Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 I'm on the opposite side of the fence regarding the 'Hawks actually. I think the 49ers will play conservatively and expect the 'Hawks to do the same. Wilson will unexpectedly come out slinging and catch the Niners off guard, and the Niners won't be able to force the battle of attrition they'd like to. I half hope the Seachickens go that route. If you look close at the last two Niner routs up there in Seattle, it was their defense that killed the Niners. A couple of big turnovers early that result in scores, force the Niners to be one dimensional on offense, and it's game over. Would love to see that trend reversed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 It's a little hard for me to make Belichick the COY just because he has one of the greatest QBs ever on his roster, and that makes up for an awful lot. While they've gone through an absurd amount of injury non-luck, the one place they didn't fail was at QB. In general - thanks to the Cassel year - I tend to discount how great Brady is in the Pats system compared to Belichick, but at the same time it's definitely a big, big help. The main thing for him is that the Pats got reinvented something like three times during the season. Once as a defense-first team early on (when trying to survive Gronk/Hernandez/Amendola injuries and get their rookie WRs on the same page), then as a up-tempo finesse passing team (when Gronk got back and the entire defense got injured), then as a power running up tempo team similar to Oregon in temperament and style. That's a lot of changes for three seasons; doing it in one is phenomenally powerful. It makes it more clear that Brady isn't so amazing, but it also makes it more clear how great Belichick is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanteGabriel Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 That's a lot of changes for three seasons; doing it in one is phenomenally powerful. It makes it more clear that Brady isn't so amazing, but it also makes it more clear how great Belichick is. This is more or less my take on it. I think what Belichick does is create a very high floor for his team through his schemes, gameplanning, and structure. Having a Hall of Fame QB at the helm turns it from a consistently competitive team into a consistent championship contender. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 I also think he is very smart about who he gets for his team. The guys he recruits and hires are ones that are massively adaptable for the most part. The best example of this is someone like Troy Brown, but Edelman and even Blount are good examples. Rarely does he get a guy for long that is great at one thing and merely meh at others. Another good example is someone like Moss, who was excellent at one thing but not very good at anything else. Despite his great talent he didn't last long. The players who do last long are the ones who understand things from a fundamental concept perspective. They've got huge football IQs. I think this is another reason that most players (and coaches) leaving the Pats don't succeed elsewhere. The primary characteristic that they all have is their versatility. Most coaches don't prize that or care about that, and as a result they leave a lot of that on the table. Now, there are some exceptions to this. Wilfork isn't particularly versatile - he's a Big Guy Planet theory guy - but he allows others to do that. Brady is versatile but skilled at specific things, and that's okay. Dillon wasn't all that versatile. But the OLine guys? The TEs (who did things like take handoffs)? The WRs who block in space well? The LBs who can rush, cover and man up? The DEs who can go into coverage and do a 2-9 split? That's the versatility he covets. It's a similar principle to what Kelly wanted with this offensive players - players who can line up anywhere and do almost anything - but taken even further. The best coaches are the ones that can adapt. Any coach can take great talent and make it far - Switzer and Caldwell are prime examples. But few can take what they're given and make something good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donald*rain Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 I'm on the opposite side of the fence regarding the 'Hawks actually. I think the 49ers will play conservatively and expect the 'Hawks to do the same. Wilson will unexpectedly come out slinging and catch the Niners off guard, and the Niners won't be able to force the battle of attrition they'd like to. This, for the W Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 Both team's bread and butter is more or less the "death of a thousand paper cuts" on offense and to let their dominant defenses throttle the opposing offenses. I seriously hope the Seachickens try to flip the script. I like the Niners chances much better under those circumstances. This, for the W Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaime L Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 Hrmmm... I need to challenge this a bit. I agree that Belichick is the best coach in the modern game. However, how would you argue that he's "the most important football mind since Walsh?"What has Belichick done that would even compare to the mainstreaming of the West Coast offense and its various off-shoots? In 20 years, what aspects of Belichick's "football mind" will still resonate in the game the way Walsh does?In my opinion, Belichick is singularly spectacular at getting a team organized and ready to play; and he has shown an amazing ability to adapt his approach based on the make up of his team. Indeed, that might be his best contribution to posterity; don't insist on square pegs in round holes! But I don't know that there's anything unique about his approach to the game, I just think