What separates Bill Bellichick from other "great" coaches?

[hawkfan68]

BB's teams have very good football discipline. They don't make many mental errors. If they do, they don't do it again and again. Players and coaches are held accountable.

 

[5_Golden_Rings]

What separates Bill Bellichick from other "great" coaches?.

He has Tom Brady.

 

[RolandDeschain]

What separates Bill Bellichick from other "great" coaches?.

He has Tom Brady.

He went 11-5 in a season without him. Part of it's the perennially weak AFC East, but Belichick is REALLY good.

He's also got so many different whiffs of cheating over the years, that I'm not sure I'd ever be able to have "full respect" for him no matter how many more rings he gets, if you understand what I mean. Every couple of years, it's something new with him and that organization...

 

[5_Golden_Rings]

What separates Bill Bellichick from other "great" coaches?.

He has Tom Brady.

He went 11-5 in a season without him. Part of it's the perennially weak AFC East, but Belichick is REALLY good.

He's also got so many different whiffs of cheating over the years, that I'm not sure I'd ever be able to have "full respect" for him no matter how many more rings he gets, if you understand what I mean. Every couple of years, it's something new with him and that organization...

That 2008 team was with a roster that went 16-0 the previous season. 2007-2008 is an exception to the rule.

Outside of those HISTORICALLY talented teams, the primary reason they compete every year is Brady.

No other QB in the NFL comes back against Atlanta. 2012, 49ers up 31-3 in New England, Brady brings them back to where they lose by less than a touchdown. No other QB does this. No coach calling plays does this, because it's hurry up.

It's Brady. The difference is Brady. You could even see it in 2001, when early on in the Super Bowl against the Rams, they are near their own goal line, and Brady, as young as he was, is able to deliver the slant on time with pressure from not only the Rams, but the field position (near safety land) and the Super Bowl. Brady is clutch, and Brady has eyes that no other QB has.

 

[RolandDeschain]

I disagree that it's as much Brady as you think. New England as a team changes up at halftime better than anybody, hands down, and has for a very long time.

I'm not denigrating Brady, I just disagree on the percentage of success you award to NE overall due to Brady.

 

[chris98251]

He was just a 6th round pick, if he was that good he would have been taken in the first round, it's the coaching

 

[sdog1981]

He was just a 6th round pick, if he was that good he would have been taken in the first round, it's the coaching

Not only that he lost his starting job at Michigan. Also fun fact, he is the first QB to lead the defending national champion to an 0-2 start.

 

[5_Golden_Rings]

He was just a 6th round pick, if he was that good he would have been taken in the first round, it's the coaching

You used the wrong smiley. Should have used this one: :stirthepot:

I disagree that it's as much Brady as you think. New England as a team changes up at halftime better than anybody, hands down, and has for a very long time.

I'm not denigrating Brady, I just disagree on the percentage of success you award to NE overall due to Brady.

Maybe, but from my experience, when they change in the second half it's because they are way behind, and they just go to the hurry up... but that's where Brady calls all the plays.

Defense though, Brady doesn't run the defense. So maybe that's Billicheat's contribution.

 

[purpleneer]

He was just a 6th round pick, if he was that good he would have been taken in the first round, it's the coaching

You used the wrong smiley. Should have used this one: :stirthepot:

I disagree that it's as much Brady as you think. New England as a team changes up at halftime better than anybody, hands down, and has for a very long time.

I'm not denigrating Brady, I just disagree on the percentage of success you award to NE overall due to Brady.

Maybe, but from my experience, when they change in the second half it's because they are way behind, and they just go to the hurry up... but that's where Brady calls all the plays.

Defense though, Brady doesn't run the defense. So maybe that's Billicheat's contribution.

Brady was far from great for 2 1/2 quarters in 51, and while his receivers could have helped him, he had some just plain bad plays even with guys open. He easily played bad enough to lose to a mediocre Houston team playing with some real disadvantages. He wasn't good in 49, with 2 bad picks, until defensive injuries and limitations made it easy. Tom Brady is great when the opponent makes it easy by going soft and simple or just plain isn't good. If either of their last 2 SB opponents had taken advantage of being in the driver's seat, he doesn't come close to either comeback win. It's extra baffling that Pittsburgh just let him have it easy all game.
Any real upper-level defense can handle him if they get help from their O and don't get stupid. It certainly helps that they are as willing as they are to run "trick" plays and pick spots to take advantage of potential shortcomings in the rules.

 

[50yrpatsfan]

He was just a 6th round pick, if he was that good he would have been taken in the first round, it's the coaching

You used the wrong smiley. Should have used this one: :stirthepot:

I disagree that it's as much Brady as you think. New England as a team changes up at halftime better than anybody, hands down, and has for a very long time.

I'm not denigrating Brady, I just disagree on the percentage of success you award to NE overall due to Brady.

Maybe, but from my experience, when they change in the second half it's because they are way behind, and they just go to the hurry up... but that's where Brady calls all the plays.

Defense though, Brady doesn't run the defense. So maybe that's Billicheat's contribution.

Brady was far from great for 2 1/2 quarters in 51, and while his receivers could have helped him, he had some just plain bad plays even with guys open. He easily played bad enough to lose to a mediocre Houston team playing with some real disadvatages. He wasn't good in 49, with 2 bad picks, until defensive injuries and limitations made it easy. Tom Brady is great when the opponent makes it easy by going soft and simple or just plain isn't good. If either of their last 2 SB opponents had taken advantage of being in the driver's seat, he doesn't come close to either comeback win. It's extra baffling that Pittsburgh just let him have it easy all game.
Any real upper-level defense can handle him if they get help from their O and don't get stupid. It certainly helps that they are as willing as they are to run "trick" plays and pick spots to take advantage of potential shortcomings in the rules.

