Coughlin > Belichick (1 Viewer)

[KarmaPolice]

The Pats were the favorites.

By Vegas. I didn't hear anybody that week pick them or say they had the better team.

And how does Vegas set the line? Obviously a hell of a lot of people thought they were the better team.How many people did you hear saying the Giants would win the Super Bowl in week 15 when they were 7-7?

Good gawd, you talk like teams can't evolve, get healthy, get hot, etc... Who cares that people were picking the Eagles at the start of the year or that people were down on the Giants 2 months ago? The Packers barely got into the playoffs last year too. Just about everywhere I listened to were saying that now that the Giants were healthy, they had the better team/more talent. I am a fan, and think the Pats got lucky to get in this year - banged up Steelers, no Rivers/Manning to face, and played a poor game against the Ravens. I think a Texas team with Schaub would have cut through all the other teams too. I am not educated enough about lines to tell you why the Pats were favored, just seemed like everybody was surprised that they were.

 

[skedssays]

last I checked, 3* while cheating < 2 the honest way

Fixed

Of the Giants don't fake injuries they don't even get to the playoffs -- so this one was won thanks, in part, to cheating.

They probably still would've won that game vs StL. But lets be honest, both Coughlin and Belichick worked under Parcells, and Coughlin probably did some taping of his own. Much like a lot of teams did, Patriots just got caught.

Any proof to substantiate this claim?

I'm just saying you have 2 coaches that came up under Parcells, who has gone on record saying "a team would have to be pretty stupid to think an opponent isn't trying to steal signals." I'm not accusing Coughlin at all or saying he's done it, that was the use of the word 'probably'. You'd think that maybe they both picked up some habits from Parcells just thinking on the side of logic.

 

[Godsbrother]

The Pats were the favorites.

By Vegas. I didn't hear anybody that week pick them or say they had the better team.

And how does Vegas set the line? Obviously a hell of a lot of people thought they were the better team.How many people did you hear saying the Giants would win the Super Bowl in week 15 when they were 7-7?

Good gawd, you talk like teams can't evolve, get healthy, get hot, etc... Who cares that people were picking the Eagles at the start of the year or that people were down on the Giants 2 months ago? The Packers barely got into the playoffs last year too. Just about everywhere I listened to were saying that now that the Giants were healthy, they had the better team/more talent. I am a fan, and think the Pats got lucky to get in this year - banged up Steelers, no Rivers/Manning to face, and played a poor game against the Ravens. I think a Texas team with Schaub would have cut through all the other teams too. I am not educated enough about lines to tell you why the Pats were favored, just seemed like everybody was surprised that they were.

Lines are set by Vegas to minimize payouts. They want to take in a mixture of bets at odds that ensure they will make money no matter who wins. If their "book" is unbalanced in favor of one or more teams then they can try to lay some of those bets with other bookmakers, or they can lower the odds on the popular team to encourage bets on the less popular one. In other words, if everybody (as you claim) were surprised that the Pats were favored they would be betting on the Giants which would move the line. This didn't happen so the betting must have been pretty even.The whole point is that Coughlin took a team that most people thought didn't have a chance as late as Week 16 and beat a 15-1 Packer team on the road and a 13-3 Pats team in the Super Bowl led by "the greatest QB of all time" and coached by "the genius" Bill Belichick. And lets not forget that Coughlin beat Belichick's 18-0 team with a wildcard team in Super Bowl XL II.

 

[The Jerk]

Great and/or effort from Godsbrother...

I think both coaches are outstanding and their record speaks for itself.

Belichick's decade-long run in NE and success as a DC with the Giants is legendary. However, it is equally fair to point out Belichick's 42-58 (1-1 playoffs) record as a head coach and five losing seasons out of six without Tom Brady as his starting QB.

Coughlin likewise has five losing seasons in 16 seasons, exactly the same as Belichick, but he took an expansion team to the AFC championship in his second season, and now competes in the far more rugged NFC East.

What I find interesting is how apparently little the media does in critiquing coaching decisions. Why is there praise for Belichick allowing the Giants to score with 1:00 left, but very little if any criticism for not making that decision one play earlier? The media manages to find praise for allowing the TD, but somehow isn't able to see it would have been far more brilliant to make the same decision one play earlier, thereby saving another timeout.

Likewise, why are few in the media critical of the ridiculous challenge of a clear Manningham catch, no matter how many yards it was.

If Belichick declines to challenge and allows the Giants a TD on their first, rather than second, try, the Patriots would have had three timeouts and more than a minute left to attempt a game-winning TD drive. His decisions directly cost two timeouts and approximately six fewer seconds of remaining game time.

Belichick deserves his "genius" praise from the media, from his defensive game plan against the Bills and 49ers to his intentional safety at Denver, etc., but I believe most coaches would be under far more scrutiny than he seems to have gotten for his poor challenge and clock management in SB XLVI.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

The Pats were the favorites.

By Vegas. I didn't hear anybody that week pick them or say they had the better team.

And how does Vegas set the line? Obviously a hell of a lot of people thought they were the better team.How many people did you hear saying the Giants would win the Super Bowl in week 15 when they were 7-7?

Good gawd, you talk like teams can't evolve, get healthy, get hot, etc... Who cares that people were picking the Eagles at the start of the year or that people were down on the Giants 2 months ago? The Packers barely got into the playoffs last year too. Just about everywhere I listened to were saying that now that the Giants were healthy, they had the better team/more talent. I am a fan, and think the Pats got lucky to get in this year - banged up Steelers, no Rivers/Manning to face, and played a poor game against the Ravens. I think a Texas team with Schaub would have cut through all the other teams too. I am not educated enough about lines to tell you why the Pats were favored, just seemed like everybody was surprised that they were.

