Bill Belichick (1 Viewer)

[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.

 

[SeniorVBDStudent]

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.

x 6.02 x 10^23

 

[Adebisi]

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

 

[Jewell]

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

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.

While it's true that Brady is great, part of Brady's greatness is his coachability. He's the eager student who wants to be the top of his class. Belichick, through his coaching and schemes, has helped Brady get there.There are countless stats that reflect Belichick is a great coach and is not overrated. Those that have watched Belichick coach every week, though, don't need the stats to tell them that Belichick is great. His game plans speak for themselves. Every coordinator in this league comes up with plans for each game, but few are as creative as Belichick at exploiting other teams' weaknesses. One week the Pats will be a blitzing team, and the next weak they will have two down lineman and drop the rest into coverage. One week the Pats will open a game by passing twenty straight times, and the next week they will stuff the ball down your throat with run play after run play. That diversity helps keep the Pats on top because other teams aren't sure exactly what to prepare for. That diversity can be attributed directly to Belichick -- on both sides of the ball.

 

[The Gray Hood]

yeah, I think it was del rio who was quoted as saying something like 'when you prepare for the pats, you have to prepare for 6 different offenses'.

 

[DropKick]

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.

Changing the topic? Seems to be about your speed.

 

[menobrown]

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.

I'm not disagreeing with you that he disregards the conventional wisdom but his coaching roots might run longer and deeper than any coaches in the league so in that respect he's really very old school. Also I think it's worth noting that while he did not go the jock route into coaching his father helped open up doors for him that are just not available to most kids in liberal arts college.Belichick has been breaking game film down since he was 10 years old. He's basically been groomed since childhood to be a coach or scout.

 

[SeniorVBDStudent]

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.

I can see its time for our regularly scheduled reality checkup.As most people know, the practice of videotaping opposing playcalls was prevalent in the league up until the time the commisioner issued a clarifying memorandum at the behest of the competition committee who felt the practice needed to be better policed to ensure compliance with the rule. Certain teams did not participate in the practice while others did. This was not an unknown phenomenon. In one famous videotape, NYJets coach Herm Edwards is seen looking into the Pats videocamera and waving, corroborating the reality that this was not some clandestine singular "cheating" endeavor of "bad guy" Bill Belichick. It happened. Some teams did it; other teams didn't. Some teams have systematically encouraged the use of steroids before and after they became banned substances. Some teams have systematically tought pick routes and chop blocking. Other examples of nefarious signal calling efforts include those delineated by former coach Steve Mariucci who spoke at length about coaching staffers digging through the trash cans in the sky boxes of opposing coordinators looking for notes, the famous example of the Miami Dolphins buying a videotape documenting Patriots playcalling signals, and the binoculars observed "above the grassy gnoll" at the Patriots pre Rams Superbowl practice. Coach Jon Gruden labelled the entire spygate issue a "joke". Bill Parcells, during his stint on NFL Sunday Countdown famously reacted to Steve Young's prodding about spygate by reminding Mr. Young how his team used to manipulate tunnel openings onto the playing field to create swirling wind patterns to disrupt opposing teams passing games. And here you are, blathering on with your relentless rhetoric about cheating and bad guys and asterisks. Whatever dude.Your sad little whispering campaign to twist the truth of the matter, which is Belichick tried to defy Roger Goodell and was spanked for it, nothing more, will not stand. As long as I remain a member here, I will continue to rebut your pathetic Barry Bonds / Rosie Ruiz analogies and highlight your rhetoric for what is is: pathetic.Try rooting for your own team instead of crying like a ##### about others. You might enjoy the experience. It's certainly healthier.Good day sir.

 

[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.

