Bill Belichick: Greatest Coach in NFL History? NO!!!

12

Bill Belichick is the greatest coach in NFL history. His 2007 Patriots team is deep enough for a Super Bowl run. But, as Mike Freeman asks, how long will the coach stick around Foxborough? Column | 5 things | Freeman

That is a quote from CBS Sportsline. No he is not the greatest in NFL history. Bill Walsh, Vince Lombardi, that's different, they are better than Belichick. Plus, what is our obsession with having to label something the best or the worst? We even put superlatives in words that don't even exist. like winningest.

Back to the main story, Belichick is so by the book, lacks creativity, and basically got his career (and partially Tom Brady's) lifted on the sake of the tuck rule. I think Belichick is a great coach, but he is not the greatest by any means. The NFL wants to make New England "America's Team". But what has happened the last 2 years? Most people forget that after Super Bowl 36, they missed the playoffs. They should really only have 2 Super Bowls to their name, and the NFL should stop falling in love with the Patriots.

Greatest coach in NFL history? No way.

Enable Comment Auto-Refresher

ThecrookedcapAll-Star

856 days ago

Score 3

It has always bothered me how overrated he is.

Permalink | Reply

856 days ago

Score 1

Lombardi is the gold standard. Walsh, who just passed, was a much better coach than Billy B ever was or will be.

DeuelioJV Squad

856 days ago

Score 1

I think dynasties were easier to build in the 60's. That's my impression based upon no research whatsoever.

InsanMajor Leaguer

856 days ago

Score 3

He's one of the greatest all time and he's the greatest active head coach, but he's not the greatest of all time.

Permalink | Reply

JuTMSY4Legend

856 days ago

Score 2

I don't think he's the best ever...but to boil his career down the the tuck rule is false...you don't win 3 super bowls on 1 play...maybe 1...not 3

Permalink | Reply

SSreportersLegend

856 days ago

Score -1

I just said they should only have 2 super bowls to their name.

JuTMSY4Legend

856 days ago

Score 2

My fault...none the less

The following teams have won a superbowl on pure luck:

That is all...

SSreportersLegend

856 days ago

Score 0

I'm tempted to say the 2006 Pittsburgh Steelers. But because the Seahawks stunk it up as well, then you're right.

JuTMSY4Legend

856 days ago

Score 1

More importantly

The following teams have won Superbowls without the aid of some luck: --

Now that is all...

SSreportersLegend

856 days ago

Score -1

Belichick is a sore loser, and the dude never smiles.

Permalink | Reply

SSreportersLegend

856 days ago

Score 1

I guess Bill Belichick is out to get me.

JuTMSY4Legend

856 days ago

Score 0

No, that was just Brandon Meriweather "stomping" you

MegECass110AAA-er

856 days ago

Score -1

It doesn't look like he would be the stomping type...

JuTMSY4Legend

856 days ago

Score 0

No idea what you're trying to say...

DeuelioJV Squad

856 days ago

Score 1

I think when you look at his organization, he's up there. In this day in age, in the age of salary caps, ego’s and the like, it’s very hard to build a consistent winner. He and his front office staff have done that so you gotta give him credit for that. I would label him one of the best ever for that reason.

Permalink | Reply

BigPPupMajor Leaguer

856 days ago

Score 0

Outside of Boston I dont know that anyone is annointing Bellichick the GOAT. I will admit that he is good, and a terrible loser.

Permalink | Reply

MegECass110AAA-er

856 days ago

Score 2

One of the best, not the best. There's too much history, the league is too old to evaluate every coach equally.

Permalink | Reply

SSreportersLegend

856 days ago

Score 0

Agreed, Sportsline shouldn't have put in that headline.

HappyskinnyAll-American

856 days ago

Score 1

It is not fair to compare him to Walsh or Lombardi, or any of those guys. He is an active coach. How about we leave the comparisons alone until he is all done.

Permalink | Reply

JuTMSY4Legend

856 days ago

Score 0

Superbowls is generally the strongest indicator or HoF coaches...with that said...Belichick having 3 generally puts you in the HoF...4 would cement that and 5 would arguably make him the best ever...regardless of the point in his career...

