Bill Belichick (1 Viewer)

[ianfitzy]

http://boston.barstoolsports.com/random-th...llman-revealed/

Link to the original King article: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writ...b.week.4/1.html

 

[JuniorNB]

If by "misunderstood", it means "overrated", then it's a good article.

 

[Adebisi]

Thanks. I had read about the Tillman letter, but had never heard about his involvement with Jim Brown.

Huge fan.

 

[Casting Couch]

Great stuff. Belichick shows he is not only one of the top coaches in NFL history, but he also

shows a human side of decency for honoring America's "true" heroes.

Here's to you Mr. Belichick.

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

I am having a hard time reconciling the image presented in the King article about Belichick in regards to Tillman with the video tape cheating - signal stealing, adulterer. spiteful coach.

 

[Adebisi]

I am having a hard time reconciling the image presented in the King article about Belichick in regards to Tillman with the video tape cheating - signal stealing, adulterer. spiteful coach.

That's understandable. Many people have difficulty understanding that famous people aren't always exactly the way the media portrays them to be.

 

[TobiasFunke]

If he is misunderstood, than it is his own "fault," if he cares.

Being "misunderstood" happens when there's a chasm between the truth and the public's perception of the truth. I can't think of a single figure in the history of the NFL who has shown less interest in the public's perception of the truth about him than Bill Belichick. He has been openly disdainful of the press, and thus by extension NFL fans who rely on the press to enhance their experience and understanding of the game. His attitude towards the injury report is similar, and shows a similar disregard for the NFL as a "product" for the fans who are its consumers.

He may well be a good man with a good heart, but people see him as a grumpy, self-centered man who lacks perspective. And he has nobody to blame for that but himself.

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

I am having a hard time reconciling the image presented in the King article about Belichick in regards to Tillman with the video tape cheating - signal stealing, adulterer. spiteful coach.

That's understandable. Many people have difficulty understanding that famous people aren't always exactly the way the media portrays them to be.

Peter King is not the media also?

 

[The_Man]

I wonder if the success of Belichick doesn't indicate that there might be a lack of top-flight intellect at work in the NFL. It seems like most NFL coaches and front office types are former players (at least at the Division I college level) who then hang around the game and ascend the coaching and/or management ladder. But are those kinds of people really the smartest people in our society?

Contrast that to Belichick who went to an elite liberal arts college and didn't enter the coaching ranks through the former jock route. He kind of reminds me of the crew of "Moneyball" guys in baseball -- not that he shares their views, but rather that he is extremely intelligent, willing to disregard the conventional wisdom, and somehow identifies new and effective ways of evaluating talents and coaching players that are superior to his opponents' methods.

Eric DeCosta, the Ravens #2 guy behind Ozzie is another one of these guys. So is Georgetown grad Jim Schwartz, now the coach of the Lions.

I'm not necessariliy saying this is the case, but it is definitely interesting to consider.

 

[JuniorNB]

I am having a hard time reconciling the image presented in the King article about Belichick in regards to Tillman with the video tape cheating - signal stealing, adulterer. spiteful coach.

That's understandable. Many people have difficulty understanding that famous people aren't always exactly the way the media portrays them to be.

Which of those qualities do you believe to be media creations?

 

[Casting Couch]

I wonder if the success of Belichick doesn't indicate that there might be a lack of top-flight intellect at work in the NFL. It seems like most NFL coaches and front office types are former players (at least at the Division I college level) who then hang around the game and ascend the coaching and/or management ladder. But are those kinds of people really the smartest people in our society?Contrast that to Belichick who went to an elite liberal arts college and didn't enter the coaching ranks through the former jock route. He kind of reminds me of the crew of "Moneyball" guys in baseball -- not that he shares their views, but rather that he is extremely intelligent, willing to disregard the conventional wisdom, and somehow identifies new and effective ways of evaluating talents and coaching players that are superior to his opponents' methods.Eric DeCosta, the Ravens #2 guy behind Ozzie is another one of these guys. So is Georgetown grad Jim Schwartz, now the coach of the Lions. I'm not necessariliy saying this is the case, but it is definitely interesting to consider.

excellent post.