I can see its time for our regularly scheduled reality checkup.As most people know, the practice of videotaping opposing playcalls was prevalent in the league up until the time the commisioner issued a clarifying memorandum at the behest of the competition committee who felt the practice needed to be better policed to ensure compliance with the rule. Certain teams did not participate in the practice while others did. This was not an unknown phenomenon. In one famous videotape, NYJets coach Herm Edwards is seen looking into the Pats videocamera and waving, corroborating the reality that this was not some clandestine singular "cheating" endeavor of "bad guy" Bill Belichick. It happened. Some teams did it; other teams didn't. Some teams have systematically encouraged the use of steroids before and after they became banned substances. Some teams have systematically tought pick routes and chop blocking. Other examples of nefarious signal calling efforts include those delineated by former coach Steve Mariucci who spoke at length about coaching staffers digging through the trash cans in the sky boxes of opposing coordinators looking for notes, the famous example of the Miami Dolphins buying a videotape documenting Patriots playcalling signals, and the binoculars observed "above the grassy gnoll" at the Patriots pre Rams Superbowl practice. Coach Jon Gruden labelled the entire spygate issue a "joke". Bill Parcells, during his stint on NFL Sunday Countdown famously reacted to Steve Young's prodding about spygate by reminding Mr. Young how his team used to manipulate tunnel openings onto the playing field to create swirling wind patterns to disrupt opposing teams passing games. And here you are, blathering on with your relentless rhetoric about cheating and bad guys and asterisks. Whatever dude.Your sad little whispering campaign to twist the truth of the matter, which is Belichick tried to defy Roger Goodell and was spanked for it, nothing more, will not stand. As long as I remain a member here, I will continue to rebut your pathetic Barry Bonds / Rosie Ruiz analogies and highlight your rhetoric for what is is: pathetic.Try rooting for your own team instead of crying like a ##### about others. You might enjoy the experience. It's certainly healthier.Good day sir.

I missed this little whinefest from the other day.I always love a good 'we got caught cheating, but other teams do it, too" argument. Now that my daughter is no longer five, I don't get to hear that much anymore. Good day sir.

 

[BassNBrew]

I'm surprised tampering charges haven't been filed as a result of the Tillman letter.

 

[parrot]

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.

Newbie, maybe you could expand for us on just how the signal taping continued to help them even after it was discovered and announced to the world. As I understand the narrative, the taping of signals gave the Patriots a massive, prohibitive advantage, to the extent that it was the primary factor in their three Superbowl victories, to hear people like yourself tell it. Yet once it was discovered that they were engaging in this practice, it still somehow gave them massive prohibitive advantage, to the extent that they were able to bury teams 52-7. Did other teams do nothing to negate this massive prohibitive advantage once it became common knowledge, even though it would have been relatively simple to do just by changing their signal schemes? Are the other head coaches in the league that inept? How exactly did that work?

 

[JuniorNB]

Newbie, maybe you could expand for us on just how the signal taping continued to help them even after it was discovered and announced to the world. As I understand the narrative, the taping of signals gave the Patriots a massive, prohibitive advantage, to the extent that it was the primary factor in their three Superbowl victories, to hear people like yourself tell it. Yet once it was discovered that they were engaging in this practice, it still somehow gave them massive prohibitive advantage, to the extent that they were able to bury teams 52-7. Did other teams do nothing to negate this massive prohibitive advantage once it became common knowledge, even though it would have been relatively simple to do just by changing their signal schemes? Are the other head coaches in the league that inept? How exactly did that work?

If you look at their scores from the 2007 season, they started off totally destroying teams. It was 'almost' as if they knew what plays were coming and what defensive stunts/blitzes were coming. Then, a little more than halfway through, the games started becoming closer. At the end, they were needing luck to pull some games out and they finally lost to a Giants team who barely even made the playoffs.Why? Who knows? I'm not privy to what goes on behind coaches' doors. One possibility is that New England had information from years of doing shady things (explaining why Mangini knew to look out for it). They probably had infor for a few games ahead. That explains the blowouts immediately following the cheating-discovery. Teams who were going to be facing the Pats probably had to change things up, too, as they knew that there was a good chance that the Pats had inside information on them. That takes time. The teams playing them a week or two or three later didn't have time to put those changes in place. The teams at the end of the schedule did. As I said, the league has never fully explained to what length the cheating took place and exactly how it was done. Therefore, none of us really know how long long it went on and what impact it had. All I know is the league took it seriously enough to impose a prett damn big penalty on them. Just as I can't prove that cheating helped them win those three Super Bowls by three points each, you can't prove that it didn't. We do know for sure that they cheated, though. Maybe you don't think that should refect on Belichick's legacy, but I sure do.

 

[parrot]

Newbie, maybe you could expand for us on just how the signal taping continued to help them even after it was discovered and announced to the world. As I understand the narrative, the taping of signals gave the Patriots a massive, prohibitive advantage, to the extent that it was the primary factor in their three Superbowl victories, to hear people like yourself tell it. Yet once it was discovered that they were engaging in this practice, it still somehow gave them massive prohibitive advantage, to the extent that they were able to bury teams 52-7. Did other teams do nothing to negate this massive prohibitive advantage once it became common knowledge, even though it would have been relatively simple to do just by changing their signal schemes? Are the other head coaches in the league that inept? How exactly did that work?