Permalink | Reply

AngeHammJV Squad

856 days ago

Score 2

Belichick is clearly and inarguably one of the best coaches ever, and probably the best one active. What he has done with the Patriots in this day and age is unbelievable. HOWEVER, don't forget to include his early head coaching years in with the more recent. His tenure as Cleveland Browns head coach was awful, plagued with bad personnel and football decisions. He did what a man does: learned from his mistakes and got better. Raiders fans and Pats haters: shut the hell up about the Tuck Rule. There were LOTS more plays in that game than that one, it was a completely accurate and correct application of the rule, and the Raiders had many chances to win that they blew. Great teams like the Patriots take advantage of situations like that. Not-great teams like the Raiders are destroyed by them. 'Nuff said.

Permalink | Reply

SSreportersLegend

856 days ago

Score -2

WHAT?! The tuck rule probably never existed.

JuTMSY4Legend

856 days ago

Score 0

well, the chick's years with cleveland featured 2 awful seasons, 1 good one and 2 mediocre seasons...comparatively Bill walsh went 2-14, 6-10 and 3-6 (stike shortened) in his first 4 years (13-3 in year 3), Jimmy Johnson went 1-15 and 7-9 in his first seasons and for belichick comparison sake he was strikely average in miami (one 10 win seasons, two 9 wins seasons and an 8-8...1 playoff birth)...sooooo...i guess you can look at cleveland as kinda a hurting portion...but...those coaches above all have something in common...3 (Johnson built that 95 team) superbowl titles...

RawbeezeitzMajor Leaguer

856 days ago

Score 2

It was a correct application of a strange rule. The rule still exists in the same form and same language.

856 days ago

Score 0

id he wins a few more super bowls then maybe but I agree not now

Permalink | Reply

ThedanfWaterboy

856 days ago

Score 0

I absolutely despise the man. Both for his conservative coaching and his general attitude.

Permalink | Reply

Manny StilesMajor Leaguer

856 days ago

Score 0

I hate him because he is a slob and demeans what "professionalism" means when he wears his cutoff sweatshirts. meanwhile, Mike Nolan was fined for wearing a suit and tie (not NFL approved and logoed merchandise) at a "Throwback" game...

TehLokiVarsity Captain

855 days ago

Score 0

If All you can do is hate him fo rhis clothes, your opinion is no longer allowed. thank you.

RawbeezeitzMajor Leaguer

856 days ago

Score 2

It's difficult to say who is the best coach ever, especially since each generation of coaches learns from the previous generation, and the role of a head coach is different now than it was 10 years ago, 20 years ago, and so on.

This article, BTW, is pure Patriot hating, which always makes me laugh. You can argue that the tuck rule was a big break in the 2001 playoffs, maybe even a game changing break, but the Patriots still beat Pittsburgh, and St. Louis (remember the Rams? They were supposed to be the team with the dynasty).

And as far as his coaching in Cleveland goes, he had no freedom to make the moves that he wanted to make. He had more overbearing ownership problems than Billy Martin.

Finally, if Bellichick is "by the book" how come none of the other 31 NFL coaches seem to have read this book?

Permalink | Reply

JuTMSY4Legend

856 days ago

Score 0

I'd actually say the pats were luckier in Pittsburgh than against the raiders...

Besides, its all about the franchise, not just the coach...look at the greats and how they were involved in personnel decisions and/or had a great personnel guy...more so now...

Who's the other team that's been consistent for the last decade?

RawbeezeitzMajor Leaguer

856 days ago

Score 0

Could you please define luck. Special teams plays aren't "lucky," they're part of the game. just ask Devin Hester, or Tony Romo.

JuTMSY4Legend

856 days ago

Score 0

Luck 1 a : a force that brings good fortune or adversity b : the events or circumstances that operate for or against an individual

JuTMSY4Legend

856 days ago

Score 0

per Miriam-Websters

RawbeezeitzMajor Leaguer

856 days ago

Score 0

I meant define luck in terms of sports. I was asking for connotation not denotation. I should have been more clear.

JuTMSY4Legend

856 days ago

Score 1

I feel like it perfectly applies to sports...What caused romo to choke...and what put the seahawks in the position of being the team to gain from that fumble...and so it...

Luck (or whatever you wanna call it) is part of that

It's better to be lucky than good and if you think any team thats won the superbowl wasn't a little lucky, your full of shit...