4eemed to me that everyone expected the Pats to win but hoped the Giants would win. I think the amount of people who were betting Giants did so because of the 3 extra points, not because they thought Giants had better odds of winning straight up. I think with even odds, would have been a different story. And if the Pats would have been getting 3, forget about it.

 

[Ghost Rider]

The guy should have been suspended if not flat out thrown out of the league but instead the media calls him a genius. Crazy world we live in...

Because he coaches in Boston, and since ESPN dominates sports coverage and loves everything Boston or NY, Spygate is almost never mentioned anymore. Trust me, had the coach and team (of a dynasty) that plays in St. Louis, Houston, Minnesota or Arizona been caught doing what Belichick did, ESPN would never stop talking about it, especially when comparing that dynasty to dynasties of the past. It's funny, we are supposed to believe that the careers of Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, etc. are all tainted because they all got caught doing something that supposedly "everyone does," but the Patriots dynasty is not flawed at all despite Spygate also supposedly being something that "everyone does." Just more ESPN bias rearing its ugly head.

 

[Ron_Mexico]

Come on....... if Coughlin doesn't make the playoffs he's fired from the Giants.Now he's better than the best coach in our era?Sorry, great game by the Giants but no way is Coughlin a better coach than Belichik.

this.Belichick has done more with less than any coach of his era.

 

[Boston]

Great and/or effort from Godsbrother...I think both coaches are outstanding and their record speaks for itself. Belichick's decade-long run in NE and success as a DC with the Giants is legendary. However, it is equally fair to point out Belichick's 42-58 (1-1 playoffs) record as a head coach and five losing seasons out of six without Tom Brady as his starting QB.Coughlin likewise has five losing seasons in 16 seasons, exactly the same as Belichick, but he took an expansion team to the AFC championship in his second season, and now competes in the far more rugged NFC East.What I find interesting is how apparently little the media does in critiquing coaching decisions. Why is there praise for Belichick allowing the Giants to score with 1:00 left, but very little if any criticism for not making that decision one play earlier? The media manages to find praise for allowing the TD, but somehow isn't able to see it would have been far more brilliant to make the same decision one play earlier, thereby saving another timeout.Likewise, why are few in the media critical of the ridiculous challenge of a clear Manningham catch, no matter how many yards it was.If Belichick declines to challenge and allows the Giants a TD on their first, rather than second, try, the Patriots would have had three timeouts and more than a minute left to attempt a game-winning TD drive. His decisions directly cost two timeouts and approximately six fewer seconds of remaining game time.Belichick deserves his "genius" praise from the media, from his defensive game plan against the Bills and 49ers to his intentional safety at Denver, etc., but I believe most coaches would be under far more scrutiny than he seems to have gotten for his poor challenge and clock management in SB XLVI.

I strongly disagree about the challenge decision...you absolutely have to challenge that...in real-time that was not a definite and Eli was rushing his team to the line...BB did not have the benefit of time on his side and that play was far too important to let slide...it was 100% a catch but you have to roll the dice there and hope the ball was bobbled or the feet weren't in-bounds...

 

[parrot]

The guy should have been suspended if not flat out thrown out of the league but instead the media calls him a genius. Crazy world we live in...

Because he coaches in Boston, and since ESPN dominates sports coverage and loves everything Boston or NY, Spygate is almost never mentioned anymore. Trust me, had the coach and team (of a dynasty) that plays in St. Louis, Houston, Minnesota or Arizona been caught doing what Belichick did, ESPN would never stop talking about it, especially when comparing that dynasty to dynasties of the past. It's funny, we are supposed to believe that the careers of Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, etc. are all tainted because they all got caught doing something that supposedly "everyone does," but the Patriots dynasty is not flawed at all despite Spygate also supposedly being something that "everyone does." Just more ESPN bias rearing its ugly head.

Or maybe, the media, very belatedly, finally grasped what it was that the Patriots were actually punished for; filming from a forbidden location, NOT filming opponents' signals. Beyond that, maybe they even put together that there was never any indication that the Patriots engaged in the kind of behavior the rule was intended to prevent, and thus never gained any illicit advantage from the practice.

 

[AmosMoses]

Coughlin <<<<< BB

Coughlin's not had anywhere near the continued regular and post season success as BB. BB is a scoundrel and a rat and lots of reason to hate him, I get this. I am sure that there are others (like his protoge's) who have cheated or tried to cheat, but don't have his success. Notice how nobody is talking up the Giants "dynasty" even they won two of the last 5 games. They are considered the lil guys that could. The Patriots during their run had a number of #1 seed teams and were generally the bullies on the block. The Giants? Always in the mix, but never a clear frontrunner even in their own division. The only reasonable explanation is BB has mad talent. Objectively, you have to give BB his due. Like him or hate him. Post Parcells era, he is THE coach of his generation. And if you took a serious poll and weeded out the haters, this wouldn't be close.

I think BB is a great coach but I don't think that a "genius" whose team is led by "the greatest QB of all time" gets beat in the championship game twice in five years by an "inferior" coach. Coughlin deserves the accolades.

Coughlin is a good coach yes, but that is not the question ir statement othat is the title of this thread.Coughlin is far from the greatness of BB. BB has been there more times then Coughlin, has more rings then Coughlin, and has been there as a member of another team more then Coughlin.

Does Coughlin have BB number head to head, that too is obvious.

But if you were starting a team would you really take coughlin over BB?

Keep in mind, Coughlin was not the one dropping passing for the Patriots late in the game, if that did not happen would we still be talking about coughlin in this light?