 

[TobiasFunke]

I wonder if the success of Belichick doesn't indicate that there might be a lack of top-flight intellect at work in the NFL. It seems like most NFL coaches and front office types are former players (at least at the Division I college level) who then hang around the game and ascend the coaching and/or management ladder. But are those kinds of people really the smartest people in our society?Contrast that to Belichick who went to an elite liberal arts college and didn't enter the coaching ranks through the former jock route. He kind of reminds me of the crew of "Moneyball" guys in baseball -- not that he shares their views, but rather that he is extremely intelligent, willing to disregard the conventional wisdom, and somehow identifies new and effective ways of evaluating talents and coaching players that are superior to his opponents' methods.Eric DeCosta, the Ravens #2 guy behind Ozzie is another one of these guys. So is Georgetown grad Jim Schwartz, now the coach of the Lions. I'm not necessariliy saying this is the case, but it is definitely interesting to consider.

excellent post.

The best evidence that this is true is the fact that, to my recollection, he was the first coach with the brains or the guts to start going for it on 4th down far more often than normal, as had been suggested by many analyses. Anyone that can read a high-school level study of probability and statistics has known for a long, long, time that teams should go for it more often, yet it seems other coaches are just now coming around to it.

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

I wonder if the success of Belichick doesn't indicate that there might be a lack of top-flight intellect at work in the NFL. It seems like most NFL coaches and front office types are former players (at least at the Division I college level) who then hang around the game and ascend the coaching and/or management ladder. But are those kinds of people really the smartest people in our society?Contrast that to Belichick who went to an elite liberal arts college and didn't enter the coaching ranks through the former jock route. He kind of reminds me of the crew of "Moneyball" guys in baseball -- not that he shares their views, but rather that he is extremely intelligent, willing to disregard the conventional wisdom, and somehow identifies new and effective ways of evaluating talents and coaching players that are superior to his opponents' methods.Eric DeCosta, the Ravens #2 guy behind Ozzie is another one of these guys. So is Georgetown grad Jim Schwartz, now the coach of the Lions. I'm not necessariliy saying this is the case, but it is definitely interesting to consider.

excellent post.

The best evidence that this is true is the fact that, to my recollection, he was the first coach with the brains or the guts to start going for it on 4th down far more often than normal, as had been suggested by many analyses. Anyone that can read a high-school level study of probability and statistics has known for a long, long, time that teams should go for it more often, yet it seems other coaches are just now coming around to it.

I think the more successful a coach becomes the more willing he is to take risks. Not to mention the more willing to take a chance on 4th down the better the OL the team needs.In essence, if you have a terrible OL a 4th and one is less likely to be successful. Each team and their opponent is different but the statistics are misleading because it do not bear that out correctly.

 

[Buffaloes]

If by "misunderstood", it means "overrated", then it's a good article.

I don't understand how a HC who has won 3 Super Bowls and has accomplished what BB has accomplished can be overrated. I don't like the pats, don't like the way their HC carries himself, but I'm not seeing the overrated argument. Please explain...

 

[Steady Mooobin]

I still don't like him.

 

[[icon]]

If by "misunderstood", it means "overrated", then it's a good article.

I don't understand how a HC who has won 3 Super Bowls and has accomplished what BB has accomplished can be overrated. I don't like the pats, don't like the way their HC carries himself, but I'm not seeing the overrated argument. Please explain...

 

[TobiasFunke]

I wonder if the success of Belichick doesn't indicate that there might be a lack of top-flight intellect at work in the NFL. It seems like most NFL coaches and front office types are former players (at least at the Division I college level) who then hang around the game and ascend the coaching and/or management ladder. But are those kinds of people really the smartest people in our society?

Contrast that to Belichick who went to an elite liberal arts college and didn't enter the coaching ranks through the former jock route. He kind of reminds me of the crew of "Moneyball" guys in baseball -- not that he shares their views, but rather that he is extremely intelligent, willing to disregard the conventional wisdom, and somehow identifies new and effective ways of evaluating talents and coaching players that are superior to his opponents' methods.

Eric DeCosta, the Ravens #2 guy behind Ozzie is another one of these guys. So is Georgetown grad Jim Schwartz, now the coach of the Lions.

I'm not necessariliy saying this is the case, but it is definitely interesting to consider.

excellent post.

The best evidence that this is true is the fact that, to my recollection, he was the first coach with the brains or the guts to start going for it on 4th down far more often than normal, as had been suggested by many analyses. Anyone that can read a high-school level study of probability and statistics has known for a long, long, time that teams should go for it more often, yet it seems other coaches are just now coming around to it.

I think the more successful a coach becomes the more willing he is to take risks. Not to mention the more willing to take a chance on 4th down the better the OL the team needs.

In essence, if you have a terrible OL a 4th and one is less likely to be successful. Each team and their opponent is different but the statistics are misleading because it do not bear that out correctly.

