Showing posts with label Bill Belichick. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bill Belichick. Show all posts

Friday, January 12, 2024

Appreciating Bill Belichick and Nick Saban

In the past two days, the greatest college football coach of all-time--Nick Saban--retired, and the greatest pro football coach of all-time--Bill Belichick--amicably parted ways with the New England Patriots. It is unclear if Saban will coach again, but it seems likely that Belichick will get another NFL head coaching job. It is fitting to discuss them in the same article because their careers are intertwined.

Saban and Belichick have been friends since the early 1980s when Saban worked with Belichick's father Steve on the coaching staff at Navy. When Bill Belichick became head coach of the Cleveland Browns in 1991, Nick Saban was the first assistant coach he hired. As the defensive coordinator, Saban played a key role for the Browns as they improved from 3-13 the year before Belichick took the reins to 11-5 in 1994. Belichick's Browns coaching staff included not only Saban but also Ozzie Newsome--the Hall of Fame tight end who later built the Baltimore Ravens into two-time Super Bowl champions--plus Kirk Ferentz (who has coached Iowa to 196 wins since 1999), and Pat Hill (who later won 112 games as an NCAA head coach). Belichick and Saban are football savants who share a love for dissecting the sport's intricate details and then preparing meticulously to exploit even the slightest possible advantage.

Saban left the Browns after the 1994 season to become the head coach at Michigan State. He led the Spartans to a 34-24-1 record in five seasons before becoming LSU's head coach. LSU went 3-8 and finished last in the SEC in 1999, the year before Saban arrived; just four years later, Saban led LSU to a 13-1 record and the national championship. After one more season at LSU, Saban left to become the head coach of the Miami Dolphins. The Dolphins went 15-17 in two seasons under Saban; their 6-10 mark in 2006 is the only losing season Saban suffered as a head coach (not including 2007, when Alabama was forced to vacate four wins due to NCAA sanctions stemming from misconduct that mostly took place under Saban's predecessor Mike Shula).

Saban left the Dolphins to become Alabama's head coach in 2007, and the rest is history, as Saban led the Crimson Tide to six national championships (2009, 2011-12, 2015, 2017, 2020) in 17 seasons. Saban has won more national championships (seven) than any coach in NCAA football history, and he ranks sixth on the all-time NCAA wins list with 292. Saban is the first and only coach to win a national championship at two different FBS schools since the inception of the AP poll in 1936, and he joined Paul "Bear" Bryant as the only two coaches to win an SEC title at two different schools. Saban was equally adept at recruiting elite athletes and developing innovative tactics; there have been many coaches who mastered one of those aspects, but it is difficult to imagine another coach matching Saban's acumen in both. Alabama never had a Heisman Trophy winner before Saban arrived in Tuscaloosa; the Crimson Tide had four Heisman Trophy winners on Saban's watch: Mark Ingram (2009), Derrick Henry (2015), DeVonta Smith (2020), and Bryce Young (2022). Only four schools have more Heisman Trophy winners than Alabama: Ohio State, Oklahoma, Notre Dame, and USC each have seven Heisman Trophy winners--but those schools accumulated their Heisman Trophies over several decades, while Saban moved Alabama to fifth on the all-time list in 15 years.

Belichick dominated the NFL in a similar fashion to the way that Saban dominated the NCAA. Belichick only coached one more season with the Browns after Saban departed; after Art Modell announced his plan to move the Browns to Baltimore, Belichick endured a tumultuous 1995 season. Modell fired Belichick after that 5-11 campaign. Belichick spent the 1996 season as assistant head coach with the New England Patriots under Bill Parcells, and then he moved to the New York Jets with Parcells, serving as assistant head coach from 1997-1999. After Parcells left the Jets, Belichick was the heir apparent, but Belichick made a shrewd assessment of the situation and decided to instead become the head coach of the New England Patriots. Belichick took over a team that went 8-8 under Pete Carroll, and Belichick's critics howled after the Patriots went 5-11 in 2000--but the Patriots improved to 11-5 in 2001, winning the AFC East and defeating the favored St. Louis "Greatest Show on Turf" Rams in Super Bowl XXXVI. 

The Patriots slipped to 9-7 in 2002 but then won back to back Super Bowl titles in 2003 and 2004 en route to posting 17 consecutive seasons with at least 10 wins; during that time, the Patriots won 16 AFC East titles (including 11 straight from 2009-2019), and three more Super Bowls (2014, 2016, 2018) while posting the first (and only) 16-0 regular season (2007) in NFL history. In 2008, the Patriots went 11-5 despite losing Hall of Fame quarterback Tom Brady to a season-ending knee injury in the first quarter of the first game. When the Patriots beat the L.A. Rams 13-3 in Super Bowl LIII, Belichick became the oldest coach to win a Super Bowl.  

Belichick made his name as a defensive guru--his defensive game plan as the defensive coordinator for the Giants' first Super Bowl win is an exhibit at the Pro Football Hall of Fame--but during his career he has proven that he can adjust with the times as well as with personnel changes. At the start of his New England tenure, the Patriots relied on stern defense and timely offense, but after Brady developed into an elite passer Belichick opened up the offense and the Patriots' offense became fearsome. Belichick was successful when he had superstar receiver Randy Moss, and he was successful when he had a receiving corps devoid of Pro Bowl receivers. Belichick has a grandmaster level understanding of situational football, and his special teams units contributed heavily to the success of his teams.

Belichick has won six Super Bowl titles in nine Super Bowl appearances as a head coach. He is the record holder in both categories by a wide margin, with Chuck Noll ranking second in wins (four) and Don Shula ranking second in appearances (six). In the pre-Super Bowl era, George Halas and Curly Lambeau each won six NFL titles.

Belichick holds NFL coaching records for most playoff wins (31, nine more than Andy Reid), most division titles (17, four more than Shula, Andy Reid, and Tom Landry), most conference championships in the Super Bowl era (nine), and most Super Bowl appearances (12, including three as an assistant coach). Belichick ranks third all-time in NFL regular season wins (302), trailing only Shula (328) and Halas (318); if you add up regular season wins and playoff wins, Belichick's 333 trails only Shula's 347. Belichick's 21 winning seasons are fifth on the all-time list behind Halas (40), Shula (33), Lambeau (33), and Landry (29).

It is no secret that New England has not played well during the four seasons after Tom Brady left New England to go to Tampa Bay--but people who have short memories or who lack knowledge of football history place too much emphasis on these last few years of Belchick's New England career, and they focus too much on whether Belichick or Brady deserve the most credit for New England's unprecedented success. Hall of Fame quarterback play is almost always required to win a Super Bowl, and after winning Super Bowls even the greatest NFL coaches rarely end their careers on a high note.

There are 13 coaches other than Belichick who have won at least two Super Bowls. Andy Reid is the only two-time Super Bowl winner who is currently coaching an NFL team.

Noll won all four of his Super Bowls with Hall of Famer Terry Bradshaw at quarterback. Bradshaw retired after the 1983 season, and Noll posted a 2-2 playoff record in his final eight seasons after going 14-6 in the playoffs from 1969-1983. Noll had eight seasons with at least 10 regular season wins from 1972-83 but did not win more than nine games in a season after 1983.

Joe Gibbs and Bill Walsh are next on the Super Bowl coaches list with three championships each. Gibbs won Super Bowls with three different starting quarterbacks, none of whom are Hall of Famers. His Washington Redskins went 9-7 in the season after his last Super Bowl win, and he retired. Gibbs came back to the Redskins 12 years later, but he did not match his earlier success, posting losing records in two seasons out of four and failing to qualify for the playoffs in all four seasons before retiring for good. Walsh is the rare NFL coach who left on top, retiring in 1988 after his San Francisco 49ers won their third Super Bowl in an eight season span. Hall of Famer Joe Montana was the quarterback for all three of Walsh's Super Bowl champions. Walsh later came back as the head coach at Stanford, where he had posted back to back bowl wins before becoming the 49ers' coach; he led Stanford to a bowl win in 1992, but closed his coaching career with 4-7 and 3-7-1 records. 

Shula's Miami Dolphins won back to back Super Bowl titles in 1972-73 with Hall of Fame quarterback Bob Griese, and Shula led the Dolphins back to the Super Bowl twice in the 1980s, but in the 10 seasons after his last Super Bowl appearance the Dolphins posted a 3-4 playoff record and missed the playoffs six times. 

Landry led the Dallas Cowboys to 20 consecutive winning seasons and two Super Bowl titles, but in his final three seasons the Cowboys went 7-9, 7-9, and 3-13. Hall of Famer Roger Staubach was the quarterback for both of Landry's Super Bowl champions

Bill Parcells won two Super Bowls in a five season span--both times with Belichick running the defense--but his teams missed the playoffs four times in his final seven seasons, and he did not win a playoff game in his final five seasons. Like Gibbs, Parcells won his Super Bowls without having a Hall of Fame quarterback.

Tom Coughlin's New York Giants twice defeated Belichick's Patriots in the Super Bowl, but after that second Super Bowl win Coughlin did not make another playoff appearance in his final four seasons, posting losing records in the last three. Coughlin's two-time Super Bowl MVP quarterback Eli Manning is not yet Hall of Fame eligible, but it is a safe bet that Manning will be a Hall of Famer. 

Mike Shananan led the Denver Broncos to back to back Super Bowl wins in 1997-98 with Hall of Fame quarterback John Elway running the show. After 1998, Shanahan went 1-5 in the playoffs, and he finished his career coaching the Washington Redskins to three losing seasons in a four year span, including a 3-13 record in his final campaign. 

George Seifert succeeded Walsh, and won a Super Bowl in his first season with Montana as the quarterback. Seifert won his second Super Bowl in 1994 with Hall of Famer Steve Young as the quarterback. Seifert coached five more seasons (two with the 49ers and then three with the Carolina Panthers), posting a 1-2 playoff record and ending his career with back to back losing seasons, including a 1-15 record in his final campaign.

Tom Flores led the Raiders to two Super Bowl wins in a four year span, but he did not win a single playoff game after capturing his second Super Bowl title. The Raiders had losing records in each of his final four seasons. Jim Plunkett, who is not a Hall of Famer, quarterbacked both of Flores' championship teams.