Well it wasn't Raheem Morris throwing all of those picks for the Bucs but you see where that got him. Coaches are responsible for the play of their players. If you start making excuses for BB then you have to do it for every head coach in the league.BB is a great coach that has had wonderful successes but also had some down seasons with Cleveland and he has had dominating teams with New England that have underachieved. He is also a known cheat.

Coughlin has twice beaten BB in the Super Bowl with teams most people considered inferior and took an expansion team to the AFC championship game in it's second season. Coughlin has proven himself to me that he is every bit the coach of Belichick.

Hardly anybody I heard or talked to was picking this Pats last week.

The Pats were the favorites.

By Vegas. I didn't hear anybody that week pick them or say they had the better team.

Do you know how dumb this sounds?Yeah, screw Vegas. Me, Billy, Tommy and Bobby thought the Giants were gonna win, so they were the favorites.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

Come on....... if Coughlin doesn't make the playoffs he's fired from the Giants.Now he's better than the best coach in our era?Sorry, great game by the Giants but no way is Coughlin a better coach than Belichik.

this.Belichick has done more with less than any coach of his era.

Isnt that his own fault? Isnt he primarily responible for the players on his roster? Did he have his players ready to play in the last 2 superbowls?

 

[Godsbrother]

Great and/or effort from Godsbrother...

Thanks! I just wanted to stir the pot a little! I do think Belichick gets way more praise in comparison to some other very good coaches and I think he should be getting a lot more disdain for Spygate.And I agree with you about not receiving criticism for not allowing them to score a TD on the play before. If you are going to do it why burn 5-6 seconds and a timeout?

 

[Carolina Hustler]

The guy should have been suspended if not flat out thrown out of the league but instead the media calls him a genius. Crazy world we live in...

Because he coaches in Boston, and since ESPN dominates sports coverage and loves everything Boston or NY, Spygate is almost never mentioned anymore. Trust me, had the coach and team (of a dynasty) that plays in St. Louis, Houston, Minnesota or Arizona been caught doing what Belichick did, ESPN would never stop talking about it, especially when comparing that dynasty to dynasties of the past. It's funny, we are supposed to believe that the careers of Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, etc. are all tainted because they all got caught doing something that supposedly "everyone does," but the Patriots dynasty is not flawed at all despite Spygate also supposedly being something that "everyone does." Just more ESPN bias rearing its ugly head.

Or maybe, the media, very belatedly, finally grasped what it was that the Patriots were actually punished for; filming from a forbidden location, NOT filming opponents' signals. Beyond that, maybe they even put together that there was never any indication that the Patriots engaged in the kind of behavior the rule was intended to prevent, and thus never gained any illicit advantage from the practice.

I think the NFL and the rest of the sports media knew it wasn't in their best interest to shed light on the matter further as their product is more attractive if their winners aren't cheaters. Too much money made on top teams perpetuating an honest winning image.Nice tery though.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Come on....... if Coughlin doesn't make the playoffs he's fired from the Giants.Now he's better than the best coach in our era?Sorry, great game by the Giants but no way is Coughlin a better coach than Belichik.

this.Belichick has done more with less than any coach of his era.

Isnt that his own fault? Isnt he primarily responible for the players on his roster? Did he have his players ready to play in the last 2 superbowls?

With all the extra picks he's had over the years I wouldn't say he's done with less.. Actually, he's had an advantage.

 

[MDSkinner]

With all the extra picks he's had over the years I wouldn't say he's done with less.. Actually, he's had an advantage.

I am a Pat's hater, but I am pretty sure he has started out with the same number of picks as every other team and that thanks to spygate he actually had less. The fact that he traded them to other teams to build up a large portion of picks does not mean he's had an advantage but that he rather has played the game smarter and created an advantage.

 

[Raiderfan32904]

Great and/or effort from Godsbrother...

Thanks! I just wanted to stir the pot a little! I do think Belichick gets way more praise in comparison to some other very good coaches and I think he should be getting a lot more disdain for Spygate.And I agree with you about not receiving criticism for not allowing them to score a TD on the play before. If you are going to do it why burn 5-6 seconds and a timeout?

Well now that you've admitted to and would you consider changing the subtitle of "not even close", or is the fishing trip to continue for a few more pages?I hate Belichick just as much as the next guy, but the whole setting Coughlin up on a pedestal to shove Belichick's face in it has overinflated Coughlin's resume. Belichick is a POS, don't like him & never will. But he's a HOF coach (or will be) and Coughlin needs to do more to be considered in his class. Not to say he won't get there. But he's not there yet.

 

[Thunderlips]

With all the extra picks he's had over the years I wouldn't say he's done with less.. Actually, he's had an advantage.

I am a Pat's hater, but I am pretty sure he has started out with the same number of picks as every other team and that thanks to spygate he actually had less. The fact that he traded them to other teams to build up a large portion of picks does not mean he's had an advantage but that he rather has played the game smarter and created an advantage.

Hasn't won him anything.

 

[MDSkinner]

With all the extra picks he's had over the years I wouldn't say he's done with less.. Actually, he's had an advantage.

I am a Pat's hater, but I am pretty sure he has started out with the same number of picks as every other team and that thanks to spygate he actually had less. The fact that he traded them to other teams to build up a large portion of picks does not mean he's had an advantage but that he rather has played the game smarter and created an advantage.

Hasn't won him anything.

I completely agree. But it is silly to say that he had an advantage in that context.

 

[Godsbrother]

Great and/or effort from Godsbrother...

Thanks! I just wanted to stir the pot a little! I do think Belichick gets way more praise in comparison to some other very good coaches and I think he should be getting a lot more disdain for Spygate.And I agree with you about not receiving criticism for not allowing them to score a TD on the play before. If you are going to do it why burn 5-6 seconds and a timeout?

