Jump to content

NFL 2016 Week 2: extending the mustache ride in LA


DanteGabriel

Recommended Posts

Just now, Tywin et al. said:

Why are we in that grouping? Ponder was a bust, but the others weren't:

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/play-index/draft-finder.cgi?request=1&year_min=1961&year_max=2016&draft_round_min=1&draft_round_max=30&draft_slot_min=1&draft_slot_max=500&pick_type=overall&team_id=min&pos=qb&college_id=all&conference_id=any&show=all&order_by=default

I really liked Teddy, and Culpepper was beasting until his knee went out too. Frankly we haven't drafted many QBs in the higher rounds, and the results seem fairly mixed.

RGIII was beasting out until his knee went out too. I'm looking at teams that haven't developed young guys into franchise players for whatever reason. Tavaris, Ponder and sadly Teddy is enough to get you on that list. I'd count the Chiefs too but they don't even try to develop their own anymore.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, DanteGabriel said:

Also: have the Cardinals been respectable for long enough now that people have mostly forgotten how consistently bad they were 15 or 20 years ago? We're only ten years removed from the "crown their asses" rant, right?

Thats a tough one to judge. Their record over the past eight years, 2008-2015 with 2008 being the year they went to the SB, was 71-57. However almost half of their wins during that eight year period have come in the past three seasons. Remove the past three years, where they went 34-14, and their record ends up at 37-43 . In my opinion they would need to replicate the success of the last three years before I'd be willing to definitively say yes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

I think that's the thing about him that is so maddening. He's clearly built the smartest, most disciplined team and system in the league. He has a leg up on everyone due to his natural football intelligence and his work ethic. And he can't seem to resist the temptation of seeking out an edge that pushes the definition of the rules over the line. 

But don't you see how these are nearly inseparable? The team and system are a way to win, but they're not nearly enough to win. That is, they will almost always get to the playoffs, but the game is far too random for them to automatically take him further. He needs some way to win 3-4 games in a row against either coaches with teams which are on the same level as himself (or nearly so) or with players who are extraordinary enough to win games almost singlehandedly (and this typically happens after his carefully crafted team has had players knocked out of it due to injury). Maybe he could do it reliably on average, but the playoffs don't work that way -- one game where his team plays poorly or the opponent plays way better than usual and he's done.

So, to win more than once or twice, one needs to be either very lucky -- or one needs an edge. Any meaningful edge almost certainly lies on the boundaries of the rules so he has no choice but to push them. Sometimes that gets him what he wants (e.g. the 2014 playoff game against the Ravens) and sometimes it gets him called a cheater (e.g. Spygate). I don't think the latter should disqualify him from anything -- many of the greats both in football and in other sports have similarly pushed the rules to the breaking point and beyond.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, briantw said:

Personally, I think all the cheating disqualifies Belichick from the "greatest coach ever" conversation.  I think he should have been banned from the league for Spygate, and I definitely think he should be blackballed from the Hall of Fame.  Spygate was so bad that the NFL literally destroyed the evidence so that it wouldn't ruin their reputation.  In any other sport, that would mean a lifetime ban.

I love that the Pats have done a full heel turn. Now Pats fans can even laugh about dominating teams with a third string quarterback. Makes loser comments like this even more amusing. B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Altherion said:

But don't you see how these are nearly inseparable? The team and system are a way to win, but they're not nearly enough to win. That is, they will almost always get to the playoffs, but the game is far too random for them to automatically take him further. He needs some way to win 3-4 games in a row against either coaches with teams which are on the same level as himself (or nearly so) or with players who are extraordinary enough to win games almost singlehandedly (and this typically happens after his carefully crafted team has had players knocked out of it due to injury). Maybe he could do it reliably on average, but the playoffs don't work that way -- one game where his team plays poorly or the opponent plays way better than usual and he's done.