he's better at it than anyone else. Well his use of Lawrence Taylor back in the 80's was pretty revolutionary. His use of two TEs was novel. He was also the first to recognize the effect of the rule changes and completely reorient his team in a diametrically opposed fashion to how it was set up before. Granted no one thing will spawn endless derivations like Walsh's WCO. I don't know if we'll ever again see a system that gets adopted by half the teams in the league, So I think you're right that when he retires, Bill Belichick will have given less to the game than Bill Walsh in terms of one lasting enduring system or a lasting legacy further propagated by his disciples. Walsh definitely seemed to be a great developer of people on a level that exceeds Belichick. Belichick is able to get the most out of them when they work for him..but he has not seemed able to impart the skills in them that allow them to go out and be successful elsewhere. And yet perversely, in a way, that actually further highlights Belichick's genius. Walsh came down from Mt. Sinai with a system and a template that his disciples could take and spread throughout the league. He was the Google of HoF coaches with his brilliant open source system. At the same time Belichick is more like Steve Jobs - his brilliance is a closed system. You cannot import the Patriot way unless you have your own Bill Belichick - there's no portability to a system whose greatest strength is based on its architect's singular ability to adapt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanteGabriel Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 Hrm, another funny Grantland coincidence: yesterday I mentioned Dante Scarnecchia's influence as the reason the Pats have consistently drafted and developed good offensive linemen... Today, an article about him pops up on Grantland. http://grantland.com/the-triangle/dante-scarnecchia-the-patriots-forgotten-man/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 And yet perversely, in a way, that actually further highlights Belichick's genius. Walsh came down from Mt. Sinai with a system and a template that his disciples could take and spread throughout the league. He was the Google of HoF coaches with his brilliant open source system. At the same time Belichick is more like Steve Jobs - his brilliance is a closed system. You cannot import the Patriot way unless you have your own Bill Belichick - there's no portability to a system whose greatest strength is based on its architect's singular ability to adapt. Kind of makes me wonder how much of that has to do with his nature/demeanor. Walsh always kind of struck me as a basically affable guy. A mentor and a teacher who was willing to share and spread his knowledge to others. Whereas Belichick strikes me more as an anti-social hermit, hoarding his secrets lest they become common knowledge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockroi Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 general - thanks to the Cassel year - I tend to discount how great Brady is in the Pats system compared to Belichick, but at the same time it's definitely a big, big help. The Cassel year is a big indicator of Belichick's ability because that team could have just imploded, and didn't. At the same time, that team did just come off a 16-0 record the prior year and had no major transitional losses. And that team never had chops; they lost almost every game they played against teams over .500 - their only wins against over .500 teams were to the Jets (Jets would beat them later in the season) and against Miami, a team they had already lost to. Their schedule was extremely easy and they could only beat mediocre teams. To me the Cassel year is more opaque - while it does show Belichick's brilliance, it also shows the ceiling on good coaching after a catastrophic injury to the QB. What was a better sign of Belichick's abilities was that when he recognized that the 2007 core had deteriorated, he remorphed a team behind the two tight-end model and that team went to a Superbowl, 2 AFC Championships and the playoffs for three seasons. I also think he is very smart about who he gets for his team. The guys he recruits and hires are ones that are massively adaptable for the most part. The best example of this is someone like Troy Brown, but Edelman and even Blount are good examples. Rarely does he get a guy for long that is great at one thing and merely meh at others. Another good example is someone like Moss, who was excellent at one thing but not very good at anything else. Despite his great talent he didn't last long. The players who do last long are the ones who understand things from a fundamental concept perspective. They've got huge football IQs. The football IQ thing is huge for Belichick, even above versatility. And the case-in-point is Donte Hightower a player that the fans are cold to, but who Belichick loves. Hightower knows the pro system and has known it for years, even when he was at Alabama. Belichick likes guys he can plug into the pros and know that they can learn from the word go (though, some claim that this type of player has already "topped out" and cannot do much more in the pros than they had at Alabama). Belichcik likes guys that learn fast such as McCourty (another ... not-beloved player in New England) and he takes chances on guys who know the game- for better (Aqib Talib) or worse (Adelius Thomas). Adaptability in Belichick himself is also huge. As you stated, kal, this is a guy who changed a team three times in one season. But also look at how the Pats have changed since 2001- from a run-first team (2001), to a dynamic offense and a great defense (2003-2005), then a huge explosion team that took advantage of the Bill Polian rule changes from 2004 (2007-2009) and then to the double tight end