Well now that you've admitted to and would you consider changing the subtitle of "not even close", or is the fishing trip to continue for a few more pages?I hate Belichick just as much as the next guy, but the whole setting Coughlin up on a pedestal to shove Belichick's face in it has overinflated Coughlin's resume. Belichick is a POS, don't like him & never will. But he's a HOF coach (or will be) and Coughlin needs to do more to be considered in his class. Not to say he won't get there. But he's not there yet.

Okay, I removed the "Not even close" subtitle but the "Coughlin > Belichick" title remains!

 

[Godsbrother]

With all the extra picks he's had over the years I wouldn't say he's done with less.. Actually, he's had an advantage.

I am a Pat's hater, but I am pretty sure he has started out with the same number of picks as every other team and that thanks to spygate he actually had less. The fact that he traded them to other teams to build up a large portion of picks does not mean he's had an advantage but that he rather has played the game smarter and created an advantage.

Hasn't won him anything.

I completely agree. But it is silly to say that he had an advantage in that context.

Okay but I don't think you can say that stock piling the picks have made him smarter than anyone else either.

 

[MDSkinner]

Okay but I don't think you can say that stock piling the picks have made him smarter than anyone else either.

That is a fair point. I guess the way that I am seeing this is that if people are seeing the extra picks as an advantage then the argument would be made that he has been able to do more to stockpile those picks than most others. Again, I am not BB fan. I just think saying he had an advantage in that light was silly. He did well at stockpiling picks. How people value stockpiling picks will vary from person to person, I would guess.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

With all the extra picks he's had over the years I wouldn't say he's done with less.. Actually, he's had an advantage.

I am a Pat's hater, but I am pretty sure he has started out with the same number of picks as every other team and that thanks to spygate he actually had less. The fact that he traded them to other teams to build up a large portion of picks does not mean he's had an advantage but that he rather has played the game smarter and created an advantage.

Hasn't won him anything.

I completely agree. But it is silly to say that he had an advantage in that context.

Whether he created it or not. Extra early picks is an advantage. What he has done with those picks is another story.

 

[MDSkinner]

Whether he created it or not. Extra early picks is an advantage. What he has done with those picks is another story.

Extra picks certainly seem like a good thing to me, which is why I think BB deserves some credit for being able to leverage what he has to get those picks. He (and the Pats front office) have done very well at stockpiling picks, and if you value that he deserves credit for that. Whether he created it or not is exactly the point.That is like saying that having Aaron Rodgers (another who I am not a fan of since he will likely own the Bears for the next 10-15) is an advantage but not giving credit to the Packers for drafting him.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Whether he created it or not. Extra early picks is an advantage. What he has done with those picks is another story.

Extra picks certainly seem like a good thing to me, which is why I think BB deserves some credit for being able to leverage what he has to get those picks. He (and the Pats front office) have done very well at stockpiling picks, and if you value that he deserves credit for that. Whether he created it or not is exactly the point.That is like saying that having Aaron Rodgers (another who I am not a fan of since he will likely own the Bears for the next 10-15) is an advantage but not giving credit to the Packers for drafting him.

Well if he is doing more with less (player wise) then everyone else,after having an advantage with draft picks, you'd have to say it's his own fault wouldn't you? How can you go into the draft every year with such a pick advantage and still end up with no defense to speak off and an offense that relies primarily on 4 players?

 

[MDSkinner]

Whether he created it or not. Extra early picks is an advantage. What he has done with those picks is another story.

Extra picks certainly seem like a good thing to me, which is why I think BB deserves some credit for being able to leverage what he has to get those picks. He (and the Pats front office) have done very well at stockpiling picks, and if you value that he deserves credit for that. Whether he created it or not is exactly the point.That is like saying that having Aaron Rodgers (another who I am not a fan of since he will likely own the Bears for the next 10-15) is an advantage but not giving credit to the Packers for drafting him.

Well if he is doing more with less (player wise) then everyone else,after having an advantage with draft picks, you'd have to say it's his own fault wouldn't you? How can you go into the draft every year with such a pick advantage and still end up with no defense to speak off and an offense that relies primarily on 4 players?

His own fault for losing in the Super Bowl? Sure, I will go with that. But basically you are proving the point of those that say (and I was not one of them) that he is doing more with less when you say that he is still able to put together a Super Bowl losing team with a terrible defense and an offense that relies on 4 players. Not bad to make it to the Super Bowl and have a chance with that lack of talent (that you created yourself through the draft that you were good at stockpiling picks from).Let me say once again, I am not a BB fan. I was VERY happy to see the Giants win this one and the previous Super Bowl they were in together. But your argument seems to come more from hate than from logic.

 

[Ron_Mexico]

Come on....... if Coughlin doesn't make the playoffs he's fired from the Giants.Now he's better than the best coach in our era?Sorry, great game by the Giants but no way is Coughlin a better coach than Belichik.

this.Belichick has done more with less than any coach of his era.

Isnt that his own fault? Isnt he primarily responible for the players on his roster? Did he have his players ready to play in the last 2 superbowls?

YesYesYes.I agree with you on all 3 points. I believe they lost to the better team in SB46.I also stand by my belief that looking at the season as a whole, he has done morewith less than any other coach in the NFL.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

Come on....... if Coughlin doesn't make the playoffs he's fired from the Giants.Now he's better than the best coach in our era?Sorry, great game by the Giants but no way is Coughlin a better coach than Belichik.

this.Belichick has done more with less than any coach of his era.

Isnt that his own fault? Isnt he primarily responible for the players on his roster? Did he have his players ready to play in the last 2 superbowls?

YesYesYes.I agree with you on all 3 points. I believe they lost to the better team in SB46.I also stand by my belief that looking at the season as a whole, he has done morewith less than any other coach in the NFL.

