 1, maybe even 2 rings without him? Remember he won 1 with George Seifert just as Troy won one with Switzer. Yes they’re the teams those coaches built, but they didn’t literally have to be there to coach them. Belichick is not a offensive coach; Brady would have likely been Brady without Belichick. But would Belichick have been Belichick without Brady? Bill Belichick has now been head coach for 8 seasons where he did not have Tom Brady starting 10+ games for him. He missed the playoffs in 7 of those seasons.

It’s entirely possible Bill Belichick is ringless if he never found Tom Brady. It is not possible Tom Brady has no hardware by 42 in any scenario. So yeah, Brady

I sort of agree and would likely take Brady, but it also depends on what coach he'd be under. Some coaches would hamper him. I couldn't see Brady winning anything under someone like Garret.

 

[big dog cowboy]

Vince Lombardi won all of his NFL championships with Bart Starr, none without. What did Bill Walsh win without Joe Montana? Chuck Knoll without Terry Bradshaw? Tom Landry was regular season successful after Staubach, but he didn’t exactly have a hall of fame career without him.

Bill Belichick has now been head coach for 8 seasons where he did not have Tom Brady starting 10+ games for him. He missed the playoffs in 7 of those seasons.

It’s entirely possible Bill Belichick is ringless if he never found Tom Brady. It is not possible Tom Brady has no hardware by 42 in any scenario. So yeah, Brady

Wow, this is a really good post!

 

[EST_1986]

Brady is the best human to every laces up a pair of football cleats. Brady past his prime vs Belicheck in his.

 

[CATCH17]

It’s clearly Tom Brady, as evidenced by Belichick’s playoff record with and without him going back to Cleveland, and Brady’s ability to continue winning once he left.

I wanted Brady last year, which would have meant Gronk too. A Brady+Gronk Cowboys team in 2020 might very well have gone deep into the playoffs if not won it all.

I don’t agree with going back to Cleveland and throwing in his playoff record.

There is context being left out there and it’s be really dumbed down.. What he did in Cleveland was pretty good considering the circumstances and up until last year the Patriots have not missed a beat anytime Brady was out of the lineup.

Also, Brady ain’t winning squat without some of these bamboozlements that Belichick has put on opposing Offenses.

Brady is great but people acting like Belichick doesn’t matter is a joke.

 

[MyFairLady]

In Tom Brady's mind last season was 100% about answering this foolish question once and for all. I think we all know how it turned out. God tier QB won. Fat little cheater boy with idiot boy at QB total failure.

 

[JW82]

Last year showed us how they do when separated. Picking 15th, hoisting a Lombardi.

 

[Turk]

I don’t agree with going back to Cleveland and throwing in his playoff record.

There is context being left out there and it’s be really dumbed down.. What he did in Cleveland was pretty good considering the circumstances and up until last year the Patriots have not missed a beat anytime Brady was out of the lineup.

Also, Brady ain’t winning squat without some of these bamboozlements that Belichick has put on opposing Offenses.

Brady is great but people acting like Belichick doesn’t matter is a joke.

The slobbering over Brady is sickening. Put Brady under any NUMBER of coaches and he has no rings at all.

Both benefited immensely from the others presence. Now BB might be done. It is possible; pretty much every single great coach in history flamed out sooner or later. But to try and claim Brady was the major single factor just shows WHO REALLY KNOWS FOOTBALL and who is just a big mouth on the internet.

 

[G2]

Brady went to a handpicked roster. Bill had to rebuild, with no money and a bunch of players that opted out. Brady is great, but I'm going with Bill on this one.

 

[jazzcat22]

Brady-Cheat.

 

[CATCH17]

Last year showed us how they do when separated. Picking 15th, hoisting a Lombardi.

So we don't factor in Brady going to a loaded team that got even more loaded after he signed vs Belichick who had a bad roster with some of his stars opting out?

Didn't a lot of you agree that Brady was done and should retire after watching him in his final season in New England under those same circumstances?

And nobody can say i'm anti Brady because I was the guy on here saying let Dak walk and sign Brady to a 2 year deal and avoid the awful Dak deal.

 

[CATCH17]

Wow, this is a really good post!

It wasn't a good post. It was a really dumbed down way to look at it.

Heck he went 11-5 in one of the seasons he didn't make the playoffs.

 

[John813]

Last year I'm sure sealed the deal for some but I think I'll wait it out to see how this year plays out.

The Bucs were a good team with a terrible QB in Winston. Going from Winston to Brady was the final piece.
Years of high draft picks, with some success and a trio of receivers and TEs was the perfect landing spot for Brady.

The Pats had a handful of opt outs and one offseason to "replace" Brady. It wasn't like it was the same team minus Brady. And having to settle for Cam broken Newton stifled the offense.

I would take Bill over Brady cause Bill would instill a football atmosphere in valley Ranch not seen since Bill Parcells and would mean Jerry took a backseat in football operations to a certain degree.