What's your opinion of this head coach???

[run pMc]

I'm sure someone will give BB a shot as HC (if he chooses to keep coaching), but I'd be leery of doing so. For one thing, his record without Brady has been iffy (as others have shown) and for another, the culture he installs is not for everyone. I think he'd want a big piece of the personnel decisions also, and that would be problematic. Personally, if I were an owner I'd go for a someone on the upswing like Ben Johnson (the DET OC). If BB wanted to just be a DC I'd be falling over myself to hire him - dude is a sharp defensive mind - but that's it.

This is just my opinion, but I don't think defensive-oriented coaches are good HC's in general. I think you do better with an Offensive guru type or a Special Teams coach. ST coaches have to be quick thinkers, good teachers, and able to communicate with everyone on the team. Offensive gurus bring in a system and usually have some innovation. Defense is pretty hit-and-miss and subject to luck, frankly, and unless you get lucky with a genius young OC you're basically the Bears.

[Fritz]

I just can't see how, this long after Brady in New England, anyone thinks Belichik is some genius. Brady in NE, Belichik is Hoody Genius. Brady not in New England, Belichik is Creepy Uncle Hoody.

[RashanGary]

He had some really good defenses in NE. It wasn’t all Brady. He’s not as good as they portrayed him the last 10 years, but he’s not as bad as his worst years indicate either.

[Joemailman]

Chuck Noll and Tom Landry didn't win any Super Bowls after their HOF QB was gone either.

[Patler]

He had some really good defenses in NE. It wasn’t all Brady. He’s not as good as they portrayed him the last 10 years, but he’s not as bad as his worst years indicate either.

I don't know.....

One year in Cleveland he was 11-5. Before and after that year he was 25-39.
One year in NE after Brady left he was 10-7. Before and after that season: 18-29, so far.
The year before Brady became the starter he was 5-11 in NE.
In 11 seasons without Brady, he has made the playoffs only twice, winning just one playoff game..

Tom Brady without BB had a lot of success.
BB without Brady in 11 seasons has done very little.

[Patler]

Chuck Noll and Tom Landry didn't win any Super Bowls after their HOF QB was gone either.

Its not just about Super Bowls, its coaching success overall. Getting to the playoffs. Having some success in the playoffs.

Noll is another one who had a long so-so career apart the core group that won the SBs. I look at him not much different than BB. He had an 8 year run of great success, and 15 years mostly out of the playoffs or sneaking in and not doing much.

Tom Landry? Now there was a coach! May not have won, but got to championship games/Super Bowls with different QBs and different team makeups (Meredith, Morton, White, Staubach). His teams adapted to the strengths of the players he had running, passing, defense. Good records and playoff appearances year after year, and doing well in the playoffs. He was an innovator who adjusted to his own players and to league trends.

[MadtownPacker]

I feel that Love would do better with an older coach. Thinking Holmgren Favre dynamic. I feel that Belichick would come to the Packers and have a better season than Pepe LePew. LaFleur was ok for rodgers and even that had trouble. Now starting to wonder if he’s the right coach for such a young team.

Patler would you say M3 is better than Belichick? He won and went I many playoffs with erron but also now winning in Texas.

[run pMc]

I think QB is such an important and high leverage position that any coach is going to look good or bad depending on who they have under center.
Belichick is a good coach but he doesn't transcend that limitation. Maybe that's a criticism against him being some kind of GOAT coach.

Personally I'm skeptical he's the GOAT coach, I can think of a few other coaches who are as deserving of such a title. (Walsh, Shula, Landry)

Would I hire him if I was an owner and needed to replace my HC? Probably not. At least, he would not be my first choice. Smart guy, good coach, but I'd want someone with more of a younger, innovative vibe, and also someone with a focus on the offensive side of the ball. BB is a defensive guy.

Now if I'm CHI he fits right into their whole ethos of Monsters of the Midway and always having trash QBs, so there's that. But if I'm the Chargers I'm looking for someone who can build a strong system around Justin Herbert and Co.

[Patler]

I feel that Love would do better with an older coach. Thinking Holmgren Favre dynamic.

Holmgren was 44, with no HC experience during Favre's first season as a starter.
LaFleur is 44 now, during Love's first season as a starter, but has years of HC experience.

Holmgren looked old, LaFleur looks like a kid.

[Patler]

Patler would you say M3 is better than Belichick? He won and went I many playoffs with erron but also now winning in Texas.

No.

