ROFLOLO!!!Clutch doesnt lose to Eli twice and some cast off eagles backup.
I was calling for it all last offseason.... I was calling for it.....
eh, no.
Bill took 6 teams to superbowl wins with players few can name.
Brady just went to win 1 superbowl with a STACKED team with tons of big talent.
And all that talent was 7-9 the previous year. Brady could have carried any of 15 teams to the super bowl this year. NE has the worst set of skill position players outside of philly and Brady wasn't sticking around to see how far he could carry Bill and his defense. If you don't respect 7 rings, you don't respect the game.
Lol it's not even just Brady's play that makes the difference, it's the confidence he intstills in them. Just look at the post game interviews with the Bucs players and how they talk about Brady. He's the goatthey wouldnt have been 7-9 had Jameis not gave away 1000 turnovers.
Nearly any other QB would have had them well into the playoffs.
not even close. so many factors go into outcome that Brady going to an already talented team (who went out & acquired even more talent) and winning says nothing about Bill.
no doubt Brady raised the level of play around him moreso than any other FA QB they could have brought in but he learned about how the details matter from Bill not the other way round.
Also for those questioning Bill Belichicks greatness, he had to deal with a league high 8 players that opted out, which 3 I believe were starters. And went 7-9 with a team whose qb threw for 8tds and 10 ints on the season, not many coaches win that many games with that type of qb play, honestly most would have the number one pick if their qb had those numbers. Hell the Gardner Minshew threw for 16 tds and 5 ints and only started 9 games, and they have the number one pick in the draft
We were 1-4 with our starting qbWell let's see, Pats have their starting qb leave, they go 7-9. Cowboys lose theirs due to injury early in the season and go 6-10.
Could it be that losing your starting quarterback means your coaching can't do much?
We were 1-4 with our starting qb
Brady won a SB in his second year in the league. In the SB he threw for 145 yards, one touchdown. Great job, eh? Yeah it was all Brady....
Well let's see, Pats have their starting qb leave, they go 7-9. Cowboys lose theirs due to injury early in the season and go 6-10.
Could it be that losing your starting quarterback means your coaching can't do much?
Why in the world is it so hard to comprehend that it was both in NE?
this is a pretty level headed take. My issue with the entire argument is for most people, its either/or. And it wasn't. It was both. At times BB carried Brady; and at other times Brady carried BB.I mean obviously both guys are stone cold HOF locks. Belichick was an amazing team builder as GM as well as HC until about 2017, at which point he hit a terminal dry spell in multiple drafts and had some bad FA/trade moves.
The GM job to build the 2014-2017 teams was basically god tier. 2018 was already kind of running on fumes though but some amazing coaching on D pulled them through at the end. By 2019-2020 all the chickens had come home to roost with a depleted offense plus no cap space meaning they couldn't pay Brady AND give him weapons to make him want to play. Maybe he's slipping as GM, or maybe it was just a run of bad luck.
My bias is towards Brady simply because ultimately it's players that play the game. Without the players a gameplan is just a list of things that don't happen. But of course 2020 Brady is only the guy he in part because of Belichick, so the whole argument tends to go in circles.
Tom Brady took over a team that was 5-13 under Belichick and went 14-3 the rest of the season, including winning a little soiree we call "Super Bowl 36".Brady won a SB in his second year in the league. In the SB he threw for 145 yards, one touchdown. Great job, eh? Yeah it was all Brady....