teams (2010-2012) and finally to this current incarnation. No team has been able to stay so competitive while moving around so much. No coach looks more into fiddling with the core of the team than Belichick. But, again, I don't know how much of this you could do without a HoF QB. I certainly don't know if 2013 would have been so good or a poor man's 2008 (win a bunch of games, but lose important ones). I don't think the Pats win against New Orleans and Cleveland, let alone Denver if Brady is not back there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanteGabriel Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 Kind of makes me wonder how much of that has to do with his nature/demeanor. Walsh always kind of struck me as a basically affable guy. A mentor and a teacher who was willing to share and spread his knowledge to others. Whereas Belichick strikes me more as an anti-social hermit, hoarding his secrets lest they become common knowledge. Walsh definitely came across as a friendly and likable guy but he was infamous for playing head games with Montana. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuseprime Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 And yet perversely, in a way, that actually further highlights Belichick's genius. Walsh came down from Mt. Sinai with a system and a template that his disciples could take and spread throughout the league. He was the Google of HoF coaches with his brilliant open source system. At the same time Belichick is more like Steve Jobs - his brilliance is a closed system. You cannot import the Patriot way unless you have your own Bill Belichick - there's no portability to a system whose greatest strength is based on its architect's singular ability to adapt. This x1,000 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaime L Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 Kind of makes me wonder how much of that has to do with his nature/demeanor. Walsh always kind of struck me as a basically affable guy. A mentor and a teacher who was willing to share and spread his knowledge to others. Whereas Belichick strikes me more as an anti-social hermit, hoarding his secrets lest they become common knowledge. Yeah I wonder if that factors in. People talk all the time about how funny and personable Belichick is in private but I think his nature is to be private, say little which could reverberate in unintentional ways. Some people are open books whereas others just in their way to keep things close to the vest. I think that's also why we're always guessing at what makes him so good. I read Halberstam's biography on Belichick and saw his A Football Life and I still find the guy to be fascinating and a near total enigma. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trickster Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 Hmm... this thread seems to have turned into a Belichick appreciation thread, not that I mind. To answer your question DG, he is my coach of the year. Also Brady missed today's practice due to illness. Big deal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockroi Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 Also Brady missed today's practice due to illness. Big deal? IF he gets better, no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 Walsh definitely came across as a friendly and likable guy but he was infamous for playing head games with Montana. True, true. I don't mean to paint him as some kind of saint or something. Just perhaps a bit more open and accessible than Belichick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Independent George Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 Also Brady missed today's practice due to illness. Big deal? Whenever Michael Jordan got sick, it meant he was about to seriously kick somebody's ass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trickster Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 Whenever Michael Jordan got sick, it meant he was about to seriously kick somebody's ass. True. As for Seahawks vs Niners, I would definitely pick the Niners on a neutral field right now. Both the defenses are great; the Seahawks D is probably a tad better. But on the the offensive side, SF should be much better. Their receiving options are miles ahead. But the homefield advantage for the Seahawks will probably swing the game in their favor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanteGabriel Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 True, true. I don't mean to paint him as some kind of saint or something. Just perhaps a bit more open and accessible than Belichick. Well, that's not saying much. ;) But no, this may be the 12 year old 49er fan in me talking, but I always regarded Bill Walsh as a paragon of gentlemanliness. Gentlemanhood? Something like that. He was fucking classy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaime L Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 Hmm... this thread seems to have turned into a Belichick appreciation thread, not that I mind. To answer your question DG, he is my coach of the year. Gotta appreciate him now because I think he's going out this round. :P But yeah he's probably my coach of the year too. There's a tendency in all sports to give CoTY to the coach of the team that was terrible last year and now is pretty good. But, what, do we really think that's always the most masterful coaching job? I think oftentimes the guy doing the best job coaching that year is the coach of one of the elite teams (hence why they're elite). Let's not punish Belichick for being so damn consistent. Same goes for Poppovich in basketball. These CoTY votes are the poor man's version of not voting for Michael Jordan or Lebron James for MVP because you're bored with them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.