NFL Tom Brady, Bill Belichick - Greatest of All Time?

Are they the greatest of all time

  • Yes, Tom Brady and Bill Belichick are the GOAT

  • Tom Brady is the best QB, but Bill Belichick isn't the greatest coach.

  • Bill Belichick is the greatest coach, but Tom Brady isn't the best QB

  • No, neither are the greatest of all time.


Results are only viewable after voting.
Mar 11, 2012
5,169
7,938
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
Liverpool, Patriots & UConn
Funny how they won more games the season he was out (2008) than the season when he returned (2009).

Might have something to do with the fact the team wasn't as good as it was in 2008. I don't get the the 2008 argument when people question Brady. He went 16-0 with that same team. How do we know that Brady doesn't win 13 or 14 games with the 2008 Patriots?
 

BomberWatson

Club Legend
Feb 22, 2011
2,102
1,275
AFL Club
Essendon
Might have something to do with the fact the team wasn't as good as it was in 2008. I don't get the the 2008 argument when people question Brady. He went 16-0 with that same team. How do we know that Brady doesn't win 13 or 14 games with the 2008 Patriots?
To be honest, I don't put much stock in what I was arguing. It was more a counterpoint to the absurd notion that an 11 win season with Matt friggin Cassel as your QB is somehow a disappointment because of some incredibly poor luck with playoff tiebreakers, and how that somewhow further solidifies Tom Brady's legacy.
 

Obviously before you discovered NFL.. ;) but to win by a FG (back in 2003 PS) isn't kicking arse.. just sayin'.. each of the Pats SIX SB's have been narrow margins matter of fact..
 
They beat 3 teams with winning records in 08, the same amount as they did in 09. They also won more than 1 road game in 08, unlike 09.

To be honest, I don't put much stock in what I was arguing. It was more a counterpoint to the absurd notion that an 11 win season with Matt friggin Cassel as your QB is somehow a disappointment because of some incredibly poor luck with playoff tiebreakers, and how that somewhow further solidifies Tom Brady's legacy.

Bottom line was they didn't make the playoffs. Would have won 14-15 with Brady. '08 was full of rubbish teams. They played a terrible NFC West where Cardinals won a div where all teams had a less than average strength of schedule. '09 they played the NFC South which was tougher.
 

BomberWatson

Club Legend
Feb 22, 2011
2,102
1,275
AFL Club
Essendon
Bottom line was they didn't make the playoffs. Would have won 14-15 with Brady. '08 was full of rubbish teams. They played a terrible NFC West where Cardinals won a div where all teams had a less than average strength of schedule. '09 they played the NFC South which was tougher.
As the fact that an 11-5 team missing the playoffs proves...
 

Honeyboy Wilson

Norm Smith Medallist
Nov 26, 2008
7,646
8,669
Adelaide
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
I don't know whether it astounds me or is the most unsurprising thing ever that people who continue to call the Patriots cheats and bring up Spygate... Don't even really know what Spygate is. They know it's something about filming the opposition and it sounds sneaky and cheaty and that's good enough for them.

I'm also amused that Tom Brady puts up 14 points in the last quarter, down 10, on ridiculous stats, against one of the great modern defences and people would rather look to two earlier interceptions and judge his play on that.

Surely it must be a shittier experience to be so negative about greatness? I mean, I find appreciating incredible efforts involving physical precision and mental toughness to be far more enjoyable than trying to play them down.

Ah well. I'm just so happy that Bill and Tom are a part of the organisation I support. I wouldn't want it any other way.
 
Ev
I will say belichick is one of the all time greats tho, regardless of all the cheating. He has achieved a level of sustained success that is hard to argue with, especially in this era of revolving door of players that is the free agency Era, compared to the Walsh, Landry, Lombardi, Brown eras when you could hold onto star studded teams for decades.

He's such a gamer of the game itself, innovator. He managed an 11-5 season with what's his face showing how much it's a system, Brady a system qb like Montana.