It is true that to some degree it depends on the team, but my point was that the traditional thinking on 4th downs was so totally and completely off the mark that it created a Moneyball-like gap between perception and truth that was (and really, still is) asking to be exploited. And Belichick has shown far more willingness than others to exploit that gap. It might be job security, but it might also be a greater understanding of the realities of the game.For an idea of what I'm talking about, check out this graph. That's for the average NFL offense against the average NFl defense. Basically, teams should be going for it whenever they're in the opponent's territory and have less than eight yards to go. It's an absolute no-brainer with four or fewer yards. And they should be going for it instead of kicking field goals inside the 30 more often, and some times even within the 20. Belichick seems to get that more than most.

 

[JuniorNB]

If by "misunderstood", it means "overrated", then it's a good article.

I don't understand how a HC who has won 3 Super Bowls and has accomplished what BB has accomplished can be overrated. I don't like the pats, don't like the way their HC carries himself, but I'm not seeing the overrated argument. Please explain...

His three Super Bowl wins (by three points each, I might add) were a bit clouded when it was discovered about New England's cheating ways. The one season since then, he didn't even make the playoffs.I think when you factor in the genius-job he did in Cleveland and his ho-hum results since the spygate scandal, it certainly takes a bit of the shine off of his accomplishments.

 

[Adebisi]

I am having a hard time reconciling the image presented in the King article about Belichick in regards to Tillman with the video tape cheating - signal stealing, adulterer. spiteful coach.

That's understandable. Many people have difficulty understanding that famous people aren't always exactly the way the media portrays them to be.

Which of those qualities do you believe to be media creations?

I did not claim that any of them were "media creations."

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

I wonder if the success of Belichick doesn't indicate that there might be a lack of top-flight intellect at work in the NFL. It seems like most NFL coaches and front office types are former players (at least at the Division I college level) who then hang around the game and ascend the coaching and/or management ladder. But are those kinds of people really the smartest people in our society?

Contrast that to Belichick who went to an elite liberal arts college and didn't enter the coaching ranks through the former jock route. He kind of reminds me of the crew of "Moneyball" guys in baseball -- not that he shares their views, but rather that he is extremely intelligent, willing to disregard the conventional wisdom, and somehow identifies new and effective ways of evaluating talents and coaching players that are superior to his opponents' methods.

Eric DeCosta, the Ravens #2 guy behind Ozzie is another one of these guys. So is Georgetown grad Jim Schwartz, now the coach of the Lions.

I'm not necessariliy saying this is the case, but it is definitely interesting to consider.

excellent post.

The best evidence that this is true is the fact that, to my recollection, he was the first coach with the brains or the guts to start going for it on 4th down far more often than normal, as had been suggested by many analyses. Anyone that can read a high-school level study of probability and statistics has known for a long, long, time that teams should go for it more often, yet it seems other coaches are just now coming around to it.

I think the more successful a coach becomes the more willing he is to take risks. Not to mention the more willing to take a chance on 4th down the better the OL the team needs.

In essence, if you have a terrible OL a 4th and one is less likely to be successful. Each team and their opponent is different but the statistics are misleading because it do not bear that out correctly.

It is true that to some degree it depends on the team, but my point was that the traditional thinking on 4th downs was so totally and completely off the mark that it created a Moneyball-like gap between perception and truth that was (and really, still is) asking to be exploited. And Belichick has shown far more willingness than others to exploit that gap. It might be job security, but it might also be a greater understanding of the realities of the game.For an idea of what I'm talking about, check out this graph. That's for the average NFL offense against the average NFl defense. Basically, teams should be going for it whenever they're in the opponent's territory and have less than eight yards to go. It's an absolute no-brainer with four or fewer yards. And they should be going for it instead of kicking field goals inside the 30 more often, and some times even within the 20. Belichick seems to get that more than most.

I understand your point, but I still think the data has to many unknown variable to be a useful measuring stick in determining where or not a team has a greater chance than not of making it on a 4th down play. The other point is that a coaches own 'political' situation has a ton of bearing on the choice and that choice is dependent upon the individual players on the team.Let's do an example:

Raider 4th and 1 at the 35. IMHO Russell (all of 6'6 325- I kid but only a little) could lean over the line and get this most of the time. But do I think that Cable would do this, especially with AL? No way.

 

[Buffaloes]

If by "misunderstood", it means "overrated", then it's a good article.

I don't understand how a HC who has won 3 Super Bowls and has accomplished what BB has accomplished can be overrated. I don't like the pats, don't like the way their HC carries himself, but I'm not seeing the overrated argument. Please explain...