Having a HOF QB certainly helps.Look at me!!! I win with a bunch of chumps!!! see how smart I am.Maybe if he kept his higher picks instead of always trading down, he might have better players? Just not a high quantity of bad players

 

[parrot]

The guy should have been suspended if not flat out thrown out of the league but instead the media calls him a genius. Crazy world we live in...

Because he coaches in Boston, and since ESPN dominates sports coverage and loves everything Boston or NY, Spygate is almost never mentioned anymore. Trust me, had the coach and team (of a dynasty) that plays in St. Louis, Houston, Minnesota or Arizona been caught doing what Belichick did, ESPN would never stop talking about it, especially when comparing that dynasty to dynasties of the past. It's funny, we are supposed to believe that the careers of Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, etc. are all tainted because they all got caught doing something that supposedly "everyone does," but the Patriots dynasty is not flawed at all despite Spygate also supposedly being something that "everyone does." Just more ESPN bias rearing its ugly head.

Or maybe, the media, very belatedly, finally grasped what it was that the Patriots were actually punished for; filming from a forbidden location, NOT filming opponents' signals. Beyond that, maybe they even put together that there was never any indication that the Patriots engaged in the kind of behavior the rule was intended to prevent, and thus never gained any illicit advantage from the practice.

I think the NFL and the rest of the sports media knew it wasn't in their best interest to shed light on the matter further as their product is more attractive if their winners aren't cheaters. Too much money made on top teams perpetuating an honest winning image.Nice tery though.

Have you followed the sports media the last few days? They're talking about Brady's wife for Chrissakes. They're dying for any kind of storyline or angle. If there was a real story about how the Patriots actually "cheated" every reporter and their dog would be on it.

 

[Run It Up]

To actually contribute to this thread days later.

Coughlin is a good coach, one of the best active coaches.

The only thing I would even consider saying he might have a leg up on Belichick is his success with personnel decisions, BB gets by with an amazing system and one of, if not the best QB in the NFL, but outside of a few OLine picks, the two TEs last year, Chung, Mccourty, Shaun Ellis this year and picking up Welker few years ago not a whole awful lot in the good category.

Wheras the Giants are set in the backfield, wideouts, TE and front 7 on defense.

 

[Avery]

To actually contribute to this thread days later.Coughlin is a good coach, one of the best active coaches.The only thing I would even consider saying he might have a leg up on Belichick is his success with personnel decisions, BB gets by with an amazing system and one of, if not the best QB in the NFL, but outside of a few OLine picks, the two TEs last year, Chung, Mccourty, Shaun Ellis this year and picking up Welker few years ago not a whole awful lot in the good category.Wheras the Giants are set in the backfield, wideouts, TE and front 7 on defense.

I love me some Coughlin but although I'm sure Coughlin has a say, he's not the GM.

 

[Run It Up]

To actually contribute to this thread days later.Coughlin is a good coach, one of the best active coaches.The only thing I would even consider saying he might have a leg up on Belichick is his success with personnel decisions, BB gets by with an amazing system and one of, if not the best QB in the NFL, but outside of a few OLine picks, the two TEs last year, Chung, Mccourty, Shaun Ellis this year and picking up Welker few years ago not a whole awful lot in the good category.Wheras the Giants are set in the backfield, wideouts, TE and front 7 on defense.

I love me some Coughlin but although I'm sure Coughlin has a say, he's not the GM.

They both contribute to personnel decisions and its silly to think that they dont.

 

[Boston]

Come on....... if Coughlin doesn't make the playoffs he's fired from the Giants.Now he's better than the best coach in our era?Sorry, great game by the Giants but no way is Coughlin a better coach than Belichik.

this.Belichick has done more with less than any coach of his era.

Isnt that his own fault? Isnt he primarily responible for the players on his roster? Did he have his players ready to play in the last 2 superbowls?

YesYesYes.I agree with you on all 3 points. I believe they lost to the better team in SB46.I also stand by my belief that looking at the season as a whole, he has done morewith less than any other coach in the NFL.

Having a HOF QB certainly helps.Look at me!!! I win with a bunch of chumps!!! see how smart I am.Maybe if he kept his higher picks instead of always trading down, he might have better players? Just not a high quantity of bad players

You gotta separate BB the Coach from BB the GM...two different roles...

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

Come on....... if Coughlin doesn't make the playoffs he's fired from the Giants.Now he's better than the best coach in our era?Sorry, great game by the Giants but no way is Coughlin a better coach than Belichik.

this.Belichick has done more with less than any coach of his era.

Isnt that his own fault? Isnt he primarily responible for the players on his roster? Did he have his players ready to play in the last 2 superbowls?

YesYesYes.I agree with you on all 3 points. I believe they lost to the better team in SB46.I also stand by my belief that looking at the season as a whole, he has done morewith less than any other coach in the NFL.

Having a HOF QB certainly helps.Look at me!!! I win with a bunch of chumps!!! see how smart I am.Maybe if he kept his higher picks instead of always trading down, he might have better players? Just not a high quantity of bad players

You gotta separate BB the Coach from BB the GM...two different roles...

you want me to make the cake, how about letting me get the groceries.In superbowl XLII I think that coughlin really out coached him.2 days ago I think that Coughlin had the better team.BB got his defense turned around for the playoffs anyway. But I think his genius label has worn off just a bit

 

[Boston]

Come on....... if Coughlin doesn't make the playoffs he's fired from the Giants.Now he's better than the best coach in our era?Sorry, great game by the Giants but no way is Coughlin a better coach than Belichik.

this.Belichick has done more with less than any coach of his era.