This is the clincher for me, how the Patriots have managed such a sustained level of winning in the salary cap era. Nobody comes close to Belichick, possibly Cowher, in regards to constantly reinventing his teams and getting the most out of his roster year in year out during his time.
Maybe I'm more in awe of his feats in comparison to my own team, but it's impressed me.
Interesting arguments.
Maybe I should've selected 'can change votes' because what you two just said is making me contemplating saying Belichick is the GOAT.
 
Belichick is a better coach than Brady is a QB.

The gameplan was perfect for the Seahawks, both offensively and defensively.

But Brady didn't do anything yesterday that 99% of the league couldn't do.

Yep because 99% of the league overcame a 10 point margin at 3/4 time against the so called best defence ever this year. I didn't realise Aaron Rogers completed 13 of 15 for 2 TD's 2 weeks ago in the last quarter. Oh that's right he didn't and like 99% of the league he lost.
 

Pies_10

Premiership Player
May 29, 2007
3,341
2,912
Rosebud,Vic
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Arsenal, Baltimore Ravens
There are a number of coaches who I would place above BB, with Vince Lombardi being at the top of the list. As for the QB, some people are saying he's the greatest because he won 4 Super Bowls, but the reality of it is that the first few years of his career in the league, he wasn't the reason the Patriots were winning Super Bowls. The D they had back a dozen years ago was ridiculously phenomenal. BB really gave the keys to Brady to open up the offense in the spread from 2007, when they acquired Randy Moss. That's when, imo, Brady truly became the "franchise QB," up until then I would argue that you could have plugged in a number of average QBs and won Super Bowls with that running game and D that the Patriots had in the early 2000s. In the last 10 years he's won just the one Super Bowl which was from yesterday, as the franchise guy. Great QB? Yes, without a doubt. But the GOAT? No way.

Have to also take in to account spygate, and potentially deflategate. Even if you take deflategate out of the picture, spygate occurred for nearly a decade, and they conveniently won 3 Super Bowls during that time. Hard to say that the figureheads of the organisation that is best known for cheating, can be considered the greatest of all time, regardless of their achievements.
This
 
Yep because 99% of the league overcame a 10 point margin at 3/4 time against the so called best defence ever this year. I didn't realise Aaron Rogers completed 13 of 15 for 2 TD's 2 weeks ago in the last quarter. Oh that's right he didn't and like 99% of the league he lost.

Yes, because throwing a 3-5 out route to a receiver whos db has been 'picked' is such a challenge for every qb who isn't tom brady.

That was the gameplan. It had no balls (Inflated or deflated), but it worked. And they've been doing it to a lesser extent for a number of years. Do you think welker and others make 100 catches by running 30 yards downfield each time. We do the exact same with Cobb.

They're high percentage passes.

Take your head out of your arse.

******* pats fans are so precious all of a sudden...
 
Yes, because throwing a 3-5 out route to a receiver whos db has been 'picked' is such a challenge for every qb who isn't tom brady.

That was the gameplan. It had no balls (Inflated or deflated), but it worked. And they've been doing it to a lesser extent for a number of years. Do you think welker and others make 100 catches by running 30 yards downfield each time. We do the exact same with Cobb.

They're high percentage passes.

Take your head out of your arse.

******* pats fans are so precious all of a sudden...

Brady made plenty of 30yd downfield passes when he had the only deep threat he's had in his career in Randy Moss. You can only work with what you've got but you still have to make it work. Throw a Megatron or similar into the mix and I'm sure you'd see plenty of 30+yd passes.

You may think l have my head in my arse but your comment of Brady only doing what 99% of the league could do against the Seahawks is just plain wrong. There are plenty of quarterbacks in the league who when the moment comes to sustain the game winning drive fail miserably and that's not Super Bowl pressure that's regular season.