His three Super Bowl wins (by three points each, I might add) were a bit clouded when it was discovered about New England's cheating ways. The one season since then, he didn't even make the playoffs.I think when you factor in the genius-job he did in Cleveland and his ho-hum results since the spygate scandal, it certainly takes a bit of the shine off of his accomplishments.

He had 1 and 15/16 of a season after the videotaping was exposed. That 15/16 of a season was a record-setting season where they were the only NFL team to go undefeated through a regular season and lost a 4th Super Bowl in the 4th quarter. As far as missing the playoffs last year, we both know that getting a Matt Cassel-led offense and team to 11-5 and tying for the AFC East lead is an accomplishment in itself. Nevermind the fact that an 11-5 team missed the playoffs for the 1st time since the early 1980s, IIRC. I'm still not buying the overrated argument.

 

[TobiasFunke]

I understand your point, but I still think the data has to many unknown variable to be a useful measuring stick in determining where or not a team has a greater chance than not of making it on a 4th down play. The other point is that a coaches own 'political' situation has a ton of bearing on the choice and that choice is dependent upon the individual players on the team.Let's do an example:Raider 4th and 1 at the 35. IMHO Russell (all of 6'6 325- I kid but only a little) could lean over the line and get this most of the time. But do I think that Cable would do this, especially with AL? No way.

Agreed. But that's a special case. Presumably, you could show the chart I linked to management/ownership of 29 other NFL teams and they would at least give you a long enough leash to make the "easy" calls. But still, coaches don't do it, either because they don't bother to look at those stats, don't embrace them fully, or don't have the kahunas to do what they should. Belichick does embrace the numbers, and I was simply pointing to this as one piece of evidence that he may be bringing a Moneyball approach to the game, something a previous poster had posited. it may or may not be true, but at least in this case he seems to understand a gap between perception and reality, just like Beane understood the gap between perception and reality for OBP a decade ago.Also, I'd like to think that even Al Davis could understand going for it on 4th and 1 from the 35, no???

 

[Adebisi]

If by "misunderstood", it means "overrated", then it's a good article.

I don't understand how a HC who has won 3 Super Bowls and has accomplished what BB has accomplished can be overrated. I don't like the pats, don't like the way their HC carries himself, but I'm not seeing the overrated argument. Please explain...

His three Super Bowl wins (by three points each, I might add) were a bit clouded when it was discovered about New England's cheating ways. The one season since then, he didn't even make the playoffs.I think when you factor in the genius-job he did in Cleveland and his ho-hum results since the spygate scandal, it certainly takes a bit of the shine off of his accomplishments.

The Patriots are 31-7 since Spygate, despite playing 15+ of those games without Tom Brady.

 

[TobiasFunke]

Oh, by the way ... let me say that it has truly been an honor to be touched by your noodley appendage.

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

Oh, by the way ... let me say that it has truly been an honor to be touched by your noodley appendage.

Your welcome.

 

[steelcityman]

and the apple dont fall far from the tree, cause Mangini is impossible to understand. Playing mind games are for good teams, not awful ones. I hate the Browns, and for their misery I hope he stays there 3-4 years. But if the Clowns want to get better, they need to fire him ASAP, put a statue of Woody Hayes on the sidelines until they win 8 games. Mangini bamboozled the Clowns ownership into a contract. And he always looks like he is 10 seconds away from pooping his pants. The same ownership who would have been unimpressed with a guy like Tomlin or Sean Payton. get Marty back!!!!

 

[theJCdude]

Great post. I am even more of a fan now.

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

I understand your point, but I still think the data has to many unknown variable to be a useful measuring stick in determining where or not a team has a greater chance than not of making it on a 4th down play. The other point is that a coaches own 'political' situation has a ton of bearing on the choice and that choice is dependent upon the individual players on the team.Let's do an example:Raider 4th and 1 at the 35. IMHO Russell (all of 6'6 325- I kid but only a little) could lean over the line and get this most of the time. But do I think that Cable would do this, especially with AL? No way.

Agreed. But that's a special case. Presumably, you could show the chart I linked to management/ownership of 29 other NFL teams and they would at least give you a long enough leash to make the "easy" calls. But still, coaches don't do it, either because they don't bother to look at those stats, don't embrace them fully, or don't have the kahunas to do what they should. Belichick does embrace the numbers, and I was simply pointing to this as one piece of evidence that he may be bringing a Moneyball approach to the game, something a previous poster had posited. it may or may not be true, but at least in this case he seems to understand a gap between perception and reality, just like Beane understood the gap between perception and reality for OBP a decade ago.Also, I'd like to think that even Al Davis could understand going for it on 4th and 1 from the 35, no???