If you look at their scores from the 2007 season, they started off totally destroying teams. It was 'almost' as if they knew what plays were coming and what defensive stunts/blitzes were coming. Then, a little more than halfway through, the games started becoming closer. At the end, they were needing luck to pull some games out and they finally lost to a Giants team who barely even made the playoffs.Why? Who knows? I'm not privy to what goes on behind coaches' doors. One possibility is that New England had information from years of doing shady things (explaining why Mangini knew to look out for it). They probably had infor for a few games ahead. That explains the blowouts immediately following the cheating-discovery. Teams who were going to be facing the Pats probably had to change things up, too, as they knew that there was a good chance that the Pats had inside information on them. That takes time. The teams playing them a week or two or three later didn't have time to put those changes in place. The teams at the end of the schedule did. As I said, the league has never fully explained to what length the cheating took place and exactly how it was done. Therefore, none of us really know how long long it went on and what impact it had. All I know is the league took it seriously enough to impose a prett damn big penalty on them. Just as I can't prove that cheating helped them win those three Super Bowls by three points each, you can't prove that it didn't. We do know for sure that they cheated, though. Maybe you don't think that should refect on Belichick's legacy, but I sure do.

You sound like a typical conspiracy nut with the utter lack of logic to support your conclusion. You could have saved yourself a lot of typing by just saying "I have no idea."

 

[JuniorNB]

Newbie, maybe you could expand for us on just how the signal taping continued to help them even after it was discovered and announced to the world. As I understand the narrative, the taping of signals gave the Patriots a massive, prohibitive advantage, to the extent that it was the primary factor in their three Superbowl victories, to hear people like yourself tell it. Yet once it was discovered that they were engaging in this practice, it still somehow gave them massive prohibitive advantage, to the extent that they were able to bury teams 52-7. Did other teams do nothing to negate this massive prohibitive advantage once it became common knowledge, even though it would have been relatively simple to do just by changing their signal schemes? Are the other head coaches in the league that inept? How exactly did that work?

If you look at their scores from the 2007 season, they started off totally destroying teams. It was 'almost' as if they knew what plays were coming and what defensive stunts/blitzes were coming. Then, a little more than halfway through, the games started becoming closer. At the end, they were needing luck to pull some games out and they finally lost to a Giants team who barely even made the playoffs.Why? Who knows? I'm not privy to what goes on behind coaches' doors. One possibility is that New England had information from years of doing shady things (explaining why Mangini knew to look out for it). They probably had infor for a few games ahead. That explains the blowouts immediately following the cheating-discovery. Teams who were going to be facing the Pats probably had to change things up, too, as they knew that there was a good chance that the Pats had inside information on them. That takes time. The teams playing them a week or two or three later didn't have time to put those changes in place. The teams at the end of the schedule did. As I said, the league has never fully explained to what length the cheating took place and exactly how it was done. Therefore, none of us really know how long long it went on and what impact it had. All I know is the league took it seriously enough to impose a prett damn big penalty on them. Just as I can't prove that cheating helped them win those three Super Bowls by three points each, you can't prove that it didn't. We do know for sure that they cheated, though. Maybe you don't think that should refect on Belichick's legacy, but I sure do.

You sound like a typical conspiracy nut with the utter lack of logic to support your conclusion. You could have saved yourself a lot of typing by just saying "I have no idea."

Are you claiming that you do know how much the cheating helped them? At least I can admit that I have no idea, unlike Patriots fans who want to pretend that the Jets game that they got caught was the only time they ever did and it had no effect on any other game they ever played.

 

[parrot]

Newbie, maybe you could expand for us on just how the signal taping continued to help them even after it was discovered and announced to the world. As I understand the narrative, the taping of signals gave the Patriots a massive, prohibitive advantage, to the extent that it was the primary factor in their three Superbowl victories, to hear people like yourself tell it. Yet once it was discovered that they were engaging in this practice, it still somehow gave them massive prohibitive advantage, to the extent that they were able to bury teams 52-7. Did other teams do nothing to negate this massive prohibitive advantage once it became common knowledge, even though it would have been relatively simple to do just by changing their signal schemes? Are the other head coaches in the league that inept? How exactly did that work?