Isnt that his own fault? Isnt he primarily responible for the players on his roster? Did he have his players ready to play in the last 2 superbowls?

YesYesYes.I agree with you on all 3 points. I believe they lost to the better team in SB46.I also stand by my belief that looking at the season as a whole, he has done morewith less than any other coach in the NFL.

Having a HOF QB certainly helps.Look at me!!! I win with a bunch of chumps!!! see how smart I am.Maybe if he kept his higher picks instead of always trading down, he might have better players? Just not a high quantity of bad players

You gotta separate BB the Coach from BB the GM...two different roles...

you want me to make the cake, how about letting me get the groceries.In superbowl XLII I think that coughlin really out coached him.2 days ago I think that Coughlin had the better team.BB got his defense turned around for the playoffs anyway. But I think his genius label has worn off just a bit

Coaching-wise he's as good as you get (and I do agree that in the first Giant Super Bowl he was out-coached)...GM-wise there are some very legit issues...I think BB is being graded unrealistically by some right now...as a Pats fan I fully understand that many fans are very tired of this organization but it seems like a 13-3 season and an AFC championship is beginning to be graded like a mediocre year for him...the guy makes mistakes and not every decision turns out correctly but coachingwise this guy has maintained a pretty high-level of excellence while having a roster totally turnover and in many cases not positively (thanks to BB the GM)...

 

[Avery]

To actually contribute to this thread days later.Coughlin is a good coach, one of the best active coaches.The only thing I would even consider saying he might have a leg up on Belichick is his success with personnel decisions, BB gets by with an amazing system and one of, if not the best QB in the NFL, but outside of a few OLine picks, the two TEs last year, Chung, Mccourty, Shaun Ellis this year and picking up Welker few years ago not a whole awful lot in the good category.Wheras the Giants are set in the backfield, wideouts, TE and front 7 on defense.

I love me some Coughlin but although I'm sure Coughlin has a say, he's not the GM.

They both contribute to personnel decisions and its silly to think that they dont.

I don't think anybody said something silly like that.It would be silly, however, to say that Coughlin gets "a leg up on Belichick" with "his success with personnel decisions" when the better part of that credit should go to Jerry Reese (and Ernie Accorsi).

 

[Carver]

Lots of ####### stupid in this thread.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

The guy should have been suspended if not flat out thrown out of the league but instead the media calls him a genius. Crazy world we live in...

Because he coaches in Boston, and since ESPN dominates sports coverage and loves everything Boston or NY, Spygate is almost never mentioned anymore. Trust me, had the coach and team (of a dynasty) that plays in St. Louis, Houston, Minnesota or Arizona been caught doing what Belichick did, ESPN would never stop talking about it, especially when comparing that dynasty to dynasties of the past. It's funny, we are supposed to believe that the careers of Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, etc. are all tainted because they all got caught doing something that supposedly "everyone does," but the Patriots dynasty is not flawed at all despite Spygate also supposedly being something that "everyone does." Just more ESPN bias rearing its ugly head.

Or maybe, the media, very belatedly, finally grasped what it was that the Patriots were actually punished for; filming from a forbidden location, NOT filming opponents' signals. Beyond that, maybe they even put together that there was never any indication that the Patriots engaged in the kind of behavior the rule was intended to prevent, and thus never gained any illicit advantage from the practice.

I think the NFL and the rest of the sports media knew it wasn't in their best interest to shed light on the matter further as their product is more attractive if their winners aren't cheaters. Too much money made on top teams perpetuating an honest winning image.Nice tery though.

Have you followed the sports media the last few days? They're talking about Brady's wife for Chrissakes. They're dying for any kind of storyline or angle. If there was a real story about how the Patriots actually "cheated" every reporter and their dog would be on it.

They did cheat, and were penalized for it.. Have you forgotten?

 

[Bri]

Insane Parcells doesn't make the HOF and we're debating how two guys that learned under him are the best of a followup era.

 

[Run It Up]

To actually contribute to this thread days later.Coughlin is a good coach, one of the best active coaches.The only thing I would even consider saying he might have a leg up on Belichick is his success with personnel decisions, BB gets by with an amazing system and one of, if not the best QB in the NFL, but outside of a few OLine picks, the two TEs last year, Chung, Mccourty, Shaun Ellis this year and picking up Welker few years ago not a whole awful lot in the good category.Wheras the Giants are set in the backfield, wideouts, TE and front 7 on defense.

I love me some Coughlin but although I'm sure Coughlin has a say, he's not the GM.

They both contribute to personnel decisions and its silly to think that they dont.

I don't think anybody said something silly like that.It would be silly, however, to say that Coughlin gets "a leg up on Belichick" with "his success with personnel decisions" when the better part of that credit should go to Jerry Reese (and Ernie Accorsi).

My comment wasnt a personal attack, nor was I suggesting that the respective GMs shouldnt be given credit, I was saying that since we are comparing TWO people that are both coaches and both have input on personnel decisions (which play a large part in a teams success) that IMO its possible to say that Coughlin has made better personnel decisions than BB.Thats it.

 

[bostonfred]

They did cheat, and were penalized for it.. Have you forgotten?

Exactly. That's how sports works. There are rules and penalties. Like when coughlin's guys dropped like they were shot to stop the no huddle. That was cheating, and they were penalized for it. Or when coughlin put twelve men on the field in the waning seconds. Cheating, penalized. That's how coughlin won a championship. He made a concious decision that cheating was more valuable than the penalties, so he cheated repeatedly. Happens all the time.