I think Belichick is a smart coach and looks at football a bit differently than most ex-jock coaches do.This is Al Davis here - no one knows what he thinks.

 

[Liquid Tension]

I wonder if the success of Belichick doesn't indicate that there might be a lack of top-flight intellect at work in the NFL. It seems like most NFL coaches and front office types are former players (at least at the Division I college level) who then hang around the game and ascend the coaching and/or management ladder. But are those kinds of people really the smartest people in our society?Contrast that to Belichick who went to an elite liberal arts college and didn't enter the coaching ranks through the former jock route. He kind of reminds me of the crew of "Moneyball" guys in baseball -- not that he shares their views, but rather that he is extremely intelligent, willing to disregard the conventional wisdom, and somehow identifies new and effective ways of evaluating talents and coaching players that are superior to his opponents' methods.Eric DeCosta, the Ravens #2 guy behind Ozzie is another one of these guys. So is Georgetown grad Jim Schwartz, now the coach of the Lions. I'm not necessariliy saying this is the case, but it is definitely interesting to consider.

 

[The Jerk]

I wonder if the success of Belichick doesn't indicate that there might be a lack of top-flight intellect at work in the NFL. It seems like most NFL coaches and front office types are former players (at least at the Division I college level) who then hang around the game and ascend the coaching and/or management ladder. But are those kinds of people really the smartest people in our society?

Contrast that to Belichick who went to an elite liberal arts college and didn't enter the coaching ranks through the former jock route. He kind of reminds me of the crew of "Moneyball" guys in baseball -- not that he shares their views, but rather that he is extremely intelligent, willing to disregard the conventional wisdom, and somehow identifies new and effective ways of evaluating talents and coaching players that are superior to his opponents' methods.

Eric DeCosta, the Ravens #2 guy behind Ozzie is another one of these guys. So is Georgetown grad Jim Schwartz, now the coach of the Lions.

I'm not necessariliy saying this is the case, but it is definitely interesting to consider.

Very thoughtful post, but I'm not sure how much you know about Bill Belichick's father, Steve. Steve Belichick, Coach Who Wrote the Book on Scouting, Dies at 86Belichick is the coaching equivalent of a player who is a "gym rat" so while he is not an ex-jock, as you say, he's far from a football outsider. He clearly grew up around football from a coach/scout point of view. Patriot fans no doubt have far more extensive knowledge of Belichick's background, so I'll let them fill in the details.

By the way, Mike Tomlin went for it on 4th down at the Steeler 30 on Sunday night. He grew up in the more traditional coach's path, including playing college at William and Mary (teammate of Darren Sharper) and coaching stops at Tampa Bay and Minnesota.

You may be right on the ex-jock statement, but perhaps what makes a coach go for it on 4th down and make other unconventional decisions might have more to do with their personality than their background.

 

[JuniorNB]

If by "misunderstood", it means "overrated", then it's a good article.

I don't understand how a HC who has won 3 Super Bowls and has accomplished what BB has accomplished can be overrated. I don't like the pats, don't like the way their HC carries himself, but I'm not seeing the overrated argument. Please explain...

His three Super Bowl wins (by three points each, I might add) were a bit clouded when it was discovered about New England's cheating ways. The one season since then, he didn't even make the playoffs.I think when you factor in the genius-job he did in Cleveland and his ho-hum results since the spygate scandal, it certainly takes a bit of the shine off of his accomplishments.

The Patriots are 31-7 since Spygate, despite playing 15+ of those games without Tom Brady.

They were still reaping teh rewards of their cheating for a few games following the actual discovery of their cheating. They still were beating teams 52-7 for a short while. Suddenly, they started beating teams like the Eagles (with AJ Feeley at QB) by a TD, narrowly beating the very bad Jets, and sneaking by the Ravens thanks to an ill-time time out by Rex Ryan. The domination and best-team-ever mirage didn't even result in a Super Bowl win. And last year, they didn't even make teh playoffs. DFon't even try to tell me that the cheating didn't help them. Oh, and I'm very impressed that they may have been the best non-playoff team ever last year. 12 teams make the playoffs, not four. Being 13th best, but a very-good 13th best, isn't a ringing endorsement.Belichick is a good coach. Probably a very good coach who has a once in a lifetine quarterback at his disposal. He would not be able to turn a poor team around.

