|
Post by sdm3 on Apr 15, 2020 7:53:47 GMT
I’ve figured out why. At the start of the game you can see that the Pats aren’t coached by Belichick; it’s some generic “Griffin Murphy” character. Presumably, Belichick didn’t give permission for the rights to his image (I don’t think he ever has for Madden). No wonder they lost! I'm always curious as to why guys do this. Michael Jordan did it for a while, Barry Bonds, Belichick now. There always seems to be one random asshole that doesn't do it. I actually researched this. As for why Belichick isn’t part of the NFLCA, your guess is as good as mine.
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Apr 15, 2020 12:26:23 GMT
I'm always curious as to why guys do this. Michael Jordan did it for a while, Barry Bonds, Belichick now. There always seems to be one random asshole that doesn't do it. I actually researched this. As for why Belichick isn’t part of the NFLCA, your guess is as good as mine. Because he thinks he's smarter than everyone else. He'll never admit he owes his success to Brady, even after the team crashes and burns this year. Brady was on Howard Stern recently and as usual was total class, saying things like, "I don't think I would've had the same success without (Belichick), and vice versa." Meanwhile in that interview you posted, Belichick is sitting there trying to take credit for Brady's success. "“We geared everything toward what would be best for (Cassel), just like we always geared everything toward what was best for Tom to help our offense there. So I don’t really see that changing.” Considering Tom can do everything except run, I don't know what they 'geared toward' him. Having receivers? Matt Cassel went to a pro bowl in Kansas City. Jimmy Garoppolo went to a Super Bowl in SF. Brissett proved to be a competent QB in Indy. You can give Bill credit for drafting those guys, but it's not like he did anything with them that wasn't done better by someone else. Tom Brady had a history of winning big games at Michigan, and Belichick used him as a game manager for years before figuring out he could do anything you asked him to do. It's just crazy to me that Brady inherited a team that was 5-11 the previous season and 0-2 at the time, and went 11-3 as a starter and ended up winning the Super Bowl; while Cassel inherited a team with a championship pedigree and a historic offense that went 16-0 and made the Super Bowl the previous season-- and won 7 less games, missed the playoffs and put up numbers nowhere near as good as Brady (less than half the TDs, more picks, and 1100 fewer pass yds), yet people (including BB himself) continue to compare the Brady and Cassel situations. Brady was thrown to the wolves and won a Super Bowl, Cassel was gifted an elite team and he missed the playoffs. Rodgers makes the all decade team over Brees and everyone on this board is up at arms because they know that's just media hype talking; but nobody wants to admit Belichick is overrated despite having a terrible record until the moment Brady became his starter. Perception is reality, but in this conversation the numbers will always be on my side, while the other end of the argument is entirely supposition. "You can just tell, though." "Belichick figured it out the second time around." He figured out how to be a great coach the second Brady became his starting QB, how convenient. How dare anyone want to use his likeness for a video game.
|
|
|
Post by sdm3 on Apr 15, 2020 13:30:10 GMT
I actually researched this. As for why Belichick isn’t part of the NFLCA, your guess is as good as mine. I feel like next season will just be you saying "I told you so!" every time Brady completes a pass.
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Apr 15, 2020 13:50:40 GMT
I feel like next season will just be you saying "I told you so!" every time Brady completes a pass. More like after 31-10 Patriots loss. Kidding, being right would be cold comfort for having to suffer through garbage football all season. I don't know how closely I'll be following Brady, to be honest. I still respect him, he's my favorite football player of all time. But he effectively retired when he left NE. I'm not tuning into a Bucs/Falcons game just to watch a guy who used to play here. In my old age (same age as Brady!) I care less about the league in any given sport; I only follow my own team for the most part. Anyway it's not like anyone on this board will admit they were wrong if the Pats crater, or if Brady puts up huge numbers in TB. "It's another system created for Brady, anyone could do this!" "Pats have a tough schedule. Too many coaches have moved on. That defense really misses ____." When I was complaining about the Pats 11-5 season two years ago, I owned it when they went on to win the Super Bowl. Nobody admitted they were wrong as the Patriots defense fell apart down the stretch last year, I don't expect anything to change.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2020 0:28:33 GMT
I actually researched this. As for why Belichick isn’t part of the NFLCA, your guess is as good as mine. Rodgers makes the all decade team over Brees and everyone on this board is up at arms because they know that's just media hype talking Wait, so that's what we're going with? Rodgers only made it over Brees because the media? Not because he is a very good QB, won a SB, 2 MVPs, and broke/set records during the decade? I swear the random hate Rodgers gets is baffling to me. People just talk about him like he isnt deserving of any accolades or praise. If people think Brees is better, fine that is anyone's right to believe. However at least acknowledge that Rodgers is damn good at what he does. It's not like he is Nathan Peterman out there. From my experience the only people complaining about it were Saints fans who feel like Brees isnt acknowledged enough or people who want to shit on Aaron. It's odd that Rodgers gets shat on for only having 1 SB yet Brees doesnt.
