• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Patriots Dynasty - Was it Brady or was it Belichick?

Binary_Digit

Binary_Digit

DP Veteran
Joined
May 21, 2005
Messages
9,194
Reaction score
9,341
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
W/L records and Lombardi trophies are a team stat, not a QB stat, but let's oversimplify just for fun.

Nobody can deny how dominant the Patriot dynasty was in the TB/BB era. For 20 years we marveled (and anguished) at the obvious wizardry of Tom Brady as well as the apparent wizardry of the Dark Hooded One himself.

But Brady left the Patriots and took a formerly 7-9 Tampa Bay team all the way to a Super Bowl win. It had been 15 years since Tampa Bay got that many wins in a season, and almost 20 years since they'd won a Super Bowl.

Meanwhile, the Patriots went 7-9 their first year w/o Brady, which was their worst W/L record in almost 20 years. And that other 7-9 season (2002) was the year that Tom Brady didn't even play because of injury, and is bookended by an 11-win season before and a 14-win season after.

Of course Mac Jones is no Tom Brady (who is?), but if Belichick is really a GOAT coach who was a critical part of the Pats' success for 20 years, then why have the Pats completely crumbled since Brady left?

I'm a Seahawks fan, so I'm no simp for Tom Brady. But I just can't see any scenario where Brady was not the one carrying the Patriots to glory every year, in spite of, not because of, Belichick's coaching. What do you think?
 
My rabid fan days with the NFL are long behind me. Brady and Belichick share the honors, imo. Without the proper supporting cast, a coach or a qb are only going to take you so far. This will be argued long after we are moved on along with the GOAT question!
 
Binary_Digit said:
W/L records and Lombardi trophies are a team stat, not a QB stat, but let's oversimplify just for fun.

Nobody can deny how dominant the Patriot dynasty was in the TB/BB era. For 20 years we marveled (and anguished) at the obvious wizardry of Tom Brady as well as the apparent wizardry of the Dark Hooded One himself.

But Brady left the Patriots and took a formerly 7-9 Tampa Bay team all the way to a Super Bowl win. It had been 15 years since Tampa Bay got that many wins in a season, and almost 20 years since they'd won a Super Bowl.

Meanwhile, the Patriots went 7-9 their first year w/o Brady, which was their worst W/L record in almost 20 years. And that other 7-9 season (2002) was the year that Tom Brady didn't even play because of injury, and is bookended by an 11-win season before and a 14-win season after.

Of course Mac Jones is no Tom Brady (who is?), but if Belichick is really a GOAT coach who was a critical part of the Pats' success for 20 years, then why have the Pats completely crumbled since Brady left?

I'm a Seahawks fan, so I'm no simp for Tom Brady. But I just can't see any scenario where Brady was not the one carrying the Patriots to glory every year, in spite of, not because of, Belichick's coaching. What do you think?
Click to expand...

Brady picked the perfect team. He got a team where the QB the previous year threw 30 INTs and still won 7 games. The team had a great,young defense. It also had a strong offensive line. Then to add a cherry on top Belichick allowed the bucks to pick up Gronk cheap. They also picked up AB, who couldn't stay with the Pats due to Kraft's indiscretion in Florida. Also picked up Fournette. Then in the Super Bowl KC lost their offensive tackles.

So to say that year is proof of anything makes no sense IMHO.

Both were the greatest at their respective jobs. Who knows if Brady would have ever started in the NFL without Belichick!
 
washunut said:
Brady picked the perfect team. He got a team where the QB the previous year threw 30 INTs and still won 7 games. The team had a great,young defense. It also had a strong offensive line. Then to add a cherry on top Belichick allowed the bucks to pick up Gronk cheap. They also picked up AB, who couldn't stay with the Pats due to Kraft's indiscretion in Florida. Also picked up Fournette. Then in the Super Bowl KC lost their offensive tackles.

So to say that year is proof of anything makes no sense IMHO.

Both were the greatest at their respective jobs. Who knows if Brady would have ever started in the NFL without Belichick!
Click to expand...
It's true that Brady didn't do it all himself, he did have a good cast around him. They don't call it the Ultimate Team Sport for nothing.

