[dgfitz]

As an aside, beleichick was a lacrosse player as a hobby/sport/passion, not an American football player. I’m very torn at the moment if he was an incredible coach or just rode the wave or Brady talent.

I pay a lot of attention to football as a hobby (and a gambling outlet) so these next two seasons at UNC for ‘ol Bill will be really telling.

[BoxFour]

> I’m very torn at the moment if he was an incredible coach or just rode the wave or Brady talent.

Honestly, it’s hard to imagine they’d have been anywhere near that successful if the answer wasn't just "both."

You see plenty of examples of great coaches stuck with lousy rosters (Parcells with the Cowboys), and also great players on poorly run teams (Patricia-era Lions). Usually when a team only has one or the other, they continually flame out early in the playoffs.

> these next two seasons at UNC for ‘ol Bill will be really telling.

I wouldn’t read too much into that. He’s 73, the game’s evolved a lot, and coaching college is a whole different thing from the NFL. It’s incredibly rare for someone to excel at both — guys like Pete Carroll being the exception that prove the rule.

[satyrun]

Exactly. It is such a stupid debate when Belichick coached and molded Brady into what he became.

Everyone has always said Belichick is basically an encyclopedia of football knowledge.

[dgfitz]

That’s my whole point. Brady went on to win a ring in Tampa. Bill did… what?

I don’t give belicheck the credit for teaching Brady, you can’t teach that. It’s not stupid at all if you’re a fan of the sport.