You may not like Brady or the Patriots but any level headed supporter of the NFL that doesn't respect how good Brady was in the fourth quarter on the weekend is letting bias cloud their judgement. Over the last 3 years teams just don't come back from 10 points down against the Seahawks.
 

Honeyboy Wilson

Norm Smith Medallist
Nov 26, 2008
7,646
8,669
Adelaide
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
There are a number of coaches who I would place above BB, with Vince Lombardi being at the top of the list. As for the QB, some people are saying he's the greatest because he won 4 Super Bowls, but the reality of it is that the first few years of his career in the league, he wasn't the reason the Patriots were winning Super Bowls. The D they had back a dozen years ago was ridiculously phenomenal. BB really gave the keys to Brady to open up the offense in the spread from 2007, when they acquired Randy Moss. That's when, imo, Brady truly became the "franchise QB," up until then I would argue that you could have plugged in a number of average QBs and won Super Bowls with that running game and D that the Patriots had in the early 2000s. In the last 10 years he's won just the one Super Bowl which was from yesterday, as the franchise guy. Great QB? Yes, without a doubt. But the GOAT? No way.

Have to also take in to account spygate, and potentially deflategate. Even if you take deflategate out of the picture, spygate occurred for nearly a decade, and they conveniently won 3 Super Bowls during that time. Hard to say that the figureheads of the organisation that is best known for cheating, can be considered the greatest of all time, regardless of their achievements.


Screw it, let's debunk all these myths.

First of all:

As for the QB, some people are saying he's the greatest because he won 4 Super Bowls, but the reality of it is that the first few years of his career in the league, he wasn't the reason the Patriots were winning Super Bowls. The D they had back a dozen years ago was ridiculously phenomenal.

I would argue that you could have plugged in a number of average QBs and won Super Bowls with that running game and D that the Patriots had in the early 2000s.

In the 2001-02 season, the average PPG allowed for the season by the Patriots was exactly 16.

Their opponents that day, the St. Louis Rams gave up an average of 15.5 PPG. So they were a better defense than the Patriots. They also had the league MVP, Kurt Warner at quarterback. Overall a better team on both sides of the ball.

Yet Brady found a way to win, with the first of many fourth quarter game winning drives in the playoffs (he has now had 12 opportunities, with 9 being successful - a success rate of 75%, but no greatness there!).

So to summarise, a first-year starter Tom Brady managed to beat a defense that was TOUGHER than the Patriots', while the superstar quarterback in his second MVP year couldn't play up to his standards. Guess what, playoffs are a different game, far more defensive, hence the historically lower scores than in the regular season. Warner couldn't step up, Brady could. Yes, New England's defense was good, but it wasn't "ridiculously phenomenal", considering they weren't even the best defense in the Superbowl, let alone for the season.

This season's Superbowl? Tom Brady went up against the CLEAR #1 defense and reigning champions and did things that no other quarterback has done since 2010.

In the 2003-04 season, the Patriot's defense was significantly better. They only gave up 14.9 PPG in the season, which was the league's no. 1 defense. Their opponents in the Superbowl, the Carolina Panthers gave up 15.3 PPG during the season. So another close defensive battle, right?

Wrong.

Although it was typical Superbowl defense for two of the quarters, the second and in particular, the last quarter went nuts. It came down to who was better in the crunch.

From wiki:

The 37 total points scored in the 4th quarter were the most combined points in a 4th quarter in a Super Bowl and the most in any quarter by two teams.

Hard to rely on that defense hey?

Again, the game came down to a game winning drive by Brady to get us into FG range to win. He wasn't called The Comeback Kid for nothing.

We needed 32 points to win that game.

Which is over double the average PPG allowed by their opponent on the season.

In the 2004-05 season, the Patriots defense was again very good, this time giving up 15.3 PPG, one of the better teams that season. But their Superbowl opponents that year? The eagles gave up only 11.5 PPG. That's unbelievable.

The Superbowl that year didn't come down to a game winning drive, but the Patriots did have to score 24 points to win.