If you look at their scores from the 2007 season, they started off totally destroying teams. It was 'almost' as if they knew what plays were coming and what defensive stunts/blitzes were coming. Then, a little more than halfway through, the games started becoming closer. At the end, they were needing luck to pull some games out and they finally lost to a Giants team who barely even made the playoffs.Why? Who knows? I'm not privy to what goes on behind coaches' doors. One possibility is that New England had information from years of doing shady things (explaining why Mangini knew to look out for it). They probably had infor for a few games ahead. That explains the blowouts immediately following the cheating-discovery. Teams who were going to be facing the Pats probably had to change things up, too, as they knew that there was a good chance that the Pats had inside information on them. That takes time. The teams playing them a week or two or three later didn't have time to put those changes in place. The teams at the end of the schedule did. As I said, the league has never fully explained to what length the cheating took place and exactly how it was done. Therefore, none of us really know how long long it went on and what impact it had. All I know is the league took it seriously enough to impose a prett damn big penalty on them. Just as I can't prove that cheating helped them win those three Super Bowls by three points each, you can't prove that it didn't. We do know for sure that they cheated, though. Maybe you don't think that should refect on Belichick's legacy, but I sure do.

You sound like a typical conspiracy nut with the utter lack of logic to support your conclusion. You could have saved yourself a lot of typing by just saying "I have no idea."

Are you claiming that you do know how much the cheating helped them? At least I can admit that I have no idea, unlike Patriots fans who want to pretend that the Jets game that they got caught was the only time they ever did and it had no effect on any other game they ever played.

NOW you have no idea? Nice backtrack. I never claimed to know anything about it, unlike yourself who is pretty dang certain it helped them even after it was 'discovered', but when called on it is at a complete loss to even begin to explain just how that might have transpired.

 

[JuniorNB]

NOW you have no idea? Nice backtrack. I never claimed to know anything about it, unlike yourself who is pretty dang certain it helped them even after it was 'discovered', but when called on it is at a complete loss to even begin to explain just how that might have transpired.

They haven't won any Super Bowls since it was 'discovered'. Not even in the season that fools like you were calling them the best NFL team ever. Coincidence? Me thinks not.

 

[parrot]

NOW you have no idea? Nice backtrack. I never claimed to know anything about it, unlike yourself who is pretty dang certain it helped them even after it was 'discovered', but when called on it is at a complete loss to even begin to explain just how that might have transpired.

They haven't won any Super Bowls since it was 'discovered'. Not even in the season that fools like you were calling them the best NFL team ever. Coincidence? Me thinks not.

Some quality posting here. Getting trounced on logic so it's time to start the name-calling. You want to link where I called them the best NFL team ever?As has already been pointed out, you're talking about two years since, one where the Superbowl loss was their one loss for the year, where they set multiple offensive records, and the other where they lost their "once in a lifetime quarterback" one quarter into the season. As usual, you make a compelling case.

 

[Abrantes]

 

[JuniorNB]

NOW you have no idea? Nice backtrack. I never claimed to know anything about it, unlike yourself who is pretty dang certain it helped them even after it was 'discovered', but when called on it is at a complete loss to even begin to explain just how that might have transpired.

They haven't won any Super Bowls since it was 'discovered'. Not even in the season that fools like you were calling them the best NFL team ever. Coincidence? Me thinks not.

Some quality posting here. Getting trounced on logic so it's time to start the name-calling. You want to link where I called them the best NFL team ever?As has already been pointed out, you're talking about two years since, one where the Superbowl loss was their one loss for the year, where they set multiple offensive records, and the other where they lost their "once in a lifetime quarterback" one quarter into the season. As usual, you make a compelling case.

"Genius" coach was that reliant on his starting QB? Perhaps it's Brady who is the genius.Sorry for the 'fool' comment. You're right. We debate on a lot of issues and you always keep it cool. My bad.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

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

can never be enough

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

someones on a bump old thread roll!!!!! great job

 

[JohnnyU]

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

can never be enough

Didn't he suck as a Browns coach?

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

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

can never be enough

Didn't he suck as a Browns coach?

well, if you call taking the 2nd worst team in the league from 3 wins to 11 wins and a playoff appearance 'sucking', then yes, he sucked magnificently.

no homo

 

[cstu]

NOW you have no idea? Nice backtrack. I never claimed to know anything about it, unlike yourself who is pretty dang certain it helped them even after it was 'discovered', but when called on it is at a complete loss to even begin to explain just how that might have transpired.