But what was wrong with Belichick's ability to field a decent team? He could've kept Gronk. He could've signed Fournette. And AB was cut by the Pats after being accused of sexual assault, not because he couldn't stay due to Kraft's massage parlor visits. Then he went on to post replacement-level stats for TB the following year - 500 yards and 4 TDs lol. And KC's injuries in the SB may have helped TB win a Lombardi, but they didn't help TB get there in the first place.

A good coach should be able to get more out of a mediocre QB than Belichick has gotten out of Mac Jones. Just ask Nick Foles. :) Instead, since Brady left, they've had one season out of four that was (barely) above 500, and this year they have the 3rd overall pick because they were so shitty. It's as though he needs Jones to play like Brady or else he doesn't have any answers.
 
Binary_Digit said:
It's true that Brady didn't do it all himself, he did have a good cast around him. They don't call it the Ultimate Team Sport for nothing.

But what was wrong with Belichick's ability to field a decent team? He could've kept Gronk. He could've signed Fournette. And AB was cut by the Pats after being accused of sexual assault, not because he couldn't stay due to Kraft's massage parlor visits. Then he went on to post replacement-level stats for TB the following year - 500 yards and 4 TDs lol. And KC's injuries in the SB may have helped TB win a Lombardi, but they didn't help TB get there in the first place.

A good coach should be able to get more out of a mediocre QB than Belichick has gotten out of Mac Jones. Just ask Nick Foles. :) Instead, since Brady left, they've had one season out of four that was (barely) above 500, and this year they have the 3rd overall pick because they were so shitty. It's as though he needs Jones to play like Brady or else he doesn't have any answers.
Click to expand...
What you said in your first line is the answer. I simply go back to when Belichick was in Cleveland. Five seasons and a record of 36-44 before getting fired. He wasn’t Mr. Wizard as a coach back then, and having Brady as quarterback in New England meant a lot. Everything? No, but a lot.
 
Grogu said:
What you said in your first line is the answer. I simply go back to when Belichick was in Cleveland. Five seasons and a record of 36-44 before getting fired. He wasn’t Mr. Wizard as a coach back then, and having Brady as quarterback in New England meant a lot. Everything? No, but a lot.
Click to expand...
Playing in a division with horrible teams like Miami, Buffalo and the Jets meant a lot.
 
First 3 were more Bill and the last 3 were more Brady
 
Binary_Digit said:
W/L records and Lombardi trophies are a team stat, not a QB stat, but let's oversimplify just for fun.

Nobody can deny how dominant the Patriot dynasty was in the TB/BB era. For 20 years we marveled (and anguished) at the obvious wizardry of Tom Brady as well as the apparent wizardry of the Dark Hooded One himself.

But Brady left the Patriots and took a formerly 7-9 Tampa Bay team all the way to a Super Bowl win. It had been 15 years since Tampa Bay got that many wins in a season, and almost 20 years since they'd won a Super Bowl.

Meanwhile, the Patriots went 7-9 their first year w/o Brady, which was their worst W/L record in almost 20 years. And that other 7-9 season (2002) was the year that Tom Brady didn't even play because of injury, and is bookended by an 11-win season before and a 14-win season after.

Of course Mac Jones is no Tom Brady (who is?), but if Belichick is really a GOAT coach who was a critical part of the Pats' success for 20 years, then why have the Pats completely crumbled since Brady left?

I'm a Seahawks fan, so I'm no simp for Tom Brady. But I just can't see any scenario where Brady was not the one carrying the Patriots to glory every year, in spite of, not because of, Belichick's coaching. What do you think?
Click to expand...

First dynasty had an insane defense built by Bill. Brady wasn’t blowing teams away then and he’d be the first to say it.
 
Higgins86 said:
You don’t go to 9 SBs because of luck. You genuinely should stop posting in the sport part of this forum.
Click to expand...
They obviously had great teams. Tom Brady was obviously a great QB. They obviously got lucky to be in that division. They got lucky with the tuck rule. They got lucky that the J James catch was ruled incomplete. They got lucky the Seahawks were stupid and decided to throw instead of giving the ball too Lynch. I would argue that there is no way you go to 9 SB's without luck.
 