Which is over double the average PPG allowed by their opponent on the season.

In fact, over those 3 Superbowl years, two were below the average PPG allowed and one was above the average PPG allowed for Superbowl winning teams. They averaged 15.4 PPG allowed... a "ridiculously phenomenal defense" that was... 0.46 PPG lower than the average.

Superbowl averages

Super Bowl Winner: 25.59 points per game, 15.86 points per game allowed

Super Bowl Loser: 25.67 points per game, 17.00 points per game allowed

To put it in perspective, Seahawks last season averaged 13.5 PPG (which the early 2000s Patriots never came close to), and this year 14.9 PPG (which was the best the Patriots ever did). So that "ridiculously phenomenal defense" should have carried ANYONE to two Superbowl rings in those two years, yeah?

Let's not forget he also made the Superbowl twice with defenses averaging:

2007: 16.1 PPG
2011: 20.1 PPG

And still managed to leave the field in both games with the lead.

And to quote someone else in this thread:

Just don't get the logic that a play Brady had no involvement in decides if he is the best or not.

So either logic hallway you go down - he's been absolutely phenomenal.

Now to move on to the next point

Have to also take in to account spygate, and potentially deflategate. Even if you take deflategate out of the picture, spygate occurred for nearly a decade, and they conveniently won 3 Super Bowls during that time. Hard to say that the figureheads of the organisation that is best known for cheating, can be considered the greatest of all time, regardless of their achievements.

Spygate is hilarious. It might be one of the funniest things in the history of sports that people point to in terms of "cheating".

Do Elway and the Broncos ever cop s**t for cheating the salary cap in their Superbowl winning period? Rarely.

How about the Saints and Bountygate helping Drew Brees get his ring? Just an aberration.

But boy oh boy do we ever go back to Spygate.

If you were wondering what it was - it was the act of filming the defensive signals on the opposition's sideline. Which 80,000 people could see, and was perfectly legal until the 2007 season. Coaches came out and said they all did it as well. But they changed the rules regarding videotaping in the 2007 season. Actually, the act of filming the defensive signals was not illegal. It was where the Patriots were filming from. No filming was allowed from the coaches box, the locker room or on the field.

If we had bought a guy a ticket and given him a camera to film the defensive signals, it would have been all above board. It was a finicky rule that we definitely broke, but it was for ONE GAME and we got fined $500,000.00 and lost a first round draft pick. We copped it and moved on. It had nothing to do with any of our wins whatsoever. We didn't even get to use that footage in any meaningful way.

Where people get lost is, before the 2002 Superbowl, a baseless report came out saying we were filming the Rams' practice. There was no evidence of this, no one could corroborate the story and it was later redacted. But people confuse the two and go SPYGATE SPYGATE SPYGATE as if it means something. What we did was wrong, it was for one game and we were penalised heavily. It didn't affect the outcome of anything.

Deflategate? Well gee whiz, if that's at all important to anyone, you've lost your mind.

Belichick is a better coach than Brady is a QB.

The gameplan was perfect for the Seahawks, both offensively and defensively.

But Brady didn't do anything yesterday that 99% of the league couldn't do.

Belichick is a better coach is he? Let's look at his record pre-Brady.

41 wins, 55 losses.

One playoff win. One playoff loss. (only made the Playoffs once).

The year before, with an almost identical team and Drew Bledsoe, the Patriots' record was 5 wins, 11 losses under Belichick.

And WITH Tom Brady?

169 wins, 53 losses.

That means he has less losses in 13 seasons with Brady, than he did in the 6 seasons before him.

Brady didn't do anything yesterday that 99% of the league couldn't do?

I'm gonna assume you mean quarterbacks, because I doubt you believe Vince Wilfork could have done as well as Brady in the Superbowl at being a quarterback.

That means you think that every quarterback in the league (32 teams at an average of 3 qbs - and for the 1% off 100%, we'll give one of them a sore shoulder) would have beaten the Seahawks yesterday with the gameplan that was in place.