So, to win more than once or twice, one needs to be either very lucky -- or one needs an edge. Any meaningful edge almost certainly lies on the boundaries of the rules so he has no choice but to push them. Sometimes that gets him what he wants (e.g. the 2014 playoff game against the Ravens) and sometimes it gets him called a cheater (e.g. Spygate). I don't think the latter should disqualify him from anything -- many of the greats both in football and in other sports have similarly pushed the rules to the breaking point and beyond.

 To some degree I suppose I'd agree with you, but it seems to me he already has a meaningful edge with a superior system of his own creation that isn't a cheat or a bug. I mean what other team currently in the league can you say plays with a comparable level of disipline or smarts? What other team has a comparable track record of not overpaying star players? Of seemingly always cutting those guys at the most economically opportune moment? 

 That ineligible receiver bit versus the Ravens is a great example, as that is the sort of thing that would never work against a Belichick team. (Honestly, it never should've worked against the Ravens, but there ya go)

 I used the word maddening because the things they have been caught for seem fairly innocuous and seemingly supply such a minute advantage that it hardly seems worth the risk of breaking the rules to achieve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

 All this Belichick talk this morning has got me crawling down the Rabbit Hole. Just read an interesting article about Ernie Adams, the so-called Belichick's Belichick...

 https://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2015/01/29/mysterious-ernie-adams-patriots-man-behind-curtain/IrNCfgrysUphGpkcIjEaBL/story.html

Yeah he has this weird thing where Belichick confides in him, but nobody really knows what he does. There are some fan conspiracies about him being like football super mastermind.

From what I understand he just studies football history and watches everyone else in the league and is kind of an impartial eye to Belichick. Kind of a neat thing on a coaching staff.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You people FEED my addiction to this subject.  The debate over who is a better "Greatest of All Time" - Brady or Belichick?  We should spend 45 pages on this one topic and not stop.  We should ONLY discuss this.  Nothing else should warrant mention.  

The argument for Belichick: 

Since Week 3 of 2001, Bill Belichick's record with Tom Brady is 172-51 (.771 winning %);

Since Week 3 of 2001, Bill Belichick's record with all other Starting QBs: 13-5 (.772).  

I already defined why I think Bill Belichick is actually an UNDERRATED head coach a while back; three-time CotY; you could make an argument that he should have won it three more times, easy.  Belichick does everything really well; he is the master of the roster, most notably getting rid of guys high (Derrel Revis, Matt Cassell) and buying guys really low (Wes Welker, Randy Moss, Mercellus Bennett, Danny Amendola) and having it work most of the time (Assante Samuel was probably a mistake).  He is a master at implementing game plans; he knows what the other team does and can read them, counter them and stuff his own game down their throat.  Belichick is also perfect at understanding his players and getting them to "do their job."  Belichick also is one of the last true radicals in the NFL; he is always looking for a way to gain that edge- whether its by turning DBs out of WRs (Edleman and Brown) or confusing grown adults with his "In-eligible" formation that made John Harbaugh cry.  He is always willing to roll the dice which always confuses and upends his opponents (unless its 4th and 2).  

He has been the best coach in the best game there is and has done it better than anyone who has come before him.  

 

The argument for Tom Brady

Regular Season Record: 172-51 (.771)

Playoff Record: 22-9 (.710)

Belichick's Lifetime record WITHOUT Tom Brady: 54-62 (.465)

Belichick's life time PLAYOFF record Without Brady: 1-1 (.500).  In the SEVEN full seasons BB has coached in the NFL without Tom Brady as his starter (1991-1995, 2000, 2008) he has seen EXACTLY TWO playoff games.  (Ironically, that on win was against ... the Patriots ... and I was AT THAT GAME IN CLEVELAND).  There has been no greater and needless rush of revisionist history than the A Football LIfe: Cleveland Browns and trying to throw the turd that Bill Belichick was somehow a reason for the franchise's success once they moved to Baltimore.  What a pile of steaming stupidity.  