RawbeezeitzMajor Leaguer

856 days ago

Score 0

Of course there's luck in sports. But to say that any team won BECAUSE of luck, or was "lucky to win" is attributing their entire win to luck, instead of them playing better than the team they played. In the instance of the Romo fumble, he made a mistake. It was an unforced error, but he still made the mistake. He plays for Dallas, Seattle was playing Dallas, Seattle played better than Dallas that game and that is why they won. Seattle didn't get lucky to win, nor did Dallas get unlucky to lose. So luck is a part of the game, but I've never seen any game determined by luck and nothing else.

JuTMSY4Legend

856 days ago

Score 0

Vinny Testeverde and the Jets versus the Seahawks...the refs totally blew it and it was all luck...

Manny StilesMajor Leaguer

856 days ago

Score -5

Win a Super Bowl by more than a touchdown if you're such a great coach... (Or take over for Doc Rivers so the Celtics can have a chance)

Permalink | Reply

HappyskinnyAll-American

856 days ago

Score 1

I love this one. Now its not enough to win, you have to win by alot.

RawbeezeitzMajor Leaguer

856 days ago

Score 0

After all, as Vince Lombardi put it: "Winning by several touchdowns isn't everything, it's the only thing"

Manny StilesMajor Leaguer

856 days ago

Score -6

winning two super bowls on field goals and a third (due to McNabb turning into that vomiting South Park kid in the 4th) doesn't make you a great coach - in fact - it often makes you the benefactor of playing against a coach that can't manage the clock) Check the scores on Lombardi's NFL-AFL Championships (Super Bowls) - BOTH games difference in score were individually greater than the sum of the differences in ALL three of Belichick's wins COMBINED!!!

JuTMSY4Legend

856 days ago

Score 3

I'm sorry, but that's the most ridiculous thing i've heard today...I rarely defend the chick, but winning 3 superbowls makes you a great coach...alright...1 on accident...maaaybe...but 3? You must be doing something right...

the only statistic that matters is Ws

Ask Dubya

RawbeezeitzMajor Leaguer

856 days ago

Score 1

Who cares about wins? All that matters is margin of victory. Just ask the BCS. Three Super Bowl wins is irrelevant, especially since the spread in Super Bowl XXXVI was 14 in favor of St. Louis. Oh, and those 24 straight wins the Patriots belted out, they don't mean anything because the margins of victory weren't high enough.

JETEPee Wee

856 days ago

Score -3

HE'S A GREAT ONE,THE YEARS HE WASNT IN THE FINALS HE WAS RACKED BY INJURIES.ALSO THE OWNER KEPT GIVING HIM LESS TO WORK WITH TILL THIS YEAR.HE'S GREAT,WHO KNOWS IF HE'S THE GREATEST.LOMBARDI,LANDRY,WALSH,NOLL.ALL WERE VERY,VERY GOOD.

Permalink | Reply

JuTMSY4Legend

856 days ago

Score 2

I remember when belichick wasn't in the finals... come on, you could have even said "championship game"...but finals?!

Manny StilesMajor Leaguer

856 days ago

Score 0

AT LEAST IT WAS ALL CAPS!!!!

Tyrone BriggsHall of Famer

856 days ago

Score 1

Do truly great coaches really worry about "being the greatest"? My guess is Belichek is more interested in winning the Super Bowl than worrying about the ranking of his legacy with notables Lombardi (who was/is/forever will be the greatest - IMO) or Walsh (RIP).

Permalink | Reply

JuTMSY4Legend

856 days ago

Score 3

He's probably reading AGM right now, pissed of and tearing up hoodies...

Tyrone BriggsHall of Famer

856 days ago

Score 0

Only if he thought one of us was Mangini!

CheezerAll-Star

855 days ago

Score 0

Why do we even try to classify someone as "The Greatest"? (Although I do believe that Lombardi is the greatest.) In the post-season, the victory is very often dependent on a few strange plays. This indicates that we do not have nearly the accuracy in evaluating the coaches that we pretend to. A bounce here, a fumble there, and results could be entirely different. How can we try to be so precise in light of this?

Why can't we just lump all of these guys as "great" and be done with it?

The exception to the "strange play" phenomenon is when a coach wins by a large margin of victory. IMHO, that demonstrates true dominance of coaching and/or talent.

Retrieved from "http://armchairgm.wikia.com/Bill_Belichick:_Greatest_Coach_in_NFL_History%3F_NO%21%21%21"

This page was last modified 20:47, 1 August 2007. Content is available under the GFDL.