You can't ignore all the wins during the season, and the NFC championship games he got to. But too often I think he was outcoached, or intimidated, too cautious, whatever, losing playoff games he should have won. He had the teams and situations to get to many more than one Super Bowl. BB took advantage of his opportunities. McCarthy did not.

[MadtownPacker]

Holmgren was 44, with no HC experience during Favre's first season as a starter.
LaFleur is 44 now, during Love's first season as a starter, but has years of HC experience.

Holmgren looked old, LaFleur looks like a kid.

I knew when I said that you would blast me with something! You slammed me against a wall and backhanded me.

[MadtownPacker]

No.

You can't ignore all the wins during the season, and the NFC championship games he got to. But too often I think he was outcoached, or intimidated, too cautious, whatever, losing playoff games he should have won. He had the teams and situations to get to many more than one Super Bowl. BB took advantage of his opportunities. McCarthy did not.

Agreed, the M3 years were filled with giant disappointments. Too often being on the bad side of an upset left the impression M3 was only as good as Rodgers was that day.

What if he was to win one with Dak? I would be shocked because Dak always chokes. M3 would also have to beat his nemesis SF. Something he couldn’t do with peak Rodgers.

[Joemailman]

I knew when I said that you would blast me with something! You slammed me against a wall and backhanded me.

[run pMc]

Agreed, the M3 years were filled with giant disappointments. Too often being on the bad side of an upset left the impression M3 was only as good as Rodgers was that day.

What if he was to win one with Dak? I would be shocked because Dak always chokes. M3 would also have to beat his nemesis SF. Something he couldn’t do with peak Rodgers.

I'd be shocked too. DAL is a good team but I think if they play SF they lose.
Also, Dak has a tendency to have a real bad stinker every so many games and is a bit of a choker. Just like his coach.

M3 did have a few chances to get to the SB. The number of NFCCG he got to speaks to how good those teams were. Favre's last year they were close, but 2014 was the year that really stands out.

[texaspackerbacker]

The reason McCarthy just might have a better shot in Dallas than he had in Green Bay is that he has Jerry Jones & son effectively GMing. True, Dak ain't Aaron Rodgers, but he is damn good, better than some in here give him credit for. And the team surrounding him, D and O both, is probably significantly better than what Rodgers had.

The Niners seem kinda bi-polar. They were way up when they beat the Cowboys, and they have lost to an inferior team or two also. Maybe McCarthy will catch them in a down spiral if both get that far.

[bobblehead]

He had some really good defenses in NE. It wasn’t all Brady. He’s not as good as they portrayed him the last 10 years, but he’s not as bad as his worst years indicate either.

I'll play devil's advocate for fun. Brady always played the short game and chewed clock. He audibled to run plays more than any good QB ever. He kept Hoody's Ds rested and on the sideline a lot.

The NBA uses stats like "per 100 possessions". The NFL is in the dark ages using "per game" stats to rank things. I want to see Love's points per possession at the end of the season. Yards per play. ect.

[bobblehead]

Holmgren was 44, with no HC experience during Favre's first season as a starter.
LaFleur is 44 now, during Love's first season as a starter, but has years of HC experience.

Holmgren looked old, LaFleur looks like a kid.

Ouch....patlerized. Mad, I'll give you the advice I give Tex in FYI. Hit google before you hit enter.

edit: now I am fully confident I'll get owned within 24 hours on something.

[RashanGary]

I'll play devil's advocate for fun. Brady always played the short game and chewed clock. He audibled to run plays more than any good QB ever. He kept Hoody's Ds rested and on the sideline a lot.

The NBA uses stats like "per 100 possessions". The NFL is in the dark ages using "per game" stats to rank things. I want to see Love's points per possession at the end of the season. Yards per play. ect.

True. Brady loved to win. Not saying he didn’t make spectacular passes, but he never went out of his way for them. He just did the simple things 100% right 100% of the time over and over and over. And mixed in some awesome shit too.

[Fritz]

True. Brady loved to win. Not saying he didn’t make spectacular passes, but he never went out of his way for them. He just did the simple things 100% right 100% of the time over and over and over. And mixed in some awesome shit too.

To me, this is as good a summary of Brady as I've seen.

I would agree with Patler's assessment of Magic Mike. And I also agree that Dak seems to poop the bed, pretty badly, in big games. I don't see him and the team getting past SanFran.

[bobblehead]

True. Brady loved to win. Not saying he didn’t make spectacular passes, but he never went out of his way for them. He just did the simple things 100% right 100% of the time over and over and over. And mixed in some awesome shit too.

*sigh* I hate that guy.