Even though this Seahawks outfit gave up only 14.9 PPG and Brady doubled that.

Even though this Seahawks outfit had given up 13 points TOTAL in the fourth quarter of the previous 8 games they had played, and Brady outscored those 8 games in just one?

It's just crazy the lengths some of you go to discredit a phenomenal achievement. If you don't think he's the GOAT, that's perfectly fine. But come up with some actual reasons that aren't just flat out silly.

Or even better, instead of downplaying Tom, maybe pump up someone else! Y'know, celebrate greatness!

But nope, it's easier to tear things down. To ignore all the amazing things that are happening and focus on any negative you can find.

I'd feel sorry for you, but I don't really care about you. I know none of this will change your mind. But I hope that if a neutral comes in here, that doesn't have an opinion one way or the other, they will take the time to read this to at least educate themselves about some of the bullshit that is still being spouted.
 
Last edited:
Honeyboy Wilson Thanks for taking the time to point out some facts and statistics that no doubt will still be met by negative responses to anything Brady and Patriots around here. The great thing is is that we still get to watch him for another couple of years trying to win number 5.
 

MarcusP2

Brownlow Medallist
Sep 21, 2009
13,038
10,468
AFL Club
Adelaide
The first Super Bowl was highly attributable to the defence, which held the greatest offence of all time (at that point) to 20 points and generated a pick six which turned out to be the difference, as well as a forced fumble which gave the Pats the chance to score again at the end of the first half. Not to say that Brady didn't have a hand in it, but it wasn't his brilliant QB play which caused the victory. A few key sacks as well.

Which isn't to say the Rams didn't have an excellent defence, but it didn't dominate on the day (conceding only 13 points is pretty good though.)

Kinda like the 2007 season really, a dominant defensive display against a great offence gives the QB a chance to win the game.
 

Honeyboy Wilson

Norm Smith Medallist
Nov 26, 2008
7,646
8,669
Adelaide
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
The first Super Bowl was highly attributable to the defence, which held the greatest offence of all time (at that point) to 20 points and generated a pick six which turned out to be the difference, as well as a forced fumble which gave the Pats the chance to score again at the end of the first half. Not to say that Brady didn't have a hand in it, but it wasn't his brilliant QB play which caused the victory. A few key sacks as well.

Which isn't to say the Rams didn't have an excellent defence, but it didn't dominate on the day (conceding only 13 points is pretty good though.)

Kinda like the 2007 season really, a dominant defensive display against a great offence gives the QB a chance to win the game.

For sure - I never meant to downplay the defensive contribution, but just to say that the Patriots also would not have won if it weren't for Tom Brady. It wasn't just a "put any average quarterback in" and they win type scenario. The early 2000s Patriots defense was great, but it was no greater than many Superbowl winning teams (as proven through average PPG allowed statistics).
 

MarcusP2

Brownlow Medallist
Sep 21, 2009
13,038
10,468
AFL Club
Adelaide
I think it's difficult to get a more perfect career/team trajectory than Brady's.

Come into a team with a top-level defence and prove to be more than capable of making enough plays to win in key situations. (Super Bowl victories).

As the defence regresses a bit, more than make up for that with your offensive development.

Then, reverse it with a top-level offence and a defence that can make plays.
 
7SCNOgy.jpg
 
Great empathatic chart find that one ^^^ Broken :thumbsu::thumbsu:

Worth noting: Three of those ZERO teams play the Pats in 2015. The Eagles & Jags visit Gillette whilst BB & his gang visit Jerry's house.

Last time Cowboys beat the Pats : 1996 Four game winning streak for Pats
Last time Eagles beat the Pats : 1999 Four game winning streak incl SB for Pats
Last Time Jaguars beat the Pats : 1998 (only time that was a Wildcard play-off) 9-1 adv Pats in this series incl play-offs 6 game winning streak
 
Back