Originally posted by qnnhan7:
Originally posted by Giedi:
Originally posted by qnnhan7:
Belichick seeems more authoritarian type of HC. As all encompassing that he may be regarding football, his type of leadership may not facilitate growth and openness for his assistants.
Walsh style was more manipulate, teach, share, and in return got his assistants' best inputs.
I read an article some where that B.B. loaded his assistants with so much work they have little time for anything else— like letting their mind wander about improving other area of their coaching to become a good HC.
Walsh gathered his assistants to ask their opinions on the Montana/Young controversy according to Holmgren. And they all gave their opinions on how it had affected the team. I don't see BB doing that before trading Jimmy for a 2nd rounder
I think maybe what makes Bellicheat a great coach is that his so called offensive system is geared to and based on what Tom Brady can do, vs some sort of fundamental offensive philosophy. That may be why his assistants haven't done well on other teams. Bellicheat's system may be too player specific to be translateable to other teams and organizations.
What I find amazing about BB is his seemingly plug 'n play type of personnel management. They have a varied receiver type through the years for Brady and them all seemed to work more often than not. This could be to some degree because of Brady. Even their RB isn't all that , but very effective when needed in game situations.
Their defense don't stay bad for long. They could have a couple of bad games, but you just don't see it continuely bad in any one area. Very similar to the Steeelers defense from year to year, or even game to game. They are usually totally different in the playoffs. I don't remember a bad Pats defense in the playoffs.
Bellicheat has hit more home runs than strike outs, from a player acquisition standpoint. I think the mediocrity of the NFL helps him. He was the first to master the salary cap, and he was able (and still is able) to manipulate the cap in such a way that they always have good personnel (maybe not great all the time) but consistently good. Again, the mediocrity of the NFL can help a coach who has mastered the cap - in that his teams don't have much weaknesses. As long as Brady is his QB, he has an advantage over pretty much every coach in the NFL. If there was a philosophy to Bellicheat's
system
his defenses are 3-4 read and react (operating multi-fronts), and from an offensive philosophy - it's an under the center read-option offense that caters to Brady's skillset. So to me, it's still an issue -- can Bellicheat win without Brady? If yes, then he definitely is a great coach at the legendary hall of fame level a la Walsh, Lombardi etc... If No, then I don't have a problem putting him in the *hall of fame great Coach* category, but just one step below the *Legends* of the game.