 

[The Jerk]

Official biography on Patriots website: LINK

 

[TobiasFunke]

Has there ever been a thread in the Shark Pool on 4th down gambles, and why almost the entire NFL seems to completely ignore statistical evidence that is clear as day?

Personally I find the subject fascinating. But that may be because I'm a total loser.

 

[PewterFan]

Notice how all the coaches under him who goes elsewhere fails.

He's simply the best head coach in football's history.

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

Notice how all the coaches under him who goes elsewhere fails.He's simply the best head coach in football's history.

His coaching tree does have a lot of dead branches.Does that tarnish his legacy? Does one judge the measure of a man by how much success the people around him enjoy? Maybe the chemistry of Brady + Belichick is like Favre + Holmgren?

 

[Ghost Rider]

Many people have difficulty understanding that famous people aren't always exactly the way the media portrays them to be.

That is true, but I don't think the media portrays Belichick any different than the way he portrays himself.

If by "misunderstood", it means "overrated", then it's a good article.

I don't understand how a HC who has won 3 Super Bowls and has accomplished what BB has accomplished can be overrated. I don't like the pats, don't like the way their HC carries himself, but I'm not seeing the overrated argument. Please explain...

His three Super Bowl wins (by three points each, I might add) were a bit clouded when it was discovered about New England's cheating ways. The one season since then, he didn't even make the playoffs.I think when you factor in the genius-job he did in Cleveland and his ho-hum results since the spygate scandal, it certainly takes a bit of the shine off of his accomplishments.

You have got to be kidding. I don't like Belichick at all, but calling him overrated just doesn't make sense.

 

[Adebisi]

If by "misunderstood", it means "overrated", then it's a good article.

I don't understand how a HC who has won 3 Super Bowls and has accomplished what BB has accomplished can be overrated. I don't like the pats, don't like the way their HC carries himself, but I'm not seeing the overrated argument. Please explain...

His three Super Bowl wins (by three points each, I might add) were a bit clouded when it was discovered about New England's cheating ways. The one season since then, he didn't even make the playoffs.I think when you factor in the genius-job he did in Cleveland and his ho-hum results since the spygate scandal, it certainly takes a bit of the shine off of his accomplishments.

The Patriots are 31-7 since Spygate, despite playing 15+ of those games without Tom Brady.

They were still reaping teh rewards of their cheating for a few games following the actual discovery of their cheating. They still were beating teams 52-7 for a short while. Suddenly, they started beating teams like the Eagles (with AJ Feeley at QB) by a TD, narrowly beating the very bad Jets, and sneaking by the Ravens thanks to an ill-time time out by Rex Ryan. The domination and best-team-ever mirage didn't even result in a Super Bowl win. And last year, they didn't even make teh playoffs. DFon't even try to tell me that the cheating didn't help them. Oh, and I'm very impressed that they may have been the best non-playoff team ever last year. 12 teams make the playoffs, not four. Being 13th best, but a very-good 13th best, isn't a ringing endorsement.Belichick is a good coach. Probably a very good coach who has a once in a lifetine quarterback at his disposal. He would not be able to turn a poor team around.

Just out of curiosity, why didn't they reap the benefits of cheating against the Eagles? What changed between week 2 and week 12? Did it take teams 2 1/2 months to realize that they'd better change their hand signals? I am legitimately curious, so please let me know.11-5 is 11-5. I'm fairly certain that at least 3/4 of the league would take that record in 2009 right this second if you offered it to them. And that would be with their starting quarterbacks in the lineup. This season, of course, flies completely in the face of your "has a once in a lifetime quarterback at his disposal" bit, since he did it without said quarterback (and on an unexpected basis, no less).

You don't think Belichick would be able to turn a poor team around? You do, of course, realize that the Patriots were on a steady decline when he took them over, they went 5-11 his first season, and then they won the Super Bowl the following season... and then in two of the following three seasons. That's not something that's escaped you, is it?

 

[joetrow]

If by "misunderstood", it means "overrated", then it's a good article.

I don't understand how a HC who has won 3 Super Bowls and has accomplished what BB has accomplished can be overrated. I don't like the pats, don't like the way their HC carries himself, but I'm not seeing the overrated argument. Please explain...

His three Super Bowl wins (by three points each, I might add) were a bit clouded when it was discovered about New England's cheating ways. The one season since then, he didn't even make the playoffs.I think when you factor in the genius-job he did in Cleveland and his ho-hum results since the spygate scandal, it certainly takes a bit of the shine off of his accomplishments.

The Patriots are 31-7 since Spygate, despite playing 15+ of those games without Tom Brady.