Vince Lombardi coached the Green Bay Packers to five championships, including wins in each of the first two Super Bowls. Hall of Famer Bart Starr quaterbacked all five of Lombardi's championship teams. Lombardi retired after his second Super Bowl win/fifth championship, only to return a year later to coach the Washington Redskins. Lombardi led the Redskins to a 7-5-2 record in his only season with the team before he died of cancer.

Jimmy Johnson coached the Dallas Cowboys to back to back Super Bowl wins in 1992-93 before losing a power struggle with owner Jerry Jones. Hall of Famer Troy Aikman quarterbacked both of those Super Bowl champions, and then he won a third Super Bowl with Barry Switzer coaching Dallas. Johnson returned to the NFL in 1996 with the Miami Dolphins, posting a 36-28 regular season record and a 2-3 playoff record without reaching the conference championship round, let alone the Super Bowl.

It should be noted that Paul Brown led the Cleveland Browns to seven league championships in the pre-Super Bowl era--four straight in the AAFC and then three in the NFL. Hall of Famer Otto Graham was his quarterback for all seven championships. Brown coached the Browns for seven more seasons after Graham retired; during that time, the Browns lost twice in the NFL championship game. Modell fired Brown after the Browns went 7-6-1 in 1962. Brown returned to pro football in 1968 as the owner/coach of the expansion Cincinnati Bengals in the AFL, leading the Bengals to a 55-56-1 record in eight seasons (two in the AFL and six in the NFL). The Bengals went 0-3 in the playoffs under Brown.

The point is not to throw shade on any of these great coaches, but to just emphasize that Belichick's late career record is not unusual and does not in any way diminish what he accomplished during his prime. It will be interesting to see how Belichick fares if he is hired by another team.

For any football purist it was a joy to watch teams coached by Belichick or Saban, because their teams were disciplined, well-prepared, calm under pressure, and fundamentally sound.

Tuesday, September 20, 2022

The Cleveland Browns Flunk Situational Football

In the 1940s and 1950s, the Cleveland Browns were one of the most dominant teams in pro football history, reaching the championship game for 10 straight years (1946-55, including four AAFC seasons and six NFL seasons) and winning seven titles. 

Since the Browns returned to the NFL in 1999, they have been one of the most inept, poorly managed, and poorly coached teams in NFL history. 

The Browns are currently coached by Kevin Stefanski. Stefanski is a young coach, and maybe he will develop into a great coach, but coaches younger than he is now (40) have won Super Bowls--including Mike Tomlin of the division rival Pittsburgh Steelers, Jon Gruden (then with the Tampa Bay Buccaneers), and, most recently, Sean McVay of the L.A. Rams.

Let's just say that right now Stefanski does not appear to be on the fast track to becoming a Super Bowl-winning coach.

A fundamental part of NFL success is understanding situational football, meaning that the coaching staff instructs the players how to make decisions and plays that maximize the opportunity for success in any given situation. 

I have been watching NFL football since the 1970s, I have been a Cleveland Browns fan for that entire time, and it pains me to say that the last time that the Cleveland Browns consistently understood the concept of situational football was when Bill Belichick coached the team in the 1990s. That era ended unceremoniously in 1995 when Browns' owner Art Modell moved the team to Baltimore and fired Belichick. You could fill a wing in the Pro Football Hall of Fame just with coaches fired by Modell: start with Paul Brown, then add Marty Schottenheimer (who had a Hall of Fame caliber career but has not yet been inducted), and finish with Belichick, who won six Super Bowls after being dumped by Modell.

Sunday's debacle versus the New York Jets is just the latest example of the Browns snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. The Browns led 24-17 and had the ball deep inside the Jets' territory with the fourth quarter clock winding down to the two minute mark. The Jets had no timeouts left, so the Browns were one first down and a few kneeldowns away from victory. Kareem Hunt took a handoff with 2:09 left, but instead of making sure that he stayed inbounds so that the clock would run all the way down to the two minute warning he fought for meaningless extra yards and ended up going out of bounds with 2:02 left. The goal of the next play should have been obvious: gain yardage if possible but above all don't fumble--and don't score, because the only way that the Jets could win is by getting the ball back. Instead, Nick Chubb raced around the left side of the offensive line and run into the end zone. The Browns now led 30-17 with 1:55 left. What could go wrong?

Here is the list (in addition to the miscues by Hunt and Chubb, the two plays that made all of the ensuing mayhem possible):

1) Cade York missed the extra point.

2) The Browns blew a coverage and gave up a 66 yard touchdown pass.

3) Onside kicks are rarely successful, but the Browns mishandled the ball and the Jets recovered (this is not new for the Browns; they also failed to recover an onside kick in week 14 versus the Ravens last season, but won anyway because the defense saved the day).

4) The Jets marched down the field in six plays, never needing a single third down conversion before scoring a 15 yard touchdown pass with :22 remaining.

5) The Browns still had a chance to win by reaching field goal range, and they have a kicker who made a 58 yard game-winning field goal last week (although he also had just missed an extra point)--but when the Browns were just one medium-range pass completion away from entering field goal range, quarterback Jacoby Brissett threw an interception. The Jets did not try to score a touchdown on the interception return, instead kneeling down to seal the victory.

How rare is it for an NFL team to blow a lead of at least 13 points with less than two minutes remaining? The last 2229 teams to enjoy such leads won the game. Not surprisingly, the previous team to blow such a lead was the Cleveland Browns in 2001 versus the Chicago Bears. When it mattered most versus the Jets, the Browns repeatedly failed to understand situational football and to execute fundamental plays, including kneeling down to keep the clock running, making an extra point, making sure that no defensive back is beaten deep with a two score lead with less than two minutes remaining, recovering an onside kick, getting one defensive stop, and running a two-minute drill to get into field goal range. If the Browns' special teams, defense, or offense understood situational football then the team would not have made so many plays that were not only bad but stupid. Situational football is all about what the coaches teach and how well they teach it. A well-coached team might lose but a well-coached team will not beat itself.

The Browns have had some awful teams since 1999 that simply did not have enough good players to be competitive no matter who coached them (though the coaches were generally awful, too), but even when the Browns have had reasonably talented teams (like they have now) they are done in by their own ineptitude.

After the loss to the Jets, Stefanski said that it is his responsibility to tell Chubb to kneel down before the play--but that comment just shows that even in the postgame press conference Stefanski still missed the point; this is not something to figure out or discuss in the heat of the moment: this is what you are supposed to be practicing and thinking about repeatedly, so that when situations arise the whole team understands what the correct play is.

ESPN's NFL Rewind show contrasted the Browns' meltdown with the end of the Patriots-Steelers game. The Patriots knew to kneel down, run out the clock, and win 17-14. As a Browns fan, it is great to see the Steelers lose, but every time Belichick's Patriots execute sound situational football I think about how many Super Bowls the Browns might have won if there had been a way to get rid of Modell, keep Belichick, and keep the team in Cleveland.

In his postgame press conference, Stefanski mentioned that the Browns are a young team. I cannot recall Belichick ever using that excuse--or any other excuse--after a loss. Steelers' coach Mike Tomlin often says, "The standard is the standard." In Pittsburgh, the standard has been three coaches in the Super Bowl era (Chuck Noll, Bill Cowher, and Mike Tomlin), each of whom has won at least one Super Bowl. It does not take 20 years--or even five years--to build a Super Bowl contender if you know what you are doing. The great Bill Walsh took over an inept San Francisco team and won a Super Bowl three years later, which he considered to be the standard: "I am often asked how long it should take to turn an NFL franchise around. My short answer is: three years. Not every team will win the Super Bowl in its third season under a new coach (as we did in San Francisco in 1981) but it is reasonable to expect at least some signs of improvement by that time...There are reasons why some teams are able to remain competitive year after year while others never seem to get over the hump...My point is that it takes a concerted commitment from ownership, the front office, the coaching staff and the players for a team to succeed. It's the old 'a-chain-is-only-as-strong-as-its-weakest-link-theory' theory. If one of the four areas is weak, it's extremely difficult to overcome that flaw." Notice that Walsh's blueprint does not include tanking, which has been proven to not work in the NBA, and is not effective (or necessary) in the NFL.

The Browns are approaching a quarter century of historic ineptitude (including a three season run of 3-13, 1-15, and 0-16) briefly interrupted by just two playoff appearances and a single playoff win. In a league designed with parity as the goal, this is disgraceful and inexcusable.

Wednesday, February 2, 2022

Tom Brady Ends an Unprecedented Career on His Terms

Tom Brady, who just announced his retirement from the NFL after 22 seasons, won more Super Bowls (seven) than any single NFL franchise. If NFL titles from the pre-Super Bowl era are counted--and they should be--there are still only three franchises that won more championships than Brady: Green Bay Packers (13), Chicago Bears (nine), and New York Giants (eight). If AAFC titles are included--and they should be--then the Cleveland Browns are tied with the Giants. 

Speaking of the Browns, Brady is often described as the greatest quarterback ever based on how many championships his teams won, but Browns quarterback Otto Graham played 10 seasons (four in the AAFC followed by six in the NFL) and his teams appeared in the championship game 10 times, winning seven titles. Graham passed for 174 touchdowns, and he scored 44 rushing touchdowns; he led the league in passer rating (retroactively calculated, as passer ratings had not been created yet) five times, and his 112.1 passer rating in 1946 stood as the single season professional record until Joe Montana broke the mark in 1989. Graham ranked first in career passer rating for over 40 years until Montana surpassed him. I do not put much stock in passer ratings, but it is notable that Graham's passer ratings were so high that it took decades before anyone broke his single season and career records.

The rules, playing styles, and playing conditions of the 1940s and 1950s are so different from the rules, playing styles, and playing conditions of the 2000s that it is not meaningful to compare Graham's individual statistics with Brady's individual statistics, but to the extent that winning championships is an important metric for quarterbacks Brady and Graham are on equal footing. To the extent that being an efficient passer is an important metric for quarterbacks, Graham stood further ahead of his peers (and even succeeding generations of quarterbacks) than Brady.

