Dan33185 wrote: ↑Mon Dec 20, 2021 10:23 am
People think it's some "gotcha" moment to say a coach isn't as good without the greatest QB of all time on the field. Like Bill Walsh would have won 3 Super Bowls without Montana, right? Anyone with common sense would tell you having a HOF QB is better than not having one, it doesn't mean all of a sudden the guy can't coach though. Belichick went 7-9 with Cam freaking Newton as a QB last year, and 11-5 with Matt Cassel. The guy clearly knows how to coach, anyone who can't see that is just hating for the sake of it, and not basing anything on common sense.
What would Tom Brady be if he was drafted by Miami in 2000 and coached by Dave Wannstedt? What if he were drafted by Detroit and coached by Bobby Ross and Mike Mornhinweg?
Or would we know think of them like we think of Bellichick because of Brady?
Remember how much of a "game manager" Brady was early on? Did you know that he threw one touchdown pass in the entire 2001 Super-Bowl winning post-season run?
His numbers: 3 games: 60-97 (61.9%), 572 yards (191ypg, 5.9ypa), 1 TD, 1 INT. Passer rating: 77.3.
I know it was a different era, but those numbers were paltry then. This was post greatest show on turf. Explosive offenses existed.
Patriots defense that run? 3 games, 47 points allowed (15.7ppg) including 17 against that greatest show on turf Rams team in the Super Bowl. 321 yards/game against, 7 takeaways (including 3 in the Super Bowl). The Pats were a +6 in the give/take that post-season. That's probably the biggest reason they won.
Later, Brady would become the most prolific passer of all-time, but he absolutely did not look that part early in his career. Belichick has his hands all over that first title run and oversaw Brady's development from late-round game manager to GOAT.