Two-Time League MVP, 3-time SB MVP, loads of records and accolades blah blah blah.  He once brought a team to the Superbowl that ranked 31st in total team Defense; he made guys like Jabbar Gaffney, David Patten and Rache Caldwell serviceable WRs.  Its cliche, but I have never- ever- seen a QB to more with less.  He was a game-manager first and then - as the game changed- was one of the best players  EVEN BEFORE they changed the rules again so that even Matt Stafford could be considered a super-star.  Oh, and he's the only QB to ever go to 6 Superbowls.  

He plays the toughest position in the toughest sport better than anyone ever before him.  A team CANNOT win without a QB.    

So, what is the real answer?  

I turn this over to Todd of Bill Swerski's Quiz Master's game show who said:  "The senseless waste of pitting these two mighty forces of nature against each other, like matter vs. anti-matter, will be a tragedy, not only for the teams involved.." [ flips card over ] "..but for our planet. All nations must band together, to ensure that such a conflagration never takes place."

Which is absolutely correct.  

In all seriousness, the problem with this issue is that it assumes quantity and quality as equal.  IN other words, it ascribes to each person a value and looks at the result of the Patriots success and tries to figure out who's individual value is greater.  It look sat the Pats value and sees "1,500."  And then it says "Between Brady and Belichick, which is greater?  Well, Belichick should get a value of 1,000 and Brady 500" or " Brady should get a value of 850 and Belichick a value of 650" or visa versa.  

But the success of the Pats is greater than the sum of its parts,  As cliche as it may be, I think each of them makes the other better,  And while Brady may be the greatest QB who ever lived, Belichick does everything about as good as you can- draft, trade, game-plan, scheme, motivate, evaluate etc.  But even with that, coaches coach and players have to play the damn game.  Its a hard choice.  

With everything, I think Belichick maximizes the team's chances to win and Brady exploits those chances.  

So... Belichick I think, but I reserve the right to change my mind.  

 

Oh, and with Brisett out with an injury, the Pats, officially, have nobody starting for next Sunday's game... and they are STILL favored to win it.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, lancerman said:

Yeah he has this weird thing where Belichick confides in him, but nobody really knows what he does. There are some fan conspiracies about him being like football super mastermind.

From what I understand he just studies football history and watches everyone else in the league and is kind of an impartial eye to Belichick. Kind of a neat thing on a coaching staff.

 

Check out the Do Your Job Documentary. There is some footage of Adams breaking down the Seattle game. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Rockroi said:

 A team CANNOT win without a QB.    

The 2015 Broncos will be ecstatic to hear that. :P 

ETA: Belichick in a landslide, you Pats fans know this to be true. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

 To some degree I suppose I'd agree with you, but it seems to me he already has a meaningful edge with a superior system of his own creation that isn't a cheat or a bug. I mean what other team currently in the league can you say plays with a comparable level of disipline or smarts? What other team has a comparable track record of not overpaying star players? Of seemingly always cutting those guys at the most economically opportune moment? 

 That ineligible receiver bit versus the Ravens is a great example, as that is the sort of thing that would never work against a Belichick team. (Honestly, it never should've worked against the Ravens, but there ya go)

 I used the word maddening because the things they have been caught for seem fairly innocuous and seemingly supply such a minute advantage that it hardly seems worth the risk of breaking the rules to achieve.

I think he just can't help it -- he optimizes everything, minor or not, and sometimes it gets him into trouble. Also, keep in mind that he needed to win big before cutting players at an opportune time even became an option. How many coaches in the NFL are also effectively general managers? If a random coach wants to cut Overpaid Star after the latter had a great year, how many would be able to get away with it?

12 minutes ago, Rockroi said:

Oh, and with Brisett out with an injury, the Pats, officially, have nobody starting for next Sunday's game... and they are STILL favored to win it.

Isn't Garoppolo coming back next week? Also, it's against Rex Ryan. I'm pretty sure he would probably lose even against Edelman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Altherion said:

I think he just can't help it -- he optimizes everything, minor or not, and sometimes it gets him into trouble. Also, keep in mind that he needed to win big before cutting players at an opportune time even became an option. How many coaches in the NFL are also effectively general managers? If a random coach wants to cut Overpaid Star after the latter had a great year, how many would be able to get away with it?