Brady spent the first 20 years of his career in New England, leading the Patriots to six Super Bowl wins in nine appearances, including the 2001, 2003 and 2004 seasons as the Patriots captured three Super Bowl titles in a four year span, a feat matched by only the Dallas Cowboys in the 1992-93 and 1995 seasons. The 2007 Patriots became the first (and still only) NFL team to go 16-0 in the regular season, but their bid for a perfect season fell short due to a Super Bowl loss to the New York Giants.

Other than an ACL injury that forced Brady to miss almost the entire 2008 season, he was remarkably durable, and he rarely sat out a play. Brady was not fast, but he had an uncanny ability to shift around in the pocket so that he avoided absorbing big hits. The only other quarterback that I have seen who was not fast but had a similar pocket agility was Dan Marino (prior to the Achilles injury that he suffered late in his career); Marino rarely scrambled, but he would move away from pressure to avoid the big hit and get rid of the ball. 

The final act of Brady's career took place in Tampa Bay, where he continued to play at a high level and set records while leading the Buccaneers to the second Super Bowl title in franchise history. Brady is not the first Super Bowl-winning quarterback to win a title with a second team--Peyton Manning won one Super Bowl with Indianapolis and one Super Bowl with Denver--but Brady won a Super Bowl in his first year with his new team, and Brady played at an elite level throughout the season and the playoff run, while Manning won in his fourth season in Denver as a caretaker quarterback who threw more interceptions than touchdowns during the regular season.

Brady was remarkably effective in high pressure situations throughout his career, conducting numerous game-winning drives. In his last game, he almost led Tampa Bay to victory after trailing 27-3 in the Divisional Playoff game versus the L.A. Rams, who survived and will now represent the NFC in the Super Bowl after defeating the San Francisco 49ers in the NFC Championship.

It is unfortunate that instead of appreciating the greatness that Brady displayed in Tampa Bay there are many commentators who feel obligated to treat the Buccaneers' title run as some kind of indictment not just of New England not making sure that Brady finished his career with the Patriots but of Bill Belichick's entire coaching career. Brady winning a Super Bowl in Tampa Bay has no connection with Belichick's legacy; Belichick was a great defensive coordinator for two New York Giants Super Bowl teams, in his first head coaching job he led the Cleveland Browns to their only playoff victory in the 1990-2019 time period, and in his second head coaching job he guided the New England Patriots to a record-setting six Super Bowl titles. Belichick's record more than speaks for itself, and he is not required to "validate" his Super Bowl wins by winning a Super Bowl with a different quarterback. Think about how foolish it would sound to say that Chuck Noll had to "validate" his four Super Bowl wins by winning a Super Bowl without Terry Bradshaw. No one says that because it is nonsense, so commentators should stop saying nonsense about Belichick; their resentment at his brief press conference answers to their ridiculous questions should not impact how they describe his legacy.

Is Brady the greatest quarterback of all-time? Brady has to be on the short list of greatest quarterbacks. He holds all of the important "counting" records, from Super Bowl titles (seven) to career playoff wins (35) to career playoff passing yards (13,049) to career playoff touchdowns (86) to career regular season wins (243) to career regular season passing yards (84,250) to career regular season passing touchdowns (624). He excelled in the biggest moments, he was incredibly durable, and he won big even when he did not have big name players at the "skill" positions. 

Graham's name is too often left out of this conversation, probably because he played so long ago and because he played the first four years of his career in the AAFC, but he led the Cleveland Browns to the NFL title in his first NFL season (1950), disproving any notion that the Browns' four consecutive AAFC championships were less valuable than NFL championships. Graham won three NFL championships in just six NFL seasons, and he was a big threat not only as a passer but also as a runner. He and Peyton Manning share the quarterback record for most All-Pro First Team selections (seven; four of Graham's selections were in the AAFC, but those four are included in ProFootballReference.com's list, as they should be). Brady earned three All-Pro First Team selections in his 22 season career. The quarterback position is often stacked with a lot of talent, so it is unusual for a quarterback to earn more than three All-Pro First Team selections. Dan Marino, Joe Montana, Steve Young, and Brett Favre join Brady on the list of quarterbacks who received the honor three times.

Graham is the all-time leader in winning percentage among starting quarterbacks, and he is the all-time leader in yards per attempt, which is remarkable considering that he played in an era when the rules did not favor the passing game. Brady ranks second in winning percentage, but he barely cracks the top 30 in yards per attempt; in general, Brady ranks number one in almost every "total" statistic, but he is not at or sometimes even near the top in percentage statistics. Brady deserves credit for playing such a long time at a very high level, but his peak value in a given season or game may not have been the highest ever.

Johnny Unitas held the records for career passing yards and career passing touchdowns when he retired. He earned All-Pro First Team honors five times, trailing only Graham and Manning at the quarterback position. Unitas' Baltimore Colts won three NFL titles in the pre-Super Bowl era, and they added a fourth title in Super Bowl V. In 2004, The Sporting News ranked Unitas as the greatest NFL quarterback of all-time, ahead of Joe Montana.

Montana tied Bradshaw's record by winning four Super Bowls, a mark that stood until Brady broke it. Montana was the modern day Graham, an efficient passer who also had mobility that enabled him to be a threat to roll out and either pass or run depending on how the defense reacted.

Unitas and Montana were probably the consensus choices as the two greatest quarterbacks of all-time prior to Brady's emergence, although there is no objective reason for Graham to be ranked below them. It is fair to say that Graham was the best quarterback of the 1940s/1950s, Unitas was the best quarterback of the 1960s, Montana was the best quarterback of the 1980s, and Brady was the best quarterback of the 2000s. The 1970s and 1990s are more difficult to assess. Bradshaw won the most championships in the 1970s, but Roger Staubach was a more efficient passer and better runner than Bradshaw while winning two Super Bowls. Dan Fouts was the most prolific passer of the late 1970s/early 1980s, but he never played in a Super Bowl. Dan Marino was the most prolific passer of the mid-1980s/early 1990s, but he only played in one Super Bowl, losing to Montana. Troy Aikman won three Super Bowls in the 1990s, but he was not individually productive enough to be ranked among the very best. Brett Favre set many career passing records during the 1990s, but he was not as efficient as several of his predecessors, and he only won one Super Bowl.

If championships matter the most, why would Brady's seven in 22 years rank higher than Graham's seven in 10 years? If Graham had played an 11th season and won his eighth title would he be considered hands down the greatest quarterback of all-time? If not, why not?

However, if durability while maintaining a high level of play is the tiebreaker/decisive factor, then Brady lapped the field: no quarterback has played so well for so long, even if there may be a few quarterbacks who played better over shorter time periods.

Passer ratings are so skewed by the rules changes from the past 40 years or so (and other factors beyond the scope of this article) that they do not impact my rankings (they are only useful for comparing players who competed in the same era, but they are worthless for comparisons across eras). For the record, Brady's career passer rating is eighth all-time on the all-time list, just ahead of Tony Romo and just behind Kirk Cousins. With all due respect to Romo and Cousins, they do not belong in the greatest quarterback of all-time conversation--and passer ratings do not belong in the conversation, either.

The case for calling Brady the greatest quarterback of all-time is strong, but not definitive. However, it should be clear that--contrary to assertions by Dan Shaughnessy--Brady is not the greatest athlete in Boston history. Shaughnessy, who covered the Boston Celtics in the 1980s, should know better. As great as Brady was, he did not come close to matching what Bill Russell accomplished: Russell led the Boston Celtics to 11 championships in 13 seasons, including a run of eight championships in a row. A football team has 11 players on the field at a time, and it has been decades since players regularly played offense and defense (Deion Sanders being the notable exception), but a basketball team has just five players on the court at a time, and all five players play both offense and defense. Russell's direct impact on team success was greater than Brady's; that is not a shot at Brady, but just a statement of fact recognizing the difference between being a great basketball player and being a great football player. Bill Russell is the greatest winner/champion in the history of major North American team sports, and he is without question the greatest athlete in Boston history.

Brady's career is unprecedented in many ways: he went from being the 199th pick in the draft to being the NFL's greatest winner during the Super Bowl era, and he played at a high level for 22 years. It was  a treat to watch him play, and it will be interesting to see what he does now that his playing days are over.

Monday, February 8, 2021

Placing Tom Brady's Greatness in Historical Context

Tom Brady entered uncharted territory by capturing his seventh Super Bowl title and his fifth Super Bowl MVP after leading the Tampa Bay Buccaneers to a 31-9 victory over the reigning champion Kansas City Chiefs. Brady put up efficient, if not gaudy, numbers, completing 21 of 29 passes for 201 yards, three touchdowns, and no interceptions. He joins Peyton Manning as the only two quarterbacks to win at least one Super Bowl with two different franchises. Brady extended his lead over Charles Haley for most Super Bowls won by a player at any position (Haley won five Super Bowl rings), and he is now three ahead of Terry Bradshaw and Joe Montana among quarterbacks. Bradshaw's standard of four Super Bowl titles seemed daunting when he set it, and Montana was often described as the greatest quarterback of all-time after he matched Bradshaw's record while compiling superior individual statistics.

The Chiefs had won 25 of their previous 27 games, including a 27-24 victory against Tampa Bay this season, but they had no answers for a Buccaneers team that did not lose again after that Kansas City defeat dropped them to 7-5. The Buccaneers won their last four regular season games, they won three road playoff games before becoming the first team to play a Super Bowl in their home stadium, and they became the first team to beat three former Super Bowl MVPs (Drew Brees, Aaron Rodgers, Patrick Mahomes) during one playoff run.

Many analysts considered Brady to be the greatest quarterback of all-time prior to yesterday, and now Brady has added another amazing chapter to his already impressive career. 

The other narrative swirling around Brady involves comparing his legacy to the legacy of Coach Bill Belichick. Belichick and Brady teamed up to win six Super Bowls together--setting the record for a coach-quarterback duo--and media members have often speculated about who was most responsible for the New England Patriots' sustained success. It is not surprising that the media narrative veered in Brady's favor as Tampa Bay advanced through the 2020 playoffs while the Patriots failed to qualify for postseason play. Tampa Bay's victory closes the book on this narrative for many media members, who now gleefully proclaim that Brady had more to do with New England's success than Belichick did.

Narratives are easy to construct, and they are often based more on emotion and selective recall/understanding of history than on objective reality.

For example, a popular narrative ranks LeBron James as the greatest basketball player of all-time, but objective analysis reveals that this assertion overlooks the accomplishments of not only some of James' predecessors but even those of his contemporaries, including Kobe Bryant. After James won his fourth NBA title and fourth NBA Finals MVP last season, the narrative uplifting James became even more prominent, but based on MVPs and championships won (two of the criteria often used to support elevating James), James has not surpassed Bill Russell, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, or Michael Jordan.

There is no doubt that James belongs in the greatest basketball player of all-time conversation, just as there is no doubt that Brady belongs in the greatest quarterback of all-time conversation, but the reality is that it is difficult, if not impossible, to objectively select one individual as the greatest performer in a team sport; even in an individual sport such as tennis there is not a clear choice, though that sport also has a media-driven narrative favoring one person (Roger Federer).

Championships won is the simple number often cited to buttress popular narratives, but it is interesting to see which championships "count" when narratives are told. It has become common practice to suggest that Michael Jordan holds some kind of record with six NBA titles, because that is often depicted as the number that Kobe Bryant was chasing (Bryant finished his career with five titles), and it is often depicted as the number LeBron James is chasing now--but Bill Russell won 11 NBA titles in 13 seasons, in addition to leading his teams to two NCAA titles plus an Olympic gold medal. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar won six NBA titles but for some reason his titles do not "count" when basketball greatness is being discussed. 

Similarly, much was made of Roger Federer's Grand Slam singles titles, but the talk of the significance of Grand Slam titles became much quieter after Rafael Nadal tied Federer with 20. Narrative creators feel free to change the stories and change the rules as opposed to changing the narrative: once Roger Federer or Tom Brady or LeBron James becomes the favored son, it takes a lot to convince media members to anoint someone else.

There is no disputing the greatness of Federer or James or Brady. Brady has not only won more Super Bowls (seven wins in 10 appearances) than any other player, but he has more Super Bowl wins than any other franchise! He would likely make the Hall of Fame just on the basis of what he has accomplished since the age of 37, including three Super Bowl wins plus earning a regular season MVP award. In that sense, he is similar to Abdul-Jabbar, whose accomplishments past the age of 35 (four NBA titles, one NBA Finals MVP, four All-NBA First Team selections, and eight All-Star selections) exceed what many Hall of Famers accomplished during their entire careers.

However, if championships are the touchstone and measuring stick of professional football greatness in general and/or the greatness of a quarterback in particular, then it must be remembered that Otto Graham made 10 championship game appearances in 10 professional seasons, leading the Cleveland Browns to seven titles. He went four for four in his All-America Football Conference championship game appearances, and then he followed that by winning three titles in six NFL seasons, including leading the Browns to a 30-28 win over the favored L.A. Rams in the 1950 NFL championship game. Against the Rams, Graham completed 22 of 33 passes for 298 yards, four touchdowns, and one interception, while also running 12 times for 99 yards. That victory happened in the first season after the NFL and AAFC merged, and it demonstrated that the Browns' AAFC titles deserved full recognition. 

It is not at all clear why NFL titles are not given equal weight with Super Bowl titles; an NFL championship is an NFL championship, regardless of what it was called in 1950 or what it is called now. AAFC titles should "count" just as much as AFL titles and pre-Super Bowl NFL titles. 

If the argument against doing so is that the rules and style of play were vastly different during Otto Graham's time and Bill Russell's time than they are in Tom Brady's time and LeBron James' time then the correct response is not to discount or ignore Graham and Russell but rather to candidly acknowledge the difficulty of making intergenerational comparisons. Perhaps there is no such thing as "the" greatest player of all-time. Maybe Graham was the greatest of his time, and now Brady is the greatest of his time (which is not to discount the possibility that other players from either era deserve consideration). 

The greatest quarterback of all-time narrative favored John Unitas for quite some time (and there is no doubt a vocal minority of observers who would still rank Unitas as the best). Unitas set career records for passing yards (40,239) and touchdowns (290) that far exceeded the marks that he broke. He won two NFL titles in the pre-Super Bowl era, plus an NFL title in the Super Bowl era (but that season ended in a famous loss to the AFL champion New York Jets in Super Bowl III). Unitas threw a touchdown in Super Bowl V before leaving the game due to injury, and his Colts won that contest on a last second field goal after Unitas' backup Earl Morrall replaced Unitas. Unitas is considered the prototype drop back passer.

It is interesting that the player who broke Unitas' records, Fran Tarkenton, was not often mentioned as the greatest quarterback of all-time; I cannot recall ever seeing or hearing a commentator rank Tarkenton as the best. Yet, Tarkenton held the career passing yardage record (47,003) for longer than any other quarterback (19 years), and he also held the career passing touchdowns record (342) for longer than any other quarterback (20 years), but Tarkenton never won a Super Bowl.

Terry Bradshaw won four Super Bowls, but his individual numbers are not as gaudy as Unitas' or Tarkenton's, nor are they efficient when compared to the statistics compiled by the passers who came after him and who benefited from rules changes that opened up the passing game.

Dan Marino at one time held the career records for passing yardage and for touchdowns, but he only made it to one Super Bowl and he never won a championship. Early in his career he was touted as someone who could become the greatest quarterback ever, but as Marino set records while Montana won Super Bowls the notion that Marino might be the greatest faded from consideration, and Marino became the Tarkenton of his era (albeit with a much different playing style, as Tarkenton was a scrambler while Marino was a pure pocket passer).

Joe Montana matched Bradshaw by winning four Super Bowls, and by the end of his career he was often touted as the greatest quarterback of all-time, a notion that went largely unchallenged until the emergence of Brady.

At some point after Brady matched Montana and Bradshaw with four Super Bowl wins while also accumulating MVP awards and posting gaudy statistics, the narrative shifted from Montana to Brady. Brett Favre--who held the career passing touchdowns record for seven years--and Peyton Manning--who held the career passing touchdowns record for five years--received some consideration prior to Brady's ascension, but Favre only won one Super Bowl and Manning only won two Super Bowls so after Brady surpassed their individual records his superior ring count took both of them out of the conversation. 

Drew Brees and Tom Brady have been trading the career passing touchdowns record recently, but Brees won just one Super Bowl, and he did not win that Super Bowl until after Brady had already been ranked ahead of Favre and Manning, so Brees has never been part of the greatest quarterback of all-time narrative.

If you believe that quarterback is the most important position in football--if not in all team sports--and if you believe that a quarterback's greatness is best measured by championships, then your choices are Otto Graham or Tom Brady. If you place more value on individual numbers, then you have to decide if it matters more to dominate your own era by a wide margin--in which case, you would probably choose Unitas--or if it matters more to dominate in recent times, in which case you could choose any one of several quarterbacks depending on which statistics you deem to be the best measure of greatness.

The larger point is that, without clearly defining the standard of greatness, the narrative elevating Brady (or anyone else) is so devoid of context as to be rendered meaningless. Was it more difficult to play in earlier eras under different rules and conditions, or are today's athletes so superior to the athletes from decades past that the athletes from previous eras would not excel today? 

Most commentators and analysts do not embrace the challenge of researching such matters and using that research as a basis to form intelligent opinions; instead, we are fed simplistic narratives about "rings" and "Who is the GOAT?" that do a disservice to the history of the game and the accomplishments of the game's greatest players.

Regarding the Belichick and Brady narrative, it is not necessary or accurate to diminish what Belichick achieved in order to give Brady the praise that he deserves. Bill Belichick's Super Bowl XX game plan as the New York Giants' defensive coordinator was so brilliant that it is on display at the Pro Football Hall of Fame. Belichick's offensive and defensive game plans as the Patriots' head coach are indisputably great, and those schemes played a crucial role in the franchise's unparalleled success.

It is fascinating to watch how the media creates and manipulates narratives. Brady is almost universally popular, with perhaps the only exception being the fans of teams who he has beaten in Super Bowls--but Belichick is regularly mocked for his press conference demeanor. Many media members would love to bring Belichick down a notch--or six notches, by finding any excuse to discount his Super Bowl titles. Of course, the same narrative game that they are now playing with Belichick and Brady could easily be applied to Belichick and Bill Parcells--and there would be more substance to the latter, as Belichick and Parcells are both coaches and have actually gone head to head against each other in that role.

Parcells won two Super Bowl titles as a head coach, with Belichick running the defense for both squads. Parcells has never won a playoff game--let alone a Super Bowl--without having Belichick on his staff. In fact, Parcells has a losing record overall without Belichick by his side. Parcells supposedly taught Belichick how to win, which is a difficult notion to accept when you look at the won-loss records of both coaches. 

After Belichick left the New York Giants, he took over a horrible Cleveland Browns team (3-13 in 1990) and led the Browns to the playoffs in 1994. That Browns team, which went 11-5, defeated Parcells' New England Patriots in the playoffs, which was the Browns' last playoff win until this season's squad beat the Pittsburgh Steelers. There is some history and context that can be referenced to defend Parcells, but a head to head comparison of coaches who competed with and against each other over an extended period of time makes more sense than trying to define the careers of a coach and a quarterback based on their one season apart after they forged a two decade partnership filled with unequaled success.

Of course, Bill Parcells is beloved as "The Big Tuna." The media is not going to construct a narrative that elevates Belichick over Parcells.

One of the many problems with comparing a football coach's impact with a quarterback's impact is that the coach directs how the entire team plays, while the quarterback's impact is strictly limited to offense, which is less than half of the game (if you factor in that many plays involve neither offense nor defense but rather special teams). 

As a brief side note, it is a true exercise in folly to compare Tom Brady to LeBron James. A star basketball player participates in most of the game (usually at least 38-40 out of 48 minutes) and he has an impact on both offense and defense as one of five teammates on the court, while a quarterback is one of 11 teammates on the field, and his impact is restricted to offense.

Brady's impact on a team is undeniable. He is a great and charismatic leader. His quarterback skill set is impeccable. 

All of that being said and acknowledged, the notion that there is some valid way to parse out Brady's impact on the Patriots from Belichick's impact on the Patriots is absurd. You may counter, "But what if Belichick never makes the playoffs again?" Belichick is 68 years old, and he already is one of the oldest coaches to win a Super Bowl. He is undoubtedly past his prime, and he is closer to the end of his coaching career than he is to the beginning. Do you judge Chuck Noll, Tom Landry, and Don Shula by what they did in the last 5-10 years of their coaching careers, or do you judge them by their overall body of work, with a focus on their primes? 

What if Belichick grooms a young quarterback and wins one more Super Bowl before retiring? That would add to Belichick's legacy, just like yesterday's Super Bowl win added to Brady's legacy, but that would not tell us whether Belichick or Brady had more to do with the Patriots' success.

The truth is that we will never know, but that honest narrative will not move the ratings needle or generate clicks for online articles, so brace yourself for all of the "Brady Owns Belichick" stories.

It is interesting to watch the Patrick Mahomes narrative evolve in the midst of these other narratives. Mahomes has already led the Chiefs to back to back Super Bowl appearances, and one Super Bowl title. It is logical to assume that he will have many more opportunities, but--as noted above--Dan Marino made one Super Bowl appearance early in his career and then never made it back, and Brett Favre made two Super Bowl appearances (with one win) in his 20 year career. It cannot be emphasized enough that the quarterback is a very important player, but he does not play on defense or special teams, and he is rendered helpless if his teammates are ineffective--just look at what happened to Mahomes in Super Bowl LV when the Buccaneers' defense overwhelmed Kansas City's offensive line. 

The truth is that the Mahomes story is incomplete. If he finishes his career with one Super Bowl win plus some gaudy individual numbers then he will not merit being ranked alongside the absolute greatest. On the other hand, yesterday's loss does not diminish what he has already accomplished, and to suggest otherwise is as incorrect as suggesting that Brady's win somehow diminishes what Belichick has already accomplished.

What can we determine using a reasonable, objective approach? 

1) There is a strong argument that Tom Brady is the greatest quarterback of his time. He may be the greatest quarterback of all-time, but to make that assessment we must first decide how to validly compare statistics and team accomplishments from the 1940s-1990s with statistics and team accomplishments from 2000-present (Brady's era).

2) There is a strong argument that Bill Belichick is the greatest NFL coach of his time. He may be the greatest NFL coach of all-time, but to make that assessment we must first decide how to validly compare statistics and team accomplishments from prior eras to the statistics and team accomplishments from Belichick's era (1980s-present).

3) Under Bill Belichick's guidance, Tom Brady developed from being a sixth round draft pick into being arguably the greatest quarterback of his time, and possibly the greatest quarterback of all-time. We do not have a large enough sample size of data to determine what development path Brady would have followed without Belichick's influence. 

4) With Tom Brady as his starting quarterback, Bill Belichick has won six Super Bowls as a head coach. During that time, Belichick played a role in both player development and game plan creation. Prior to that time, in his first stint as a head coach, Belichick built the Cleveland Browns from a last place team into a playoff team; prior to coaching the Browns, Belichick's defensive game plans played a major, if not decisive, role as the New York Giants won two Super Bowls. We have a large enough sample size of data to determine that Belichick is an outstanding, versatile coach even without Brady. We do not have a large enough sample size of data to prove how many Super Bowls that Belichick's Patriots would have won without Brady.

The bottom line is that winning a championship involves many variables that cannot be controlled by either the coach or the quarterback. If the Buccaneers had not been able to shut down Patrick Mahomes, resulting in Kansas City winning a 34-31 shootout with Brady posting exactly the same numbers that he posted yesterday would that somehow diminish Brady's greatness? Would it increase Belichick's greatness by "proving" that Brady cannot win a Super Bowl without Belichick?

Framing the conversation in those terms, it should be obvious that many of the media-driven narratives are nonsense.

Wednesday, March 18, 2020

Refuting False Narratives About the Legacies of Tom Brady and Bill Belichick

Tom Brady has publicly announced that he plans to leave the New England Patriots via free agency, though he has yet to announce where he is going. Not surprisingly, Brady's statement has unleashed a wave of commentary about his legacy, and Bill Belichick's legacy, as well as a reexamination of previous all-time greats who could have played their entire careers for one team but elected to see if the grass was greener elsewhere--with Joe Montana, Michael Jordan, and Peyton Manning being perhaps the three most prominent examples.

Both Belichick and Brady have more than secured their individual legacies. Belichick was a key contributor to two Super Bowl champions as an assistant coach before winning six Super Bowls as New England's head coach. Any short list of the greatest football coaches of all-time must include his name, and nothing that happens in the rest of his career will change or diminish that. Belichick is the second oldest head coach in the NFL now, and he is tied with several others as the eighth oldest head coach in NFL history. A career is judged by the overall body of work, with an emphasis on what happened in the prime years; Belichick's career is not going to be defined by what happens in his final seasons. Of course, if he wins Super Bowls as an elder statesman coach that could potentially add to his already established legacy, but no sensible person is going to hold it against Belichick if he does not win another Super Bowl. Don Shula, Chuck Noll, and Tom Landry are three of the greatest coaches of all-time, and their careers ended long after their final Super Bowl victory with no damage done to their legacies.

Brady is a six-time Super Bowl champion quarterback who is nearing the end of his career. If he wins another Super Bowl, he can add to his legacy, but few quarterbacks have even played as long as Brady, let alone won championships at his age; if Brady does not win another Super Bowl, it does not hurt his legacy any more than Joe Montana's time as a Kansas City Chief did.

Speaking of which, without looking it up do you even remember how long Montana played in Kansas City, what statistics he posted, and how the team performed? Unless you are an NFL addict with a great memory or you are lying, the honest answer is "No."

Before revisiting the end of Montana's career, it is worth briefly mentioning Joe Namath, whose name is sometimes brought up in this context. While it may have been painful at the time for NFL fans to watch him finish his career as an L.A. Ram, Namath secured his legacy by leading the New York Jets to victory in Super Bowl III. Nothing that happened after that caused long-term damage to Namath's legacy. He will always be remembered as a triumphant Jet, and no one spends much time thinking about his brief time as a stumbling Ram.

Back to Montana, who spent two years as a Chief, making the Pro Bowl in 1993 (his first season with the team) and compiling a 17-8 regular season record (he missed seven games due to injury) in 1993-94. Montana led the Chiefs to the 1993 AFC Championship Game, but the Chiefs lost 30-13, and Montana was knocked out of the game with a concussion in the third quarter. Montana quarterbacked the Chiefs to a 9-7 record and a loss in the Wild Card round in 1994 before he retired at 38. Those two seasons are a solid postscript to a Hall of Fame career, but they had no impact on the legacy that Montana had already forged by winning four Super Bowls as a San Francisco 49er.

Consider an example from a different sport. Michael Jordan had already retired and come back once as a Chicago Bull before he came out of retirement in 2001 to play for the Washington Wizards. Jordan never averaged less than 28 ppg in a full season with the Bulls, and he never averaged more than 23 ppg in his two seasons with the Wizards. Jordan led the Bulls to six titles in six NBA Finals appearances, and he was not able to take the Wizards to the playoffs even once. No, Jordan the Wizard did not accomplish as much as Jordan the Bull, but Jordan the Wizard added some clips to his career highlight reel, and did not harm Jordan's legacy at all.

Brady and Manning spent much of their careers battling for individual honors and Super Bowl titles. Manning won one Super Bowl in 13 seasons as a Colt before finishing his career as a Denver Bronco. Manning earned three Pro Bowl selections as a Bronco while also making the All-Pro First Team twice, and winning another Super Bowl title. Interestingly, his two playoff runs that ended in Super Bowl wins are two of his four worst postseasons statistically (based on the NFL's passer rating system). Winning a second Super Bowl--albeit while no longer a star player (he had nine passing touchdowns and 17 interceptions in his final regular season before the Broncos won the Super Bowl)--perhaps added a bit to Manning's legacy, but certainly no one dwells on how limited a player Manning was by that time, nor would any rational commentator have held it against Manning if his Bronco years had not been capped off with a championship.

Supposedly, next season is going to represent some kind of referendum in a made up Belichick versus Brady competition: Can Brady win without Belichick? Can Belichick win without Brady? Will neither one win?

This is nonsense. If there were to be a genuine, meaningful Belichick versus Brady competition then we would need to pit them against each other when both were in their primes, and we would need to supply them with comparable supporting casts. Give prime Brady a different coach and a solid supporting cast, and how much would he win? How much Brady wins as a past his prime quarterback can only tell us so much.

The other side of the question is how much would prime Belichick win with a different quarterback and a solid supporting cast? 

Actually, we did get a glimpse of that during the 2008 season that Brady missed with an ACL injury, and we saw the Patriots go 11-5 with Matt Cassel as the starting quarterback. Cassel left the Patriots after that season, and went 26-40 as a starter during the rest of his career. During his first head coaching job, Belichick inherited a 3-13 Cleveland team and in four years he turned them into an 11-5 squad that won a playoff game (which is the last playoff game that the Browns have won). So, we do have some evidence about what Belichick can do as a coach without Brady.

All that we know for sure is that the Belichick-Brady tandem is the greatest coach-quarterback duo in NFL history (throw in the AAFC years, and you could make an argument for Paul Brown-Otto Graham, who won seven championships and made 10 championship game appearances in 10 seasons together). Whether or not either of them win any more Super Bowls in the final years of their respective careers does not change the significance of what they accomplished together, nor "prove" that one was more integral to their shared success than the other.

Monday, February 4, 2019

Patriots' Sustained Greatness Demands Respect

In a defensive struggle during which the teams set the record for the fewest points scored in a Super Bowl, the New England Patriots prevailed 13-3 over the Los Angeles Rams. The tandem of coach Bill Belichick and quarterback Tom Brady has advanced to nine Super Bowls and won six of them. Brady has won more Super Bowls than any other quarterback has played in and he has won more Super Bowls than any other player has won, breaking Charles Haley's more than two decades old record of five. Brady has won a record four Super Bowl MVPs (breaking Joe Montana's record of three) but this year Brady's trusted slot receiver Julian Edelman won the Super Bowl MVP after compiling 10 catches for 141 yards.