They haven't won any Super Bowls since it was 'discovered'. Not even in the season that fools like you were calling them the best NFL team ever. Coincidence? Me thinks not.

Some quality posting here. Getting trounced on logic so it's time to start the name-calling. You want to link where I called them the best NFL team ever?As has already been pointed out, you're talking about two years since, one where the Superbowl loss was their one loss for the year, where they set multiple offensive records, and the other where they lost their "once in a lifetime quarterback" one quarter into the season. As usual, you make a compelling case.

"Genius" coach was that reliant on his starting QB? Perhaps it's Brady who is the genius.Sorry for the 'fool' comment. You're right. We debate on a lot of issues and you always keep it cool. My bad.

First let me say Brady is an awesome QB.

But he doesn't play defense, prepare defensive strategies, draft players or sign free agents.

 

[PhD]

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

can never be enough

Didn't he suck as a Browns coach?

well, if you call taking the 2nd worst team in the league from 3 wins to 11 wins and a playoff appearance 'sucking', then yes, he sucked magnificently.

no homo

right. It was an awesome turn-around... it only took him three losing seasons to do it, which kind of sucked. You have to credit him for that one good year though... before they sucked again the following year. But all-in-all, if history has taught us anything, it was the Browns for God's sake. He generally brought them some of the best average years that they had at the time, before they fired him.

 

[cstu]

right. It was an awesome turn-around... it only took him three losing seasons to do it, which kind of sucked. You have to credit him for that one good year though... before they sucked again the following year. But all-in-all, if history has taught us anything, it was the Browns for God's sake. He generally brought them some of the best average years that they had at the time, before they fired him.

The Browns have not have an 11 win season since Belichick was fired.

Amazing that he'd be fired right after a down year in which their All-Pro safety Eric Turner and 1st round WR Derrick Alexander were injured for most of the season.

Alas, the Browns.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

well, that's when they moved

there was a bit of turmoil

of course, firing the best coach in the history of sports was still probably a mistake

 

[cstu]

well, that's when they moved

there was a bit of turmoil

of course, firing the best coach in the history of sports was still probably a mistake

Link

Bill Belichick, fired Wednesday after the five worst years in Browns history, is believed close to signing on with Jimmy Johnson as the Miami Dolphins' defensive coordinator.

Modell blamed the leak of his move to Baltimore for ruining Belichick's final year. After a 3-1 start, the Browns were 4-4 when the news surfaced and finished 1-7.

From the best trade in NFL history:

“I really believe that much of the disdain and abuse I received was because of the feelings the media and the public had for Bill,” Modell said in 1996. “Every day I thought it would change, that he would be more pleasant to people. He never did, and it hurt all of us terribly.”

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

Yeah, how'd That Work Out?

 

[JetMaxx]

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

can never be enough

Didn't he cheat as a Browns coach?

Apparently not

 

[Insomniac]

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

can never be enough

Didn't he suck as a Browns coach?

The year before he became the coach of the Browns they went 3-13 and had a point differential of -234.

His first year the team went 6-10 and were outscored by 5 points.

That looks like a substantial improvement to me.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

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

can never be enough

Didn't he suck as a Browns coach?

The year before he became the coach of the Browns they went 3-13 and had a point differential of -234.

His first year the team went 6-10 and were outscored by 5 points.

That looks like a substantial improvement to me.

but he didnt't win 4 superbowls with them!!@!@#$!

 

[Touchdown There]

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

can never be enough

Didn't he suck as a Browns coach?

well, if you call taking the 2nd worst team in the league from 3 wins to 11 wins and a playoff appearance 'sucking', then yes, he sucked magnificently.

no homo

What does "no homo" mean at the end of this post in 8pt font? Hope you don't mind, but I enlarged and bolded as your subtle negative jabs combined with terrible sarcasm really needs to stop.

 

[PhD]

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

can never be enough

Didn't he suck as a Browns coach?

The year before he became the coach of the Browns they went 3-13 and had a point differential of -234.

His first year the team went 6-10 and were outscored by 5 points.

That looks like a substantial improvement to me.

but he didnt't win 4 superbowls with them!!@!@#$!

Heck, he hasn't even won 4 superbowls with the Pats has he?

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

let me get back to you in a couple weeks on that one

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

well, that's when they moved

there was a bit of turmoil

of course, firing the best coach in the history of sports was still probably a mistake

such a tool

 

[Run It Up]

So much hate.