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Apr 16, 2020 11:54:13 GMT
Rodgers makes the all decade team over Brees and everyone on this board is up at arms because they know that's just media hype talking Wait, so that's what we're going with? Rodgers only made it over Brees because the media? Not because he is a very good QB, won a SB, 2 MVPs, and broke/set records during the decade? I swear the random hate Rodgers gets is baffling to me. People just talk about him like he isnt deserving of any accolades or praise. If people think Brees is better, fine that is anyone's right to believe. However at least acknowledge that Rodgers is damn good at what he does. It's not like he is Nathan Peterman out there. From my experience the only people complaining about it were Saints fans who feel like Brees isnt acknowledged enough or people who want to shit on Aaron. It's odd that Rodgers gets shat on for only having 1 SB yet Brees doesnt. They're both great. I would've given Brees the nod over Rodgers.
|
|
|
Post by hehatesshe on Apr 16, 2020 12:33:09 GMT
I actually researched this. As for why Belichick isn’t part of the NFLCA, your guess is as good as mine. Because he thinks he's smarter than everyone else. He'll never admit he owes his success to Brady, even after the team crashes and burns this year. Brady was on Howard Stern recently and as usual was total class, saying things like, "I don't think I would've had the same success without (Belichick), and vice versa." Meanwhile in that interview you posted, Belichick is sitting there trying to take credit for Brady's success. "“We geared everything toward what would be best for (Cassel), just like we always geared everything toward what was best for Tom to help our offense there. So I don’t really see that changing.” Considering Tom can do everything except run, I don't know what they 'geared toward' him. Having receivers? Matt Cassel went to a pro bowl in Kansas City. Jimmy Garoppolo went to a Super Bowl in SF. Brissett proved to be a competent QB in Indy. You can give Bill credit for drafting those guys, but it's not like he did anything with them that wasn't done better by someone else. Tom Brady had a history of winning big games at Michigan, and Belichick used him as a game manager for years before figuring out he could do anything you asked him to do. It's just crazy to me that Brady inherited a team that was 5-11 the previous season and 0-2 at the time, and went 11-3 as a starter and ended up winning the Super Bowl; while Cassel inherited a team with a championship pedigree and a historic offense that went 16-0 and made the Super Bowl the previous season-- and won 7 less games, missed the playoffs and put up numbers nowhere near as good as Brady (less than half the TDs, more picks, and 1100 fewer pass yds), yet people (including BB himself) continue to compare the Brady and Cassel situations. Brady was thrown to the wolves and won a Super Bowl, Cassel was gifted an elite team and he missed the playoffs. Rodgers makes the all decade team over Brees and everyone on this board is up at arms because they know that's just media hype talking; but nobody wants to admit Belichick is overrated despite having a terrible record until the moment Brady became his starter. Perception is reality, but in this conversation the numbers will always be on my side, while the other end of the argument is entirely supposition. "You can just tell, though." "Belichick figured it out the second time around." He figured out how to be a great coach the second Brady became his starting QB, how convenient. How dare anyone want to use his likeness for a video game. Also, don't forget that Cleveland went to the playoffs in 5 of the 6 years before Belichick became the coach. It's not like he took over a team that hasn't been to the playoffs in over a decade. That would be TB12 in TB.
|
|