Higgins86 said:
First 3 were more Bill and the last 3 were more Brady
Click to expand...
All Super Bowl appearances were due to Brady and luck. Bill was a good coach who got lucky to have Brady.

Also, lets not forget the role Gronk played.
 
Bill Belichik is vastly overrated. He was lucky in NE to have all those players and staff.

Bill spent 4 years in Cleveland and made the playoffs once, losing the first game.
He had a losing record in Cleveland.

Belichik is average at best. And maybe not even that.
 
It's amazing how quickly Bill was no longer a genius when Brady and Gronk left. He ruined Mac Jones by having a defensive Coordinator run the offense. He has always sucked at drafting. Now the Pats have the third pick in the draft because of him. Also, it seems no one wants him as their coach.
 
Mongidig said:
All Super Bowl appearances were due to Brady and luck. Bill was a good coach who got lucky to have Brady.

Also, lets not forget the role Gronk played.
Click to expand...

How was 2001 about luck or Brady. Explain?
 
Mongidig said:
It's amazing how quickly Bill was no longer a genius when Brady and Gronk left. He ruined Mac Jones by having a defensive Coordinator run the offense. He has always sucked at drafting. Now the Pats have the third pick in the draft because of him. Also, it seems no one wants him as their coach.
Click to expand...

Remind me who drafted Gronk and Brady?
 
It has to be both. And others.

The Patriot Way created a mentality that bred winners. Love em...hate em...whatever...but Brady by himself is the absolute GOAT...but he isnt winning championships on his own. During the 20 year Patriot Dynasty, the mentality was ALWAYS 'next man up'. Brady stepped into the starting role when Bledsoe went down. Starters came and went. But you cant deny the success of the organization and that is a total team effort.
 
VanceMack said:
It has to be both. And others.

The Patriot Way created a mentality that bred winners. Love em...hate em...whatever...but Brady by himself is the absolute GOAT...but he isnt winning championships on his own. During the 20 year Patriot Dynasty, the mentality was ALWAYS 'next man up'. Brady stepped into the starting role when Bledsoe went down. Starters came and went. But you cant deny the success of the organization and that is a total team effort.
Click to expand...

Agreed. 2018 was a great example of how important they both were. Brady phenomenal on the road vs the chiefs in the afc championship and it’s a Bill B defensive masterclass in the SB vs the Rams.
 
Binary_Digit said:
It's true that Brady didn't do it all himself, he did have a good cast around him. They don't call it the Ultimate Team Sport for nothing.

But what was wrong with Belichick's ability to field a decent team? He could've kept Gronk. He could've signed Fournette. And AB was cut by the Pats after being accused of sexual assault, not because he couldn't stay due to Kraft's massage parlor visits. Then he went on to post replacement-level stats for TB the following year - 500 yards and 4 TDs lol. And KC's injuries in the SB may have helped TB win a Lombardi, but they didn't help TB get there in the first place.

A good coach should be able to get more out of a mediocre QB than Belichick has gotten out of Mac Jones. Just ask Nick Foles. :) Instead, since Brady left, they've had one season out of four that was (barely) above 500, and this year they have the 3rd overall pick because they were so shitty. It's as though he needs Jones to play like Brady or else he doesn't have any answers.
Click to expand...
I think the difference between Mac Jones and Brady (OK...the BIGGEST difference) is that Brady was a leader. He worked harder than everyone in the locker room, he walked the walk and when he talked he wasnt just barking. And frankly...it could also be a change in player mentality. Bills players took the abuse because they knew it would make them winners...and even some of the players during his era resented the work. But the work made winners.
 
Mongidig said:
All Super Bowl appearances were due to Brady and luck. Bill was a good coach who got lucky to have Brady.

Also, lets not forget the role Gronk played.
Click to expand...
I'll just bump this post.
 
Higgins86 said:
Yes you did you said Bill was a bad drafter but then refused to give him credit for his good drafts lol
Click to expand...
You don’t think bad drafters can have a good draft? I’m judging him on his overall performance not just one draft.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom