Brian Gutekunst, Making No Sense

[texaspackerbacker]

Excellent Post, APB.

[mraynrand]

With all due respect, you are incorrect.

Not every team subscribes to Belichickism. For starter, the Packers under Thompson subscribed to Polar Bearism, also known as Draft and Develop, not Belichickism.

And that unique quality that makes the Pats successful? Tom Brady, an elite QB. Put Belichick on the 2017 Browns with Hundley-clone Kizer at QB and no way the Browns are in the Super Bowl. J-Mac subscribed to Belichickism in Denver, but failed mainly b/c he lacked an elite QB.

Belichickism works best with an elite QB. Belichick's 6 rings with Brady are proofs.

The Packers have an elite QB.

At some point you're going to have to accept that Belichickism requires Bill Belichick. Some of the FAs he's brought to the Patsies would never work anywhere else because the coaching isn't there, including Green Bay. Cheat is responsible for at least 8 Superbowl wins. Parcells was nothing without Cheat. Cheat is an exceptional coaching and GM talent, at this point I would say unquestionably the greatest in NFL history.

The Polar Bear was on a spectrum with total Draft/Development on one side and FA/Trade (George Allen) on the other. Despite your protestations, TT , though being tilted to DD side, still brought in FAs. The secret sauce for Belichickism was BB the coach being able to integrate talent and make it work in a team concept. That even included Terrell Buckley. BB the GM found a way to draw out the best last years of many a fading talent because BB the coach flawlessly deployed them.

This is my opinion: One important reason the Packers used DD so much was it was a way to indoctrinate young kids to the Green Bay life. It was a franchise survival tool to bring kids in who could live and play in a small town. So not only did they go heavy DD, but they generally selected guys mature enough to handle a city with virtually nothing to do that young kids with pockets of cash like. And veterans they brought in had to buy into that too. I'm not sure how much of a factor this is, but I'm certain it plays a part.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Excellent Post, APB.

Thanks Tex.

I was hoping you'd define "Good normal American" in the glossary thread, but I guess that term is too FYI for the Packer forum. Rand's definition is appropriate, but that means Rastak is not a good normal American. lol

[mraynrand]

Rand's definition is appropriate, but that means Rastak is not a good normal American. lol

Rastak is a Meh American. Supporting the Vikings doesn't make him a traitor to the nation or anything, but you can question his normalcy.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

At some point you're going to have to accept that Belichickism requires Bill Belichick. Some of the FAs he's brought to the Patsies would never work anywhere else because the coaching isn't there, including Green Bay. Cheat is responsible for at least 8 Superbowl wins. Parcells was nothing without Cheat. Cheat is an exceptional coaching and GM talent, at this point I would say unquestionably the greatest in NFL history.

The Polar Bear was on a spectrum with total Draft/Development on one side and FA/Trade (George Allen) on the other. Despite your protestations, TT , though being tilted to DD side, still brought in FAs. The secret sauce for Belichickism was BB the coach being able to integrate talent and make it work in a team concept. That even included Terrell Buckley. BB the GM found a way to draw out the best last years of many a fading talent because BB the coach flawlessly deployed them.

This is my opinion: One important reason the Packers used DD so much was it was a way to indoctrinate young kids to the Green Bay life. It was a franchise survival tool to bring kids in who could live and play in a small town. So not only did they go heavy DD, but they generally selected guys mature enough to handle a city with virtually nothing to do that young kids with pockets of cash like. And veterans they brought in had to buy into that too. I'm not sure how much of a factor this is, but I'm certain it plays a part.

Sure, Belichick is exceptional at some things coaching-wise, moreso at, say, game management than say, McCarthy. But many folks once doubted that the West Coast Offense would never work without Walsh, too. Holmgren and Shanahan, among others, debunked that theory. The NFL is a copycat league in which trade secrets are not so secrets. Copying Belichick's coaching style should not be too difficult.

And doing things like Belichick the GM is not difficult, either, especially with an ever increasing cap. As I've refrained previously, if Deshawn Wynn is your starting RB, and you have a chance to get Beast Mode, get Beast Mode. It's called an upgrade. If Shields season ended in week 1, you can't just hibernate and hope an undrafted player like Gunter "develops" quickly. If your receiving crop is productive but slothish, and you can acquire a speed fiend like Brandin Cooks for 1st and 3rds, why the hell not?

With an elite QB like Aaron Rodgers on your roster, optimizing the talent on your team with respect to the cap should be the way to do things. Draft and develop is for teams with no shot worth a damn, like the Browns. Draft and develop is just wasting Rodgers' prime, as the saying goes.

Thompson signed a notable free agent once every 2 or 3 blue moons. He rarely ever made any in-season trades. Mostly, he spent the majority of his time as GM drafting and hibernating. In other words, the antithesis of Belichick.

I don't buy the theory that players still don't want to play in Green Bay. Favre and White made playing in cold, dark and dull Green Bay cool again. For those with a longin for the city lights during the season, Milwaukee is only an hour south via car. Chicago, only 3. Plus, plan ticket costs to other urban paradises further away are chump changes to all these highly paid players. It's all about the Benjamins, and the Packers have plenty of them - thanks to revenue sharing.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Did Bush ever get any All Pro votes for his ST work?

Pb answered your question, but the fact that Janis got, I think, 2 votes this season supports the notion that he deserves at least $2 M/yr based on special teams acumen alone.

[bobblehead]

With all due respect, you are incorrect.

Not every team subscribes to Belichickism. For starter, the Packers under Thompson subscribed to Polar Bearism, also known as Draft and Develop, not Belichickism.

And that unique quality that makes the Pats successful? Tom Brady, an elite QB. Put Belichick on the 2017 Browns with Hundley-clone Kizer at QB and no way the Browns are in the Super Bowl. J-Mac subscribed to Belichickism in Denver, but failed mainly b/c he lacked an elite QB.

Belichickism works best with an elite QB. Belichick's 6 rings with Brady are proofs.

The Packers have an elite QB.

The patriots with Belichick are a unique thingy in history of pro sports. You also have to question the level of cheating involved. Bottom line is duh. An elite QB gives you an edge. Add to it the NFL and networks amid plummeting ratings were shitting their collective pants over a Bortles Foles Superbowl to the point the Patriots were holding, pulling jerseys and facemasking uncalled in that game and you get yet another Patriots in the big game.

I get it. TT wasn't Bellicheat any more than any other GM has been in recent history. TT won a superbowl, put together a 15-1 season, and had a success level rivaled ONLY by Bellicheat. I am not happy he is no longer the GM. MM on the other hand gets exposed quite often. I hope Gute signs every FA under the sun to make a run at it. Its win win for me. Either we get a packers superbowl or its exposed as a flawed strategy.

[bobblehead]

Parcells was nothing without Cheat.

Have to take exception to this remark. Parcells was an epic success with many a failing organization. Cheat failed in Cleveland, his only other shot as top dog. It could be argued he lucked into Brady much more than it could be argued TT lucked into ARod. Cheat didn't think highly enough of Brady to take him until round 6. TT knew Arod was a steal when he took him. It was a wildly unpopular pick. It took stones. Taking Brady in the 6th took luck.

Name me all the coaches in NFL history that took 2 teams to a superbowl and a 3rd team to an AFCC game. Same guy turned around a putrid dallas franchise and got them back into the playoffs with...what the fuck was his name at QB back then.??

[mraynrand]

Have to take exception to this remark. Parcells was an epic success with many a failing organization.

Cheat failed in Cleveland, his only other shot as top dog.

That doesn't refute my point. Without BB, the Giants never beat Kelly in 1990. That was BB's #1 defense. Same in 1986 with BB's top defense (#2 pass #2 run). You could say that Parcells lucked into having LT on his roster too. But it was BB who brought out his best and it was the Giants defenses that won them those championships (as defense 'always' does).

Seriously, I do give Parcells credit, but he was never a champ without BB.

[bobblehead]

That doesn't refute my point. Without BB, the Giants never beat Kelly in 1990. That was BB's #1 defense. Same in 1986 with BB's top defense (#2 pass #2 run). You could say that Parcells lucked into having LT on his roster too. But it was BB who brought out his best and it was the Giants defenses that won them those championships (as defense 'always' does).

Seriously, I do give Parcells credit, but he was never a champ without BB.

Like I said. When BB does it without Brady and with another team like Parcells did then I will believe. Right now he is a guy living off cheating and Tom Brady. Saying the assistant is responsible for the success of the HC is....weird. The HC brought him in. I could argue that Bellicheat was never a champ without some obscure ballboy that has been with the team throughout, but that would be silly.

[mraynrand]

Like I said. When BB does it without Brady and with another team like Parcells did then I will believe. Right now he is a guy living off cheating and Tom Brady. Saying the assistant is responsible for the success of the HC is....weird. The HC brought him in. I could argue that Bellicheat was never a champ without some obscure ballboy that has been with the team throughout, but that would be silly.

Bill won a lot with defense, not just Brady. Shut down the Greatest Show on Turf. Cleveland was a playoff team before Modell destroyed them with the moving season, so BB did it in another town just as much as Manzier Parcells did it in Dallas.

Belichick has all the accolades - 8 super bowls and he can take credit (though he doesn't) for 1986 and 1990 because it those were his defenses. I bet he would have shut down Favre in 1996 had he still been DC. Thank goodness he wasn't.

Don Shula had Dan Marino all those years - how many Superbowls did they win?

[call_me_ishmael]

I think Hoodie would have won a few more with Jimmy had he had the chance. BB is the goat man.

[Bretsky]

Those who consistently claim BB failed in Cleveland should really do some due diligence IMO

[bobblehead]

Bill won a lot with defense, not just Brady. Shut down the Greatest Show on Turf. Cleveland was a playoff team before Modell destroyed them with the moving season, so BB did it in another town just as much as Manzier Parcells did it in Dallas.

Belichick has all the accolades - 8 super bowls and he can take credit (though he doesn't) for 1986 and 1990 because it those were his defenses. I bet he would have shut down Favre in 1996 had he still been DC. Thank goodness he wasn't.

Don Shula had Dan Marino all those years - how many Superbowls did they win?

We are talking about Parcells, not Shula so...nice straw man.

Better check Hoodies overall record with Cleveland before you tell me how well he was doing.

[bobblehead]

Those who consistently claim BB failed in Cleveland should really do some due diligence IMO

I have. I watched that team. I thought they would be better. They disappointed me year in and out. I do think BB is great. I just simply believe Parcells was his mentor and better.