Brady is now the oldest quarterback to win a Super Bowl and Belichick is now the oldest coach to win a Super Bowl. Belichick tied George Halas and Curly Lambeau for most NFL titles won by a coach. The unprecedented run for Belichick and Brady has lasted for nearly two decades, a dynasty of unparalleled length and success in NFL history; other NFL dynasties include the 1990s Dallas Cowboys (three Super Bowl wins), the 1980s San Francisco 49ers (four Super Bowl wins), the 1970s Pittsburgh Steelers (four Super Bowl wins) and the 1960s Green Bay Packers (five NFL titles, plus two Super Bowl wins against the AFL champions). The only football dynasty that compares with New England's is the 1940s/1950s Cleveland Browns, who won four All-American Football Conference titles in four seasons and then captured three NFL titles in the first six seasons after that league merged with the NFL. The Browns are the only North American professional sports team that has appeared in the championship game or championship series in each of its first 10 seasons of existence.

The 2018 NFL regular season was marked by a record setting scoring explosion, and two of the highest scoring teams were the Rams and the Kansas City Chiefs. The Patriots not only defeated both teams but they shut out both teams in the first halves of their respective playoff encounters. Belichick has an uncanny ability to dissect game film and devise a strategy that enables his players to maximize their strengths, minimize their weaknesses and take away whatever the other team does best.

Casual fans may have found Super Bowl LIII to be boring but football purists understand that they witnessed a strategic masterpiece, a theme that ESPN's Steve Young expounded upon right after the game. Young called this game Bill Belichick's "Sistine Chapel," a masterpiece capping Belichick's tremendous career (or at least capping it thus far, as Belichick and his Patriots show no signs of slowing down and could very well win more championships). Young added that there are many "haters" in this era of social media and hot takes but that we "are fools" if we don't step back and appreciate the greatness being displayed by the Patriots in general and Belichick in particular. Belichick modestly insists that it is all about the players but Young said to Belichick that he is going to "push back" a bit against that notion because Belichick is doing things with his players that no other coach could do.

Think about it. While Brady is arguably the greatest quarterback ever, this Patriots team is not brimming with Pro Bowl or Hall of Fame level talent. The Rams almost certainly have a more talented roster from top to bottom--but Belichick has an unparalleled ability to put his players in position to succeed while also making the other team's best players look and feel confused. The Rams' young quarterback Jared Goff appears to have a bright future but against the Patriots he looked hesitant, uncertain and largely ineffective.

When Young and the NFL Primetime crew interviewed Patriots' owner Robert Kraft, Kraft noted that the league's structure is designed ensure parity: teams that don't do well get higher draft picks and an easier schedule than teams that do well, in order to maximize the chances that in a given season one of several teams could emerge as the champion. The Patriots have defied that structural obstacle to be perennial contenders and multiple-time champions.

You don't have to like the Patriots or root for them, but if you love football and/or if you love competitive greatness then you have to respect what they have accomplished and how they have accomplished it. Young said that the Patriots have perfected turning football into an "intellectual, academic" exercise.

Wednesday, July 4, 2018

Nick Saban on the Mindset of a Champion

The May 1, 2018 issue of Fortune profiled many individuals who are leaders in their respective fields. Coach Nick Saban, who has won five national championships in nine years with Alabama and six national championships overall (the most by any college football coach in the poll era, dating back to 1936), was the obvious choice for college football (if not for the entire sports world).

Bill Belichick and Nick Saban worked together for the Cleveland Browns in the early 1990s before becoming, respectively, the greatest pro football coach and greatest college football coach of this era (if not all-time). One of Belichick's most famous mantras is "Do your job"; Belichick urges each coach on his staff and each player on his team to focus on the specific responsibilities of his job and to depend on each other coach and player to also do his job. "Do your job" encompasses many concepts, including the idea that if one player is hurt or ineffective then his backup is expected to come in and not just perform adequately but rather perform at a high level.

One example of that from Saban's recent experience is the 2018 College Football Playoff National Championship Game versus Georgia. At halftime Alabama trailed 13-0 and Saban benched his experienced starting quarterback Jalen Hurts in favor of 19 year old freshman Tua Tagovailoa, who clinched the championship for Alabama with a 41 yard touchdown pass in overtime. Such individual and team success is not a fluke but rather a result of season-long preparation for such pressure-packed moments.

Saban told Fortune, "To me it takes a completely different mindset to stay successful as opposed to what you have to do to build something to be successful. All of us are sort of geared toward, if we have success, we're supposed to be rewarded for it, not necessarily that we have to continue to do things even better than we did before."

Saban explained that being a champion requires a different and special mindset: "I mean, it's like you make an A on a test and you say, 'I can take it easy for two weeks and make a C on the next test and have a B average' That's normal. It's special for somebody to make an A on the test and say, 'I'm going to try to make the highest grade ever in the class.' That's not normal. But yet, that's what you have to try to promote from a mindset standpoint to the people in your organization."

Saturday, February 10, 2018

Pondering the Dynasty that Belichick and Saban Could Have Built in Cleveland

Winning Super Bowl LII would have been a crowning achievement for Bill Belichick, who already owns more Super Bowl rings than any head coach (five: 2001, 2003-04, 2014, 2016) in addition to the two rings that he won as an assistant coach with the New York Giants. However, Philadelphia's thrilling 41-33 victory over Belichick's defending champion New England Patriots does not tarnish the impressive legacy that Belichick has already built.

Jenny Vrentas' recent Sports Illustrated piece titled Belichick and Saban: The Stories Behind Football’s Most Powerful Friendship details the deep and long-lasting bond that exists between Belichick--arguably the greatest pro football coach of all-time--and Nick Saban--arguably the best college football coach of all-time, winner of six national championships (2003, 2009, 2011, 2012, 2015, 2017).

One of the most overlooked football stories of the past 30 years is the tremendous quality of the coaching staff that Belichick assembled when he was the head coach of the Cleveland Browns. Not only was Saban on that staff, but Hall of Fame tight end Ozzie Newsome--who went on to build the two-time Super Bowl champion Baltimore Ravens--was also hired by Belichick. Numerous other members of that staff have made a significant impact throughout pro and/or college football as executives, head coaches or assistant coaches.

Vrentas describes how the Belichick-Saban connection formed in Cleveland, after the two had previously become acquainted a few years earlier as they each worked their way up the coaching ranks:
Belichick got his first head coaching job in 1991--at age 39, with the Browns--and interviewed 85 potential assistant coaches. But his first hire was the easiest: Saban, as his defensive coordinator. He assembled an all-star staff, including nine future NFL head coaches or GMs and three coaches who would go on to lead major college programs. "But I'm going to tell you," says (Chuck) Bresnahan, the Navy linebacker who joined Belichick's Browns staff as linebackers coach, "when Bill and Nick walked in the room, there was a different response from players, coaches, everyone. Things got quiet. You knew it was time for business.'"
Before Belichick and Saban worked together in Cleveland, they had spent hours together--in secret, without their respective teams at the time knowing about this--talking football strategy and breaking down plays together. They were two like-minded, single-minded football savants who were trying to figure out how to implement the ideal method of building a team. Vrentas writes:
Belichick was trying to install a system of coaching players, evaluating players, assembling a roster. Those conversations he and Saban had at West Point about defense? In Cleveland, it was "like, 500 times more of that," Belichick says.
Vrentas notes that Belichick and Saban have different tendencies, particularly on defense: by nature, Belichick favors a more conservative bend but don't break run-stopping scheme, while Saban prefers an attacking front supported by man to man coverage. Belichick and Saban shared the same cornerstone, though, as Vrentas puts it: "Be rigid in fundamentals and techniques, but flexible in scheme." Both coaches proved over time that they could adapt their preferred schemes to both their personnel and also the opposing team's personnel.

Belichick took over a Cleveland team that went 3-13 in 1990 and doubled that win total to 6-10 in 1991. By 1994, the Browns had the best scoring defense in pro football--allowing just 12.8 ppg--and, at 11-5, were a playoff team. They beat New England in the Wild Card round before falling to Pittsburgh in the Divisional Round.

Then, in the middle of the next season Browns owner Art Modell announced his plan to move the franchise to Baltimore, where the team was renamed the Ravens (the NFL returned the Browns franchise/logo to Cleveland in 1999); that decision turned the fans against Modell and wrecked the team that Belichick had built. Modell fired Belichick, who resurfaced as a head coach a few years later in New England--and the rest is history, as Belichick finally had an owner (Bob Kraft) who enabled Belichick to fully implement his vision of how to build a team. While Belichick built a dynasty in New England, the Browns have yet to win a playoff game since the 1994 season.

Vrentas references a talk that Saban once gave to 1500 high school coaches at Mississippi's annual coaching clinic. Saban repeatedly mentioned not just how much he had learned during his time with Belichick--including, most importantly, "He defines what everybody in the organization is supposed to do"--but he also referred more than once to his time with the Browns. Saban explained that one of his key defensive concepts at Alabama--"pattern matching," a zone coverage that morphs into man to man as a pass pattern develops--"started at the Browns."

Another thing that started with the Browns is what Belichick called three "critical factors" for each position: essential criteria for a player to perform in a given role. For example, cornerbacks must be able to (1) tackle, (2) play the ball in the deep part of the field and (3) play man to man effectively. Belichick also had specific height/weight/speed preferences for each position. Saban told Vrentas that Belichick's systematic personnel evaluation techniques had "the greatest impact for me" of anything that he experienced while working with Belichick in Cleveland.

Newsome borrowed the three "critical factors," renamed them "Triangles of Success" and used the concept while building the Ravens into perennial contenders and two-time champions.

Thinking about all of this history and all of these championships won--none of them in Cleveland, where the foundation for all of this success was built--I recall how relentlessly the Cleveland media (and, often, the national media as well) belittled and attacked Belichick both during his time with the Browns and for many years afterward. These self-styled experts made declarations about how Belichick was not suited to be a head coach--and then, after it became clear to even the stupidest sportswriters that Belichick is in fact a great coach, Belichick's critics had the nerve to still assert that Belichick had "failed" in Cleveland before learning how to win in New England.