 

[bostonfred]

The thing people forget when criticizing the patriots drafts is that they've only had their one natural pick earlier than 20th since brady took over. They got seymour at seventh the draft before brady took over, wilfork slid, and other than that, they haven't had a shot at the elite guys in over a decade. Even the two years since 2001 that the pats missed the playoffs, they were held out on tiebreakers at 9-7 and 11-5. Other teams stop to rebuild. The patriots dynasty keeps rolling because they accumulate enough picks to absorb their misses while teams that don't have tom brady are forced to hit on most of their picks or keep going through the same rebuilding process again and again like detroit, cinci, cleveland, etc.

 

[Run It Up]

The thing people forget when criticizing the patriots drafts is that they've only had their one natural pick earlier than 20th since brady took over. They got seymour at seventh the draft before brady took over, wilfork slid, and other than that, they haven't had a shot at the elite guys in over a decade. Even the two years since 2001 that the pats missed the playoffs, they were held out on tiebreakers at 9-7 and 11-5. Other teams stop to rebuild. The patriots dynasty keeps rolling because they accumulate enough picks to absorb their misses while teams that don't have tom brady are forced to hit on most of their picks or keep going through the same rebuilding process again and again like detroit, cinci, cleveland, etc.

Its a great point and I did not even consider that when weighing my opinion over their respective drafts.I really liked the shots the pats took with Wilfork and Ocho, im holding out hope that over the offseason Ocho picks something up and I dont think a 2013 5th round pick for a DT that a few years earlier could be argued was one of the best in the league was a bad move at all, didnt pan out but what if it had...

 

[Carolina Hustler]

They did cheat, and were penalized for it.. Have you forgotten?

Exactly. That's how sports works. There are rules and penalties. Like when coughlin's guys dropped like they were shot to stop the no huddle. That was cheating, and they were penalized for it. Or when coughlin put twelve men on the field in the waning seconds. Cheating, penalized. That's how coughlin won a championship. He made a concious decision that cheating was more valuable than the penalties, so he cheated repeatedly. Happens all the time.

So you're suggesting that having 12 men on the field was intentional cheating? And you're trying to compare that to taping practices and defensive signals?

If I'm not mistaken, the 12th man on the field was in the process of getting off the field. He was just late getting off.

NBC never showed a true replay of the snap, only a freeze-frame of 12 Giants defenders, clearly numbered and labeled, spaced out as if they all meant to be there. But rewatching the clip, you can see that the defender at the top of the field isn't a cornerback; it's lineman Justin Tuck, helmet off, trying to hustle off the field. He's just a few steps from the sideline when the ball is snapped. This wasn't a calculating Giants defense gaming the system, just an old fashioned personnel ####-up.

My linkI really don't see how that changed the outcome of the game anyways.. Patriots fan crying about cheating and time lost off the clock.. It was an unintentional gaff on Tucks part, but even if he would have gotten off the field on time, the pass was still incomplete and the 8 sec's were still lost, and he didn't even try to get in on the play..

Nice try BostonFred

 

[Bri]

The thing people forget when criticizing the patriots drafts is that they've only had their one natural pick earlier than 20th since brady took over. They got seymour at seventh the draft before brady took over, wilfork slid, and other than that, they haven't had a shot at the elite guys in over a decade. Even the two years since 2001 that the pats missed the playoffs, they were held out on tiebreakers at 9-7 and 11-5. Other teams stop to rebuild. The patriots dynasty keeps rolling because they accumulate enough picks to absorb their misses while teams that don't have tom brady are forced to hit on most of their picks or keep going through the same rebuilding process again and again like detroit, cinci, cleveland, etc.

good point.We don't often admit how many picks miss around here, but prefer to play the what if game. Pats have whiffed on so many draft picks, but if they were 4 of 9 one year then we talk of how good those four picks were.I think Pioli was very good in New England and this might not be entirely to BB's credit. I doubt very much that this overly planned out concept of stockpiling picks isn't his, I mean it sure seems like him, but some others do get credit.

 

[Godsbrother]

The guy should have been suspended if not flat out thrown out of the league but instead the media calls him a genius. Crazy world we live in...

Because he coaches in Boston, and since ESPN dominates sports coverage and loves everything Boston or NY, Spygate is almost never mentioned anymore. Trust me, had the coach and team (of a dynasty) that plays in St. Louis, Houston, Minnesota or Arizona been caught doing what Belichick did, ESPN would never stop talking about it, especially when comparing that dynasty to dynasties of the past. It's funny, we are supposed to believe that the careers of Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, etc. are all tainted because they all got caught doing something that supposedly "everyone does," but the Patriots dynasty is not flawed at all despite Spygate also supposedly being something that "everyone does." Just more ESPN bias rearing its ugly head.

Or maybe, the media, very belatedly, finally grasped what it was that the Patriots were actually punished for; filming from a forbidden location, NOT filming opponents' signals. Beyond that, maybe they even put together that there was never any indication that the Patriots engaged in the kind of behavior the rule was intended to prevent, and thus never gained any illicit advantage from the practice.

I think the NFL and the rest of the sports media knew it wasn't in their best interest to shed light on the matter further as their product is more attractive if their winners aren't cheaters. Too much money made on top teams perpetuating an honest winning image.Nice tery though.

Have you followed the sports media the last few days? They're talking about Brady's wife for Chrissakes. They're dying for any kind of storyline or angle. If there was a real story about how the Patriots actually "cheated" every reporter and their dog would be on it.

The problem is that Fidel Goodell had all of the evidence destroyed after making his decision to only fine Belichick $500k and take a #1 draft pick from the Patriots. This was done to keep the media from learning the extent of the cheating to protect the integrity of the league.

 

[Bri]

I think it's interesting that Coughlin was part of the old Giants staff under BP and somehow has (relatively) horrible LBers. Giant football for like 30 years was predicated on great LB play.