They were still reaping teh rewards of their cheating for a few games following the actual discovery of their cheating. They still were beating teams 52-7 for a short while. Suddenly, they started beating teams like the Eagles (with AJ Feeley at QB) by a TD, narrowly beating the very bad Jets, and sneaking by the Ravens thanks to an ill-time time out by Rex Ryan. The domination and best-team-ever mirage didn't even result in a Super Bowl win. And last year, they didn't even make teh playoffs. DFon't even try to tell me that the cheating didn't help them. Oh, and I'm very impressed that they may have been the best non-playoff team ever last year. 12 teams make the playoffs, not four. Being 13th best, but a very-good 13th best, isn't a ringing endorsement.Belichick is a good coach. Probably a very good coach who has a once in a lifetine quarterback at his disposal. He would not be able to turn a poor team around.

No excuses for the Spy Gate tapes, but I hurd so many stories on siruis radio after the news broke from players and ex-players saying that their teams had backup QB's that thier job during the games was to watch opposing teams hand signals. They then matched the hand signals up to plays on the coaches tape. I think the result of spy gate was way over blown, the only thing I see that resulted from spy gate was giving other teams and their fans a way to blame their losses on anything else than themselves. It takes the right players and the right coaches to win games, and the Pats have both.

 

[The Gray Hood]

I kind of doubt the majority of people you see once a week on tv are 'understood' by the unwashed masses.

the fact is, there are really just a lot of knuckleheads and jackasses running around that need to have their opinions heard on every person on the planet they read a blurb about on yahoo, regardless if they've actually even met the person in question, let alone know anything about them, or wtf they're talking about in general.

do these people 'misunderstanding' things really matter, or does their opinion count for anything?

if you expect a free and open internet to be without a lot of white noise then you're bs'ing yourself.

maybe one day far in the future they'll invent a knucklehead filter, but I'm not holding my breath.

 

[fantasysharkctb]

Did we really need another thread on fuggin Bill Belicheat or the Pats?

 

[Bills_Fan11]

I am having a hard time reconciling the image presented in the King article about Belichick in regards to Tillman with the video tape cheating - signal stealing, adulterer. spiteful coach.

That's understandable. Many people have difficulty understanding that famous people aren't always exactly the way the media portrays them to be.

I actually admire guys who do good things quietly rather than go out of their way to publicize it, so good for him. To imply in any way that the media has a vendetta against him though is absurd. He treats them like cr@p.

If he is misunderstood, than it is his own "fault," if he cares.Being "misunderstood" happens when there's a chasm between the truth and the public's perception of the truth. I can't think of a single figure in the history of the NFL who has shown less interest in the public's perception of the truth about him than Bill Belichick. He has been openly disdainful of the press, and thus by extension NFL fans who rely on the press to enhance their experience and understanding of the game. His attitude towards the injury report is similar, and shows a similar disregard for the NFL as a "product" for the fans who are its consumers.He may well be a good man with a good heart, but people see him as a grumpy, self-centered man who lacks perspective. And he has nobody to blame for that but himself.

Yah this is another way to put it.

 

[Hatfield]

Notice how all the coaches under him who goes elsewhere fails.He's simply the best head coach in football's history.

His coaching tree does have a lot of dead branches.Does that tarnish his legacy? Does one judge the measure of a man by how much success the people around him enjoy? Maybe the chemistry of Brady + Belichick is like Favre + Holmgren?

It enhances his legacy and he isn't just a coach, he is also the GM. Every personnel decision since he came to the Pats has been his and the biggest fraud from his tree will be exposed in Kansas City.

 

[Caveman_Nick]

If he is misunderstood, than it is his own "fault," if he cares.Being "misunderstood" happens when there's a chasm between the truth and the public's perception of the truth. I can't think of a single figure in the history of the NFL who has shown less interest in the public's perception of the truth about him than Bill Belichick. He has been openly disdainful of the press, and thus by extension NFL fans who rely on the press to enhance their experience and understanding of the game. His attitude towards the injury report is similar, and shows a similar disregard for the NFL as a "product" for the fans who are its consumers.He may well be a good man with a good heart, but people see him as a grumpy, self-centered man who lacks perspective. And he has nobody to blame for that but himself.

I think you nailed it here....he just doesn't care what people think.