No, the truth is that Belichick built the foundation for his success in Cleveland, but Modell and many media members were not smart enough to understand this. Smart football people, though, are still applying lessons from what Belichick was doing back when he was mocked for mumbling at press conferences, as if engaging in snappy repartee with people who don't know the game has anything to do with actually coaching well.

Tuesday, February 7, 2017

Belichick, Brady and the New England Patriots Embody the Difference Between Winners and Champions

By now, you have seen it, heard about it and/or been subjected to endless "takes" about it: the New England Patriots came back from a 25 point third quarter deficit to beat the Atlanta Falcons 34-28 in overtime in Super Bowl LI. Bill Belichick now stands alone above NFL coaches with five Super Bowl wins and Tom Brady stands alone above NFL quarterbacks with five Super Bowl wins (Charles Haley won five Super Bowls as a linebacker for the 49ers and Cowboys).

I try to avoid engaging in hyperbole but considering the quality of the teams, the magnitude of the historical legacies at stake, the many great individual plays and the dramatic overtime conclusion, Super Bowl LI is the greatest Super Bowl ever.

Here are some of my thoughts and observations to place Super Bowl LI in a larger context:

1) Has any major sports figure more thoroughly forced the media to completely reevaluate his legacy than Bill Belichick? Cleveland media members mocked Belichick during his tenure with the Browns (fun fact: Belichick presided over the Browns' most recent playoff win, after the 1994 season) and after Belichick resigned following just one day as the New York Jets' coach the national media ganged up on him as well (Belichick believed that the Jets lacked the organizational stability necessary to build a championship team and history has certainly vindicated him about that).

When New England owner Robert Kraft was considering hiring Belichick, Art Modell--who backstabbed Cleveland's fans by moving the Browns to Baltimore in 1995, a decision that also sabotaged Belichick's final year with the team--told Kraft that hiring Belichick would be the biggest mistake he ever made. Modell thought like a media member (he was a Madison Avenue ad man before buying the Browns) and, like most members of the media, he would not have known a bubble screen from bubble wrap, but instead of accepting responsibility for his actions in Cleveland he preferred to make Belichick the scapegoat.

Kraft wisely ignored Modell and the media know-it-alls. Kraft not only hired Belichick but he had enough sense to stay out of his way (something that Modell never figured out how to do as an owner) and enable Belchick to rebuild the Patriots from the ground up. Go back and look at the headlines from early in Belichick's tenure in New England; the stupidity of the media is breathtaking. It is also pathetic that Modell, who had pledged that Belichick would be the last coach that he hired only to betray him, was not satisfied with firing Belichick but that he also tried to ruin his reputation among other NFL owners.

2) The Patriots proved the power of positive thinking. Shaquille O'Neal often says that if the general panics then the troops will panic but if the general is calm then the troops will be calm. The Patriots did not play well in the first half but you did not see Belichick or Brady losing their cool. They exuded a quiet confidence that there was a lot of time left in the game and that they could still win. Many media members love to talk about "halftime adjustments" or "in game adjustments" but the reality is that game-planning is done before the game, not during it.

If you have to come up with a new game plan at halftime then you are dead. If you listen to Belichick or Gregg Popovich or any other great coach you will notice that they almost sneer when a media member asks them about halftime adjustments. Belichick had a game plan that took into account the Falcons' tendencies and, as Belichick noted after the game, by the middle of the first quarter it was obvious that the Falcons were going to almost exclusively stick with man to man defense. The only "adjustment" the Patriots had to make was to stay focused, not panic after making some mistakes and execute the game plan that had been drawn up to counter man to man defense. There were no great halftime speeches and no "adjustments" drawn on a chalkboard.

The Patriots stayed calm, they stayed focused and they followed Belichick's mantra: "Do your job." This approach is a marked contrast to what we often see in the sports world. When challenges arrive, it is very easy to think negatively or blame your teammates or to abandon the game plan as opposed to focusing on executing it. When the Cleveland Cavaliers hit a rough patch recently, LeBron James blamed everyone but himself and he is reportedly actively involved in trying to arrange for the Cavaliers to trade Kevin Love to New York for Carmelo Anthony. Belichick and Brady did not whine that they needed "another playmaker" after Rob Gronkowski suffered a season-ending injury; instead, they won a Super Bowl with a bunch of wide receivers who no one would have ever heard of if those receivers had not had the good fortune to be coached by Belichick and thrown to by Brady. The 39 year old Brady did not complain about having to throw the ball over 60 times because the Patriots' running game could not get going. World Chess Champion Vasily Smyslov once said that in chess you must do things as they have to be done and then see what happens (Larry Brown might call this "playing the right way") and that is what Brady did: the Patriots had to throw the ball a lot to win, so he threw the ball a lot and did not complain or whine or make excuses.

It is also worth noting that when all was said and done, neither Belichick nor Brady announced that they were the best of all-time; they deflect praise and they speak about the contributions of the other members of the team. I can't help but think back to when James quit versus Boston in the 2010 playoffs and then announced at his press conference that he had "spoiled" the fans by being so great for so long--or to when James declared that he never lacked confidence because he is "the best player in the world." Muhammad Ali could get away with saying such things because he went in the ring by himself and proved in one on one combat that he was the greatest but it is a little different in a team sport--and when a team sport athlete makes such a statement it then becomes quite legitimate to ask why he has a losing record in the Finals: if you keep tooting your own horn then you can't complain when the critics point out your discordant notes. Brady and Belichick don't have to say anything because their resumes speak loud and clear: the Patriots are contenders every year and they have posted an unprecedented 5-2 Super Bowl record in a league that is designed to promote parity.

3) "Do your job." Julian Edelman's job is to catch footballs. Before Super Bowl LI, he warmed up by catching passes one-handed, first with his right hand and then with his left hand. A few hours later with the championship on the line, Edelman outfought three Falcons for the ball and cradled it in his hands just inches above the turf. How does one little 5-9 receiver beat out three players to make such a play? Edelman did his job. Losing teams get in trouble because some players try to do too much or because other players become so discouraged that they stop trying at all. The Patriots do their job until the clock strikes triple zeroes. As Belichick said after the game, it takes 60 minutes of effort and sometimes even a few minutes more than that (because of overtime).

4) The difference between winners and champions. In the first half, Brady did not look like the greatest quarterback of all-time. He made uncharacteristic mistakes and he even seemed rattled mentally and/or physically by the Falcons' pass rush. However, Brady kept battling and his confidence permeated throughout the team. There are two recurring themes in the Patriots' post-game quotes: (1) Coach Belichick prepared us for anything that could happen and (2) We never doubted that we could come back because we had Tom Brady running the offense. That kind of leadership cannot be quantified; indeed, other than height, Brady lacks just about any measurable you would look for in a franchise quarterback but you cannot measure mental toughness and work ethic and leadership.

In an interview aired on Fox before the Super Bowl, Kraft told Erin Andrews that the toughest part of any task is completing the last 5% of the job. I would add that the final 5% is what separates champions from everyone else: it is the difference between winners and champions.

The Atlanta Falcons are winners. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise; they had a great season and they played brilliantly in the NFC playoffs to advance to the Super Bowl. What the Falcons are not is champions: they were not able to complete the last 5% of the job. Perhaps they will find a way individually and collectively to develop that championship mentality; there have been other teams that fell just short only to eventually take the last step--but there have also been plenty of teams that fell just short and then collapsed, because the way that they fell short revealed something essential about their competitive spirit that just could not be fixed.

I love the unscripted drama of sports. No statistical model could have predicted what transpired down the stretch in the Super Bowl. I read a stat somewhere that at one point the Falcons were 99.8% favorites to win the game. Such statistical modeling fails to take into account the human spirit. I think back to the famous "Battle of 1816," when John McEnroe defeated Bjorn Borg by that score in the fourth set tiebreaker of the 1980 Wimbledon Finals. Borg had won four straight Wimbledons but it seemed like McEnroe was about to dethrone him. It would have been understandable for Borg to quit against his younger rival but, instead, Borg played an almost flawless fifth set to win a then-unprecedented fifth straight Wimbledon crown. That tiebreaker is often replayed but one time when Borg was asked about it he almost whispered with a knowing smile that it was the fifth set that mattered.

I have never had the opportunity to compete at the highest level of any sport but in my local and regional competitions I have attempted to apply what I have learned from a lifetime of studying the greatest champions. It took me nearly a decade to win my first Dayton Chess Club Championship. Perhaps my most frustrating failure came after I raced to a 3-0 lead by beating my main rivals, only to fall short by losing to two lower rated competitors. Such a setback is a cause for serious introspection; I had already won many tournaments and attained an Expert level rating but I had never won a chess championship, falling short both in the city high school championship and in the DCC Championship.

The next time that I played in the Dayton Chess Club championship after blowing that 3-0 lead, I was not deterred when adversity arose in certain games and I was not distracted by what anyone else in the tournament did, because I had finally figured out that what mattered was not accumulating rating points or being satisfied by beating the players who were the biggest threats on paper: what mattered was completing that last 5% of the job, winning that fifth set, beating out three players to catch a pass.

Being a champion is like being addicted to a drug; it took Michael Jordan several years to win his first NBA title and then he won six in the next eight years. After I won my first DCC title, I won three in a four year stretch en route to capturing a record 10 overall in a 20 year period despite rarely if ever being the highest rated participant. No "metric" would have projected that I would win 10 DCC titles--and that is what is great about competition.

Please forgive the personal interlude but trying to understand champions has been a lifelong fascination of mine and I have attempted to apply what I have learned both in my writings about champions and also in my modest endeavors to be a champion on a local/regional level. I also should make it clear that I consider my rivals for the DCC title over the past two decades--including but not limited to Earle Wikle, John Dowling, Chris Atkins, Ross Sprague, Les Whorton and Will Sedlar--to be champions as well and any time I describe my journey to become a champion I certainly mean no disrespect to the journeys that each of them took to become champions: when two champions square off someone has to lose but a true champion shows his mettle by bouncing back. McEnroe beat Borg in the 1981 Wimbledon Final to secure his legacy as a great champion; Belichick and Brady have responded to their two Super Bowl losses by adding two more Super Bowl wins to their resumes. It will be interesting to see what these Atlanta Falcons are made of and if they can complete the final 5% of the job or if they have already peaked. After the Super Bowl, Jimmy Johnson said that the Falcons will be back but as an NCAA and NFL champion he should know better: championships are not promised to anyone, no matter how talented or young or hungry.