At one point all the DL were getting bigger and bigger in the NFL. It was the evolution of the game. Mount and others were these huge 350 lb linemen and these small DL weren't going to cut it. The Eagles (prob few other teams too) had a smallish DL and were supposedly too small, but they did well back then. That evolution didn't happen really, it shifted back and there's plenty of supposedly smallish DL that do very well now. The Giants have very few 300lb+ DL but probably have one of the best defensive lines in the game.

Since their last Supe, we haven't really seen the 4DE set take off and become a trend. We might now. Guys like Tuck that can somehow play well inside and be cat quick are very hard to find. I think teams will try some DEs inside though now; more of a push toward that.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

The guy should have been suspended if not flat out thrown out of the league but instead the media calls him a genius. Crazy world we live in...

Because he coaches in Boston, and since ESPN dominates sports coverage and loves everything Boston or NY, Spygate is almost never mentioned anymore. Trust me, had the coach and team (of a dynasty) that plays in St. Louis, Houston, Minnesota or Arizona been caught doing what Belichick did, ESPN would never stop talking about it, especially when comparing that dynasty to dynasties of the past. It's funny, we are supposed to believe that the careers of Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, etc. are all tainted because they all got caught doing something that supposedly "everyone does," but the Patriots dynasty is not flawed at all despite Spygate also supposedly being something that "everyone does." Just more ESPN bias rearing its ugly head.

Or maybe, the media, very belatedly, finally grasped what it was that the Patriots were actually punished for; filming from a forbidden location, NOT filming opponents' signals. Beyond that, maybe they even put together that there was never any indication that the Patriots engaged in the kind of behavior the rule was intended to prevent, and thus never gained any illicit advantage from the practice.

I think the NFL and the rest of the sports media knew it wasn't in their best interest to shed light on the matter further as their product is more attractive if their winners aren't cheaters. Too much money made on top teams perpetuating an honest winning image.Nice tery though.

Have you followed the sports media the last few days? They're talking about Brady's wife for Chrissakes. They're dying for any kind of storyline or angle. If there was a real story about how the Patriots actually "cheated" every reporter and their dog would be on it.

The problem is that Fidel Goodell had all of the evidence destroyed after making his decision to only fine Belichick $500k and take a #1 draft pick from the Patriots. This was done to keep the media from learning the extent of the cheating to protect the integrity of the league.

*this^

 

[bostonfred]

They did cheat, and were penalized for it.. Have you forgotten?

Exactly. That's how sports works. There are rules and penalties. Like when coughlin's guys dropped like they were shot to stop the no huddle. That was cheating, and they were penalized for it. Or when coughlin put twelve men on the field in the waning seconds. Cheating, penalized. That's how coughlin won a championship. He made a concious decision that cheating was more valuable than the penalties, so he cheated repeatedly. Happens all the time.

So you're suggesting that having 12 men on the field was intentional cheating? And you're trying to compare that to taping practices and defensive signals?

No, my point is simple: there are rules and there are penalties. Coughlins strategy of having his guys fake injury was useful for dealing with the no huddle. That directly impacted a game in their superbowl season. nobody is suggesting that the giants superbowl is invalid, because there is a process for dealing with rules violation in the nfl just like every major sport. But the giants cheating in that game led to a win, which changed their season from an 8-8 disappointment to a 9-7 division win, which led to a superbowl victory. And unlike spygate, which led to the biggest penalty of all times, the giants were let off with a warning.The spygate controversy now appears to have been overblown. Since that fateful jets game,the league started closely monitoring the patriots every move. The patriots immediately won 18 straight games, then went to two superbowls, had their qb win two mvps, won more games than any other team by a decisive margin, and did it all without the benefit of a first round pick which was stripped from them by an arbitrary decision by the commish. That same commish who just warned the giants for a tactic that palpably affected the superbowl champion this year.This isn't intended to say that spygate and flopping are the same thing, or that the giants were the only ones to fake injuries (although they did it more obviously than anyone I've ever seen), any more than the patriots were the only ones to videotape signals. Its just to say that the spygate issue has been shown to be relatively small in the story of this patriots dynasty. You can bring it up all you want, but it just makes you sound bitter.

 

[Godsbrother]

The spygate controversy now appears to have been overblown. Since that fateful jets game,the league started closely monitoring the patriots every move. The patriots immediately won 18 straight games, then went to two superbowls, had their qb win two mvps, won more games than any other team by a decisive margin, and did it all without the benefit of a first round pick which was stripped from them by an arbitrary decision by the commish.

You don't seem to get that by cheating the Patriots had an unfair advantage in the games BEFORE Spygate (you remember it was when they were winning SBs). What happened in later seasons doesn't have anything to do with Spygate.

 

[bostonfred]

The spygate controversy now appears to have been overblown. Since that fateful jets game,the league started closely monitoring the patriots every move. The patriots immediately won 18 straight games, then went to two superbowls, had their qb win two mvps, won more games than any other team by a decisive margin, and did it all without the benefit of a first round pick which was stripped from them by an arbitrary decision by the commish.

You don't seem to get that by cheating the Patriots had an unfair advantage in the games BEFORE Spygate (you remember it was when they were winning SBs). What happened in later seasons doesn't have anything to do with Spygate.

Of course we can't go back and prove what would have happened with or without the supposed advantage of spygate, any more than we can with the cowboys championships, which jimmy johnson admitted were won with the same supposed advantage. But we can see that the patriots haven't just won, but won more games in the five seasons since the incident than they did in the five prior, despite losing their first round pick. So the advantage appears to be minimal. (And yes, GB, I understand that you'll never change your mind on this, but I figured id post an explanation for the benefit of readers whose team hasn't been smoked by the patriots repeatedly during the Dynasty.)