Isn't Garoppolo coming back next week? Also, it's against Rex Ryan. I'm pretty sure he would probably lose even against Edelman.

Yeah, I get that, but things like Spygate and Deflategate (not saying he had any knowledge of the latter necessarily) go way over the line of optimization. Those are both straight up, conscious breaking of the rules, and to achieve an arguably minute advantage. It's kind of mind-boggling. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Maithanet said:

You are picking your data points pretty egregiously here.  Most quarterbacks do worse in their first year of starting than the rest of their career.  And yet, here we have the comparison for Matt Cassel:

Year 1 (Belichek): 10-5. 

Rest of career (4 different teams):  25-39

Cassel was not just better, but dramatically better with Belichek than with any other coach, in spite of that being his first year starting. 

Again here's the thing. At the end of the day, Cassel was playing on the successor to one of the greatest teams of all time. That counts for something. And he had a better season somewhere else. So to act like he was incapable of doing it without Belichick, is disengenous, because he did it without Belichick, in a lesser scenario than the successor to the 2008 Patriots.

And not for nothing. Bledsoe went 5-13 with Belichick in the middle of his career. And Bledsoe was easily the second best QB Belichick ever had.

So you can say I'm picking my data egregiously, but the only counter to this is a 14-5 run without Brady where most of it took place on one of the best teams Belichick ever coached.

So if there ever was a scenario for a QB in his first year to succeed it was that year. And statistically, Cassel didn't have a great year. And not for nothing, they had a weak schedule and struggled against most good teams they played.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

I think that's the thing about him that is so maddening. He's clearly built the smartest, most disciplined team and system in the league. He has a leg up on everyone due to his natural football intelligence and his work ethic. And he can't seem to resist the temptation of seeking out an edge that pushes the definition of the rules over the line. 

That's what makes Belichick great. He's always looking for an edge, no matter how small or borderline* illegal.

 

* he wouldn't do something blatantly illegal like cheat the salary cap, or trip a player running down the sidelines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Triskan said:

The thing is Bro that he really did suck everywhere but when he had Hoody.  The end.

Lancerman started the Brady/Belichick controversy with his posts on this very messageboard on September 23rd of 2016. The monkey finished it folks. He finished it. You know what I mean. Matt Cassel was an overrated, career backup PERIOD. Now we all want to get back to making Westeros strong and great again. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, White Walker Texas Ranger said:

That's what makes Belichick great. He's always looking for an edge, no matter how small or borderline* illegal.

 

* he wouldn't do something blatantly illegal like cheat the salary cap, or trip a player running down the sidelines.

* Except Spygate qualifies, methinks. That was about as blatant as it gets, after the league sends out that letter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Triskan said:

The thing is Bro that he really did suck everywhere but when he had Hoody.  The end.

New England 2008: 63%, 3693 yards, 21TD, 11INT, 89.4 rating

record: 11-5

Kansas City 2010: 58%, 3116 yards, 27TD, 7INT, 93.0 rating

record: 10-6

Should amend the end of your post to "Hoody and Todd Haley"

That was the epilogue, Bro.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

Yeah, I get that, but things like Spygate and Deflategate (not saying he had any knowledge of the latter necessarily) go way over the line of optimization. Those are both straight up, conscious breaking of the rules, and to achieve an arguably minute advantage. It's kind of mind-boggling. 

The thing is deflategate is explainable in that there was a game where the staff got chewed out because the refs overinflated the balls to like 16psi.

Spygate was just Belichick thumbing his nose at everybody

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, lancerman said:

The thing is deflategate is explainable in that there was a game where the staff got chewed out because the refs overinflated the balls to like 16psi.

Spygate was just Belichick thumbing his nose at everybody

 

That was an expensive nose thumbing, especially given his later admission that on a scale of 1 to 100, Spygate provided the Patriots with an advantage of 1. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...