Friday, February 20, 2015

What Are the Consequences for Reckless Reporting?

The Most Overinflated "Scandal" Ever has taken a few interesting turns in the past couple weeks. In case you did not know or forgot--and how could you not know, with multiple media outlets breathlessly releasing misinformation every hour on the hour?--the whole saga began when Indianapolis linebacker D'Qwell Jackson told someone on the Colts' sideline that the football he intercepted from Tom Brady near the end of the first half of New England's 45-7 win over Indianapolis was deflated. Except, of course, that Jackson never said that at all; Indianapolis Star reporter Bob Kravitz, sure that he had latched onto a Pulitzer Prize-winning scoop about dastardly deeds committed by the Patriots, either made the whole thing up or relied on a source that has about as much knowledge of the situation as Sergeant Schultz and about as much credibility as Joe Isuzu.

Kravitz was not content to merely get the facts wrong; he also took it upon himself to call for the firing of New England Coach Bill Belichick. Then ESPN, not wanting someone else to enjoy all of the glory that comes with bad reporting and baseless, grandstanding commentary, weighed in with their full armada of talking heads. Mike Wilbon, without doing any investigative reporting on this issue whatsoever and without any facts suggesting that Belichick had committed any offense at all, demanded that the NFL strip the Patriots of their Super Bowl berth because the Patriots are "on probation" in his fevered mind. Chris Mortenson invented a story about 11 of the 12 game day footballs used by the Patriots being significantly deflated. Kravitz' co-worker at the Indianapolis Star, Gregg Doyel, chimed in by calling for Belichick's immediate firing.

Michael Hurley offered a brilliant take on all of the members of the "Shout first, shout some more and don't bother to think later" school of reporting. His whole article deserves your attention but here is his three point breakdown of why the so-called scandal is unfounded and ridiculous:

First, at a press conference last Thursday in Phoenix, NFL vice president of officiating Dean Blandino spilled the beans that the PSI of the 12 Patriots footballs were never recorded by referee Walt Anderson. Blandino said that balls were measured, and if they were under the low threshold of 12.5, they were simply pumped up with some air. So instantly, the report by ESPN’s Chris Mortensen that said 11 of the 12 footballs were a full 2 PSI under the threshold was essentially debunked. How could Mortensen have that information if nobody could have that information? (The answer, of course, is that a source who desperately wanted such misinformation out there gave him the "scoop.")

Secondly, NFL Network's Ian Rapoport reported the morning of the Super Bowl that just one of the 11 footballs was 2 PSI under the limit, while the other 10 were "just a tick" under the 12.5 threshold. Rapoport's report was crucial for a number of reasons. For one, he is paid by the NFL, and so he can't afford to be wrong. If his report, which makes Roger Goodell's bloodthirsty office look like a bunch of clowns, turns out to be wrong, how much longer would the league keep him on the payroll? Second, the phrasing of the footballs of being "just a tick" under the limit is at once believable, because that's how non-technical measurements would be recorded, and also because footballs which were originally inflated near the lower limit would likely lose some air pressure after two hours outside in January.

And then there's this: The one football that was 2 PSI under the limit? That was the ball intercepted by D'Qwell Jackson, the pizza man puncher, according to ProFootballTalk. It was the football that was taken to the Colts sideline and then submitted to the NFL to launch an investigation. You're going to tell me that the Colts didn't manipulate that football before submitting it? The team that fired off the accusations of cheating didn't take an extra step or two to make sure they were right by sticking a needle in that football and letting it drain for a few seconds before handing it over to the league and saying, "Hey, the Patriots are using underinflated footballs, so you need to investigate"?

Hurley was just warming up. Next, he pointed out that the same Bob Kravitz who called for Belichick's head on the basis of unfounded ball-deflating allegations pleaded in print with the NFL to give Colts' owner Jim Irsay a second chance after Irsay's DUI fiasco:

So to recap: Irsay took drugs and stepped behind the wheel. He could have killed someone. But Kravitz wasn't angry. Then Bill Belichick was accused of playing football with footballs that had a little less air in them. Kravitz was irate.

Here’s what Kravitz wrote after a very compromised source with an ax to grind against Belichick told him that the Patriots used some underinflated footballs: "If Patriots owner Robert Kraft has an ounce of integrity, he will fire Bill Belichick immediately for toying with the integrity of the game for the second time in his otherwise magnificent career...If Roger Goodell has an ounce of integrity, and he's not spending all his time going to pre-game soirees at Kraft's mansion, he will not only fine Belichick and take away draft choices, but suspend the head coach for the upcoming Super Bowl."

So, driving under the influence of prescription drugs, an act which could result in the deaths of innocent people, is simply the act of a man who needs some help. Underinflate some footballs, and you deserve to lose your job. Solid reasoning there, especially now that we know the entire deflated football accusations were essentially made up out of thin air.

Aces.

Kravitz also fully believed Irsay when he said he had $29,000 in cash on him because he's "extremely generous," but he didn't believe Belichick for not knowing how much air gets pumped into the footballs. His judgment is sound...

OK, I'm sorry, but one more quote from my man Bob Kravitz: "Still, it is utterly amazing (but not really) how far some media will go to defend their city's team, especially when it wins Super Bowls."

If Alanis Morissette ever writes a sequel to her hit song, I hope she'll include this line from Kravitz, which comes while he's doing his local team's bidding.

The whole story just gets better and better every day. Breaking news, stop the presses: there is video of a Patriots' locker room attendant doing something that seems fishy. No further investigation necessary, case closed: Pulitzer for Kravitz, sanctions for the evil Belichick. Oh, wait; the Patriots' locker room attendant was set up by an NFL employee who was switching out footballs as part of a memorabilia scam. If Kravitz' eyes were not obscured by the two feet protruding from his mouth, he might have done some actual investigating and discovered a real scandal!

What are the consequences for reckless reporting? Kravitz, Doyel, Wilbon and Mortenson can get the facts wrong, smear people's reputations and not suffer any meaningful consequences. That is grossly unfair, both to the targets of their sloppy work and to real journalists who deserve the opportunity to provide insightful coverage. NFL players who don't perform well get cut, NFL coaches who don't win enough games get fired but media members who have the right contacts enjoy lifetime job security no matter how sloppy and/or tendentious their work is--and that is the most deflating thing about all of this.

Sunday, February 1, 2015

Bill Belichick's Legacy Should Not Be Defined by One Game

It is harsh and unrealistic to define any person's legacy by one moment or one game. A legacy is, by definition, an accumulation of moments and games. Bill Belichick can add to his legacy if his New England Patriots win Super Bowl XLIX but, considering his long track record of success, his legacy cannot possibly be defined solely or primarily just by this game. The reality is that Belichick's legacy has already been largely defined by a series of great moments and games, dating all the way back to his time as an assistant coach. Belichick's defensive game plan from Super Bowl XXV resides in the Pro Football Hall of Fame. Belichick, then the defensive coordinator for Bill Parcells' New York Giants, came up with a brilliant strategical approach to slow down the seemingly unstoppable Buffalo Bills' offensive machine headlined by quarterback Jim Kelly. Parcells never made it to a Super Bowl without Belichick by his side.

Belichick has won five Super Bowls--two as an assistant coach with the Giants, three more as the head coach of the New England Patriots--and today he will be making his ninth appearance (three as Parcells' assistant, six as New England's head coach) in arguably the biggest, most prestigious game in all of sports as his New England Patriots face the defending champion Seattle Seahawks. This is expected to be one of the most competitive Super Bowls ever (I'll go on record picking the Patriots to win 24-21 in a contest decided in the waning moments of the fourth quarter) and many people perceive this to be a legacy-defining moment for Belichick. If the Patriots lose, Belichick's critics will crow that Belichick still has yet to win a Super Bowl since the so-called "Spygate" scandal, when the Patriots had an employee in full team regalia openly and publicly shoot real-time video of football games. If the Patriots win, Belichick's critics will whine about The Most Overinflated "Scandal" Ever and confidently declare that the victory is somehow tainted. In other words, no matter what happens in Super Bowl XLIX, Belichick's legacy will supposedly be tarnished.

This narrative--that Belichick loses no matter what--is ridiculous. I much prefer Kevin Clark's take in The Dueling Legacies of Bill Belichick. Clark writes that Belichick's defining legacy is "bringing value investing to football." Belichick had great success with a 3-4 defense when few NFL teams used that alignment. Belichick was a master at finding players who other teams overlooked who could fit perfectly in that scheme. Belichick did so well with the 3-4 that most of the league's teams copied him and started looking for the same kinds of players. Belichick used to have his pick of the litter among nose tackles because few other teams were looking for nose tackles, but when many other teams started running the 3-4, the Patriots--who always fell to the bottom of the draft because they were at the top of the standings--could not so easily draft the players who they needed. This is when Belichick's genius became fully apparent. Clark explains, "Free agency became even harder. It was no longer cheap or easy for Belichick to get the players he needed. So he did something insane. He completely changed the system." Belichick switched back to the 4-3 defense.

Clark describes what happened next:

He found the cheap and great players there. New England kept winning and he's swung back and forth a handful of times in the remaining decade. Whenever one system gets too costly, he jumps to the other.

This sort of value-searching is common with anything Belichick, who operates as the Patriots' general manager and has full control of the roster. While the NFL waits around for its "moneyball" revolution, the search for inefficiencies is actually long over. Belichick found them all.

A handful of teams have tried to imitate this but have failed. That is because adopting the Belichick model is akin to trying to adopt the Usain Bolt model for running. It takes talent that is really, really hard to acquire.

People who are jealous of Belichick's success and/or spend their lives looking for snipers in grassy knolls fail to appreciate the hard work and intelligence that is the foundation for New England's success during the Belichick era.