 

[The Gray Hood]

If he is misunderstood, than it is his own "fault," if he cares.Being "misunderstood" happens when there's a chasm between the truth and the public's perception of the truth. I can't think of a single figure in the history of the NFL who has shown less interest in the public's perception of the truth about him than Bill Belichick. He has been openly disdainful of the press, and thus by extension NFL fans who rely on the press to enhance their experience and understanding of the game. His attitude towards the injury report is similar, and shows a similar disregard for the NFL as a "product" for the fans who are its consumers.He may well be a good man with a good heart, but people see him as a grumpy, self-centered man who lacks perspective. And he has nobody to blame for that but himself.

I kind of doubt he's all that worried about what 'tobiasfunke' is posting about him in the 'shark pool'.but maybe you know him better than I do, since I've never actually met the guy.

 

[yabahos]

Interesting insight into Belicheck. Everyone's different ... some people do good things and need to shout it out to the world, others do good things and don't want to draw attention to themselves.

Belicheck's a great coach but it helps that he has Ernie Adams working for/with him.

 

[JuniorNB]

If he is misunderstood, than it is his own "fault," if he cares.Being "misunderstood" happens when there's a chasm between the truth and the public's perception of the truth. I can't think of a single figure in the history of the NFL who has shown less interest in the public's perception of the truth about him than Bill Belichick. He has been openly disdainful of the press, and thus by extension NFL fans who rely on the press to enhance their experience and understanding of the game. His attitude towards the injury report is similar, and shows a similar disregard for the NFL as a "product" for the fans who are its consumers.He may well be a good man with a good heart, but people see him as a grumpy, self-centered man who lacks perspective. And he has nobody to blame for that but himself.

I kind of doubt he's all that worried about what 'tobiasfunke' is posting about him in the 'shark pool'.but maybe you know him better than I do, since I've never actually met the guy.

He might not care what tobiasfunke thinks about him, but I'm sure he's super-excited that you have his back. Or his nutsack. Or whatever bodypart of his you're currently stroking for him. Gray hood? are you kidding me? As in BB's gray hoodie?

 

[DropKick]

If by "misunderstood", it means "overrated", then it's a good article.

I don't understand how a HC who has won 3 Super Bowls and has accomplished what BB has accomplished can be overrated. I don't like the pats, don't like the way their HC carries himself, but I'm not seeing the overrated argument. Please explain...

His three Super Bowl wins (by three points each, I might add) were a bit clouded when it was discovered about New England's cheating ways. The one season since then, he didn't even make the playoffs.I think when you factor in the genius-job he did in Cleveland and his ho-hum results since the spygate scandal, it certainly takes a bit of the shine off of his accomplishments.

The Patriots are 31-7 since Spygate, despite playing 15+ of those games without Tom Brady.

They were still reaping teh rewards of their cheating for a few games following the actual discovery of their cheating. They still were beating teams 52-7 for a short while. Suddenly, they started beating teams like the Eagles (with AJ Feeley at QB) by a TD, narrowly beating the very bad Jets, and sneaking by the Ravens thanks to an ill-time time out by Rex Ryan. The domination and best-team-ever mirage didn't even result in a Super Bowl win. And last year, they didn't even make teh playoffs. DFon't even try to tell me that the cheating didn't help them. Oh, and I'm very impressed that they may have been the best non-playoff team ever last year. 12 teams make the playoffs, not four. Being 13th best, but a very-good 13th best, isn't a ringing endorsement.Belichick is a good coach. Probably a very good coach who has a once in a lifetine quarterback at his disposal. He would not be able to turn a poor team around.

Loads of jealousy here.Oh, sorry. Pats beat YOUR team in a SB where your QB choked big time... Now I understand.

 

[Jewell]

Did we really need another thread on fuggin Bill Belicheat or the Pats?

Yes.

 

[JuniorNB]

Loads of jealousy here.Oh, sorry. Pats beat YOUR team in a SB where your QB choked big time... Now I understand.

Barry Bonds broke the home run record and Rosie Ruiz won a Boston Marathon, too. Congrats to them as well.

 

[SeniorVBDStudent]

If he is misunderstood, than it is his own "fault," if he cares.Being "misunderstood" happens when there's a chasm between the truth and the public's perception of the truth. I can't think of a single figure in the history of the NFL who has shown less interest in the public's perception of the truth about him than Bill Belichick. He has been openly disdainful of the press, and thus by extension NFL fans who rely on the press to enhance their experience and understanding of the game. His attitude towards the injury report is similar, and shows a similar disregard for the NFL as a "product" for the fans who are its consumers.He may well be a good man with a good heart, but people see him as a grumpy, self-centered man who lacks perspective. And he has nobody to blame for that but himself.

You've accidentally stumbled on some real insight.He doesn't care.