 

[dschuler]

How is BB so good now after the cheating incident? Why does he keep winning? Why does he keep going to the playoffs? Why does he keep out coaching the other team? Let me guess, the same whiners about spy-gate are the same whiners about the Ravens game. Some people are truly pathetic.

No excuses, just results.

 

[Touchdown There]

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

can never be enough

Didn't he suck as a Browns coach?

well, if you call taking the 2nd worst team in the league from 3 wins to 11 wins and a playoff appearance 'sucking', then yes, he sucked magnificently.

no homo

What does "no homo" mean at the end of this post in 8pt font? Hope you don't mind, but I enlarged and bolded as your subtle negative jabs combined with terrible sarcasm really needs to stop.

No response, Larry? What did you mean with this slur?

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

How is BB so good now after the cheating incident? Why does he keep winning? Why does he keep going to the playoffs? Why does he keep out coaching the other team? Let me guess, the same whiners about spy-gate are the same whiners about the Ravens game. Some people are truly pathetic.

No excuses, just results.

dude he lost 2 superbowls to Eli manning and Tom Coughlin, slow your roll her just a bit

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

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

can never be enough

Didn't he suck as a Browns coach?

well, if you call taking the 2nd worst team in the league from 3 wins to 11 wins and a playoff appearance 'sucking', then yes, he sucked magnificently.

no homo

What does "no homo" mean at the end of this post in 8pt font? Hope you don't mind, but I enlarged and bolded as your subtle negative jabs combined with terrible sarcasm really needs to stop.

No response, Larry? What did you mean with this slur?

I Meant I didn't Want You In This thread

 

[Run It Up]

Oh snap, its getting a little steamy in here.

Watching Caliendo on ESPN, Belichick interviewing Rex for a job. Bretty gud.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

yeah that was pretty funny

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

“I really believe that much of the disdain and abuse I received was because of the feelings the media and the public had for Bill,” Modell said in 1996. “Every day I thought it would change, that he would be more pleasant to people. He never did, and it hurt all of us terribly.”

wait...let me see if I can learn something from all this trollery -- art modell, the man infamous for moving the storied browns claims people dislike him a bit because belichick doesn't smile at them more often?

or was that a made up quote?

 

[cstu]

“I really believe that much of the disdain and abuse I received was because of the feelings the media and the public had for Bill,” Modell said in 1996. “Every day I thought it would change, that he would be more pleasant to people. He never did, and it hurt all of us terribly.”

wait...let me see if I can learn something from all this trollery -- art modell, the man infamous for moving the storied browns claims people dislike him a bit because belichick doesn't smile at them more often?

or was that a made up quote?

He did in fact say that. There was a belief at the time that his personality would prevent him from being a good head coach:

“Because of Belichick’s terrible relationship with the media, perhaps the worst in NFL history,” John McClain of the Houston Chronicle noted in January 1997, “the Raiders are the only team that could give him another chance to be a head coach.”

Particularly harsh criticism came from his old media buddies in Cleveland. Bud Shaw of the Plain Dealer talked about the picture of Belichick at the Super Bowl with the Patriots in 1996 being worth “1,000 of the grunts and one-word replies that identified his Cro-Magnon era as Browns’ coach,” and would later describe Belichick as “as bland as a bland comfort could be.”5 Tony Grossi of the same paper shot down reports linking Belichick to Indianapolis by noting, “[Jim] Irsay needs to pump up excitement in his market to sell higher-priced luxury suites and club seats. Belichick’s record in Cleveland as a fan-base killer is legendary.”

http://grantland.com/the-triangle/bill-belichick-new-england-patriots-trade-new-york-jets/

 

[Touchdown There]

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

can never be enough

Didn't he suck as a Browns coach?

well, if you call taking the 2nd worst team in the league from 3 wins to 11 wins and a playoff appearance 'sucking', then yes, he sucked magnificently.

no homo

What does "no homo" mean at the end of this post in 8pt font? Hope you don't mind, but I enlarged and bolded as your subtle negative jabs combined with terrible sarcasm really needs to stop.

No response, Larry? What did you mean with this slur?

I Meant I didn't Want You In This thread

No caps for five years and then you cap every word for a whole sentence? You are an evil, negative, ugly troll sir.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

oh yeah, I just updated my phone recently and now it does that