Leading comebacks in the 4th quarters of SB's is the definition of greatness. It was Montana's 91 yard drive against Cinci that established his legacy, and it was Elway's last minute drive against Cleveland in an AFCC game that cemented his. In this game Brady led a 91 yard drive in the last 3 minutes of regulation to tie it (including a 2-point conversion play, plus an OT touchdown drive, plus several earlier scoring drives in the 2nd half - 31 straight points. So what were you saying again?

Atlanta was a tough opponent, as you well know. So was Seattle 2 years ago. Falling behind to teams like that isn't playing badly, it's a measure of the competition.

 

[purpleneer]

He was just a 6th round pick, if he was that good he would have been taken in the first round, it's the coaching

You used the wrong smiley. Should have used this one: :stirthepot:

I disagree that it's as much Brady as you think. New England as a team changes up at halftime better than anybody, hands down, and has for a very long time.

I'm not denigrating Brady, I just disagree on the percentage of success you award to NE overall due to Brady.

Maybe, but from my experience, when they change in the second half it's because they are way behind, and they just go to the hurry up... but that's where Brady calls all the plays.

Defense though, Brady doesn't run the defense. So maybe that's Billicheat's contribution.

Brady was far from great for 2 1/2 quarters in 51, and while his receivers could have helped him, he had some just plain bad plays even with guys open. He easily played bad enough to lose to a mediocre Houston team playing with some real disadvantages. He wasn't good in 49, with 2 bad picks, until defensive injuries and limitations made it easy. Tom Brady is great when the opponent makes it easy by going soft and simple or just plain isn't good. If either of their last 2 SB opponents had taken advantage of being in the driver's seat, he doesn't come close to either comeback win. It's extra baffling that Pittsburgh just let him have it easy all game.
Any real upper-level defense can handle him if they get help from their O and don't get stupid. It certainly helps that they are as willing as they are to run "trick" plays and pick spots to take advantage of potential shortcomings in the rules.

Leading comebacks in the 4th quarters of SB's is the definition of greatness. It was Montana's 91 yard drive against Cinci that established his legacy, and it was Elway's last minute drive against Cleveland in an AFCC game that cemented his. In this game Brady led a 91 yard drive in the last 3 minutes of regulation to tie it (including a 2-point conversion play, plus an OT touchdown drive, plus several earlier scoring drives in the 2nd half - 31 straight points. So what were you saying again?

Atlanta was a tough opponent, as you well know. So was Seattle 2 years ago. Falling behind to teams like that isn't playing badly, it's a measure of the competition.

I meant exactly what I said, whatever the competition level, Brady played badly in those those games until the opponent blew it and made it easy. And Atlanta wasn't exactly a great defense but part of the deficit was a Shaub-esque pick-6 Brady threw.

 

[Popeyejones]

Two things, IMO:

(1) Most great NFL coaches are hedgehogs (great at one thing) whereas Bellichick is more a of a fox (very good at many different things.

Think of guys like Kyle Shannahan who no matter who he has is going to run "his" offense, or PC who had a competitive advantage when he wanted big CBs when they were undervalued, but now is still stuck on big CBs even when they're overvalued.

Bellichick doesn't have any of that. Even with the best QB in the NFL they're a power run team a lot of weaks.

(2) He's done a better job than anyone at instituting a culture, and getting rid of anyone, no matter how talented, if they deviate from it.

If you don't know the playbook you get cut, if you fumble you get benched, and if you try to freelance you get traded. It doesn't matter if you're an All-Pro or not.

In a weird way when it comes to scheming and strategy he DOESN'T have a regimented system like most coaches do, but when it comes to team building he has a MUCH MORE regimented system than most coaches do.

Basically, he's atypically flexible for "what we do" questions, and atypically inflexible for "who we are" questions.

It's what makes him the best coach in the NFL, IMO.

 

[Pape]

Belichick:


7) Master cheater-see the SB against the Rams and much more


And I still can't stand the bastard.

See what?

 

[ivotuk]

I disagree that it's as much Brady as you think. New England as a team changes up at halftime better than anybody, hands down, and has for a very long time.

I'm not denigrating Brady, I just disagree on the percentage of success you award to NE overall due to Brady.

Nobody else but Brady could have come back like he did in the last 2 Superbowls he played. Maybe Joe Montana, but not anybody else.

 

[Rambitious]

I ask this here because of where i want to go with the discussion. I also think a lot of people gloss over the relevant reasons and act like other "great" coaches just can't match his genius (or something like that).

In my eyes, there have been at least a few who could match his intellect and understanding of the game, which are undoubtedly major separation points for most, but the one thing that really puts him above the rest gets missed. Namely, he cares far less than the other guys smart enough to push him about how he wins and is willing to change his plan and buck conventional "wisdom" more.

Cheating.

 

[RolandDeschain]

Nobody else but Brady could have come back like he did in the last 2 Superbowls he played. Maybe Joe Montana, but not anybody else.

The comeback against us wasn't much, and absolutely would not have happened if we had ignore concussion protocol like they did.

Worlds apart from the comeback he did against Atlanta.

 

[Seahawk]

Bellichick is plainly just smarter than anyone else. He's secretly a Mathematician/Genius working for NASA and has this little hobby/distraction called Football to do in his spare time. Also, Brady.

 

[Largent80]

He cheats.

 

[Tical21]

Pretty simple. Replace Kearse, Willson, Gilliam, KPL, Rubin with younger, hungrier, improving players. Probably would've shipped off Sherman by now too.

 

[SantaClaraHawk]

Not being able to grow his coaching tree.