FOX is talking about Belichek being the best in history

[GNG]

You don't have to let me win, I'm kicking your ass all by myself.

You have no way of determining how Vince Lombardi would do in the free agency/salary cap era............period..

We know of the success that BB has had in that same free agency/salary cap era.

I'm not sure you know which game you're playing dude.

Like I always say, a great coach is a great coach regardless of era. The great coaches know how to adjust to changing situations.

 

[Rex Racer]

You have that exactly backwards which is about right for you. Starr did nothing without Lombardi. Starr played for years before and after Lombardi and went 17-34. I'll let you look up his record under Lombardi. Lombardi took a Pack team that had been garbage for years and immediately turned them into winners. The year he stepped down as coach they turned right back into mediocrity. Then he went to DC and led the Skins to their 1st winning season in 15 years. Then he died. There's Lombardi then we can argue about who comes next.

Thanks coach....................................................... so to summarize Lombardi won all his championships with Bart Starr at QB?

Good to know.


Smoke another one fukwad, it's all you got at this point.

 

[GNG]

Not true. Times are different.

Lombardi would be lost in todays game, but saying that doesn't take away from his greatness in his time.

Lombardi is the greatest coach of all-time and he would have adjusted to today's game. To say he would be lost is almost laughable.

 

[NEPatsfan]

Lombardi is the greatest coach of all-time and he would have adjusted to today's game. To say he would be lost is almost laughable.

He would be lost.

Now if your argument had he been born in these times and raise through it, then that is different, since it's simply based on intelligence.

 

[Rex Racer]

A great coach would be a great coach in any era. This is a no-brainer.

You're struggling with this: "I don't know if I would say the probability is lower, but I would seriously question whether they could sustain long term success like Lombardi did with free agency and a salary cap to deal with."


I get it. You hate the Patriots because of their recent history of mud stomping the Cowboys, but reality can't be ignored.

 

[Wazmankg]

Thanks coach....................................................... so to summarize Lombardi won all his championships with Bart Starr at QB?

Good to know.


Smoke another one fukwad, it's all you got at this point.

No to summarize you have it exactly ass backwards as usual you silly twat. Starr did nothing without Lombardi on the sideline.

 

[GNG]

You have that exactly backwards which is about right for you. Starr did nothing without Lombardi. Starr played for years before and after Lombardi and went 17-34. I'll let you look up his record under Lombardi. Lombardi took a Pack team that had been garbage for years and immediately turned them into winners. The year he stepped down as coach they turned right back into mediocrity. Then he went to DC and led the Skins to their 1st winning season in 15 years. Then he died. There's Lombardi then we can argue about who comes next.

Starr injured his throwing arm during his last season playing under Lombardi and that led to his diminished performance afterwards.

 

[Scooby-Doo]

Lombardi coached in an era where you could hoard players, so you have to weight his success a bit. And Walsh had the benefit of Hall of Fame QB play as well. (By the way the WCO was by Don Coryell, not Bill Wash)

So did every other coach. You are soooooo biased it's laughable.

 

[NEPatsfan]

So did every other coach. You are soooooo biased it's laughable.

And the fact that they could all do it, stops one from having the best team then not letting it go to free agency and salary cap makes me biased how?

 

[GNG]

I get it. You hate the Patriots because of their recent history of mud stomping the Cowboys, but reality can't be ignored.

I never mentioned the Patriots Rex but understand your paranoia. I thought we were comparing coaches and teams from different eras but you took it as an insult to your team.

 

[Rex Racer]

No to summarize you have it exactly ass backwards as usual you silly twat. Starr did nothing without Lombardi on the sideline.

Lets go over this one more time. I'll type slowly so that even a fucktarded shitstain like you can follow along.

Ready?

You sure you're ready?

Vince Lombardi won zero championships without Bart Starr at QB.

First thing you should do is dispute that point if you can and then build your argument off of that.

Go.

 

[GNG]

And the fact that they could all do it, stops one from having the best team then not letting it go to free agency and salary cap makes me biased how?

You better quit while you're behind dude.

 

[NEPatsfan]

You better quit while you're behind dude.

To far ahead to quite.

Your mistake is thinking anyone in the past is better than anyone at an equal plane for their own era is the same.

Alexander the Great was a hell of a field commander, but I would take Patton over him ten times over.

It's the nature of advancement.


Again unless you are somehow trying to argue each individuals IQ.

 

[Wazmankg]

Starr injured his throwing arm during his last season playing under Lombardi and that led to his diminished performance afterwards.

He didn't do anything in Green Bay the 2 years before Lombardi took over either. Starr was the first of the great game manager QBs. He never threw for 2500 yards. He was good but the notion that Lombardi couldn't have won with someone else is false imo.

 

[Rex Racer]

So did every other coach. You are soooooo biased it's laughable.

The debate isn't that Lombardi wasn't the best of his era, it is that he would not have been able to keep his team intact for a lengthy run which is what the modern coaches have to deal with.

 

[NEPatsfan]

He didn't do anything in Green Bay the 2 years before Lombardi took over either. Starr was the first of the great game manager QBs. He never threw for 2500 yards. He was good but the notion that Lombardi couldn't have won with someone else is false imo.

I haven't looked, what was the typical number of passing yards thrown for the top tier QB's of that time during a season?

 

[GNG]

Vince Lombardi won zero championships without Bart Starr at QB.

First thing you should do is dispute that point if you can and then build your argument off of that.

Bill Walsh never won a Super Bowl without Joe Montana at QB and Belichick never won a Super Bowl without Tom Brady at QB. This game is fun.

 

[NEPatsfan]

Bill Walsh never won a Super Bowl without Joe Montana at QB and Belichick never won a Super Bowl without Tom Brady at QB. This game is fun.

I already made that point early during debate on these boards.

 

[GNG]

The debate isn't that Lombardi wasn't the best of his era, it is that he would not have been able to keep his team intact for a lengthy run which is what the modern coaches have to deal with.

I'm sure Lombardi would have adjusted to the modern era.

 

[Scooby-Doo]

And the fact that they could all do it, stops one from having the best team then not letting it go to free agency and salary cap makes me biased how?

My point is, it was a level playing field back then because everyone could do the same thing. Everyone had to play by the same rules so your argument holds no water.

And yes... You are probably the most biased poster on these boards.