this post was submitted on 09 Nov 2023
1 points (100.0% liked)

NFL

51 readers
9 users here now

A place for NFL news, game highlights and everything that excites you about American Football.

founded 11 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] Fancy_Load5502@alien.top 1 points 10 months ago (7 children)

Bill is not a very good head coach, and is not able to teach others how to do it. Bill got very lucky to find Tom Brady, and had great success with him. But both before and after Brady, it becomes clear that Tom was why they won those games much more than Bill.

[โ€“] ehehe@alien.top 1 points 10 months ago

I knew football fans were stupid, but this is just reaching unfathomable levels of stupidity.

QB is an extremely important position, and Brady was extremely valuable. Bill Belichick is an extremely good defensive coach who was ahead of the game for a lot of years with regards to team structure and personnel philosophy.

Almost every single great QB got their Super Bowl wins in the years their defenses peaked. Aaron Rodgers, Russell Wilson, Peyton Manning, Drew Brees, Ben Roethlisberger, even guys like Stafford and Eli Manning. Seriously, look into it -- literally every single one won when they had the best defense of their career, because it takes both sides of the ball. (INCLUDING THE GIANTS TWICE WHEN BELICHICK WAS THEIR D-COORD).

Brady and Belichick won tons of them because Brady made the offense good and Belichick made the defense good, as well as being a good gameplanner, in-game decision maker, attention to detail, and getting a lot out of players that didn't have the highest natural talent.

There is really no need to make it more complicated than that. Belichick does not seem to have an edge over the competition in GM decisions anymore. And he's always been a defensive coach. So their team sucking because the offense sucks means Belichick is not a great offensive coach which is not new information, he is a defensive Goat.

load more comments (6 replies)