Why Garoppolo Isn't A Brown
-
Bill is Croatian. He is the best coach in history.
-
He would be nothing, nothing, not one little thing without (Tom Brady)
Actually, he wouldn't be nothing. He would be like Andy Reid....
Well, Gip, we all have one.
Prove what you say. I say he is one of the best coaches in NFL history - if not THE best. I have objective measures. You have ONE, like the rest of us.
Well, Gip, we all have one.
Prove what you say. I say he is one of the best coaches in NFL history - if not THE best. I have objective measures. You have ONE, like the rest of us.
You want an "objective measure"? Try counting how many winning seasons he has had WITHOUT Tom Brady as his primary starting QB.
I will save you the time: He has 2 seasons with a winning record....and 5 seasons with a losing record.
He has ONE post season playoff win in which Tom Brady was not his starting QB. (He is 1-1 without Brady in the postseason)
So....like I said, he is a good coach and would probably have his team contending some for playoff spots.
Tom Brady has made him a Champion.
-
Compare him to Joe Gibbs....who I think was a far better coach.
Joe Gibbs won 3 Super Bowls, all with different QBs. One with Theisman(also lost one with him). One with Rypien, One with Doug Williams.
THAT is a superior coach.
-
Compare him to Joe Gibbs....who I think was a far better coach.
Joe Gibbs won 3 Super Bowls, all with different QBs. One with Theisman(also lost one with him). One with Rypien, One with Doug Williams.
THAT is a superior coach.
Compare him to Joe Gibbs....who I think was a far better coach.
Joe Gibbs won 3 Super Bowls, all with different QBs. One with Theisman(also lost one with him). One with Rypien, One with Doug Williams.
THAT is a superior coach.
Gibbs is one of the best, tool Maybe better, based on your select criteria.
Using Belichek's record in Cleveland is foolhardy.
He inherited a horrible team - not as bad as this one, but a horrible team. Not too many coaches are hired to coach Good teams. Granted, he blew some early draft picks - the G he drafted in the 2nd round his first draft and Touchdown Tommy Vardell the following year.
Then, when he got them to Good - maybe SB contention - the already-crumbling organization became more visible. The team had no money, the players were thinking about picking up their families and moving, etc.
It was just a couple of years ago that - except for the QB position - the Browns had a stronger roster than the Patriots.
Not sure if you're a Trial Attorney but you do sound a bit like '12 Angry Men'
-
Compare him to Joe Gibbs....who I think was a far better coach.
Joe Gibbs won 3 Super Bowls, all with different QBs. One with Theisman(also lost one with him). One with Rypien, One with Doug Williams.
THAT is a superior coach.
Gibbs is one of the best, tool Maybe better, based on your select criteria.
Using Belichek's record in Cleveland is foolhardy.
He inherited a horrible team - not as bad as this one, but a horrible team. Not too many coaches are hired to coach Good teams. Granted, he blew some early draft picks - the G he drafted in the 2nd round his first draft and Touchdown Tommy Vardell the following year.
Then, when he got them to Good - maybe SB contention - the already-crumbling organization became more visible. The team had no money, the players were thinking about picking up their families and moving, etc.
It was just a couple of years ago that - except for the QB position - the Browns had a stronger roster than the Patriots.
Not sure if you're a Trial Attorney but you do sound a bit like '12 Angry Men'
Gibbs is one of the best, tool Maybe better, based on your select criteria.
Using Belichek's record in Cleveland is foolhardy.
He inherited a horrible team - not as bad as this one, but a horrible team. Not too many coaches are hired to coach Good teams. Granted, he blew some early draft picks - the G he drafted in the 2nd round his first draft and Touchdown Tommy Vardell the following year.
He inherited a team that was just ONE year from having won a division title. NOT using his Cleveland record is foolhardy....because it demonstrates the kind of coach he is without Brady.
And, its NOT like he was here just one year...he was here 5 years.....longer than any coach we have had since. He had 4 losing seasons in 5 years.
Then, when he got them to Good - maybe SB contention - the already-crumbling organization became more visible. The team had no money, the players were thinking about picking up their families and moving, etc.
Well...if you want to attribute SOME blame on Art Modell...well, yes. But BB was here for 4 years without the threat of the "move". And yes, he was building....and again, I repeat....he is a good coach that can field a playoff contending team...but he is sub .500 overall without a guy named Brady playing for him. Brady makes him a champion.
It was just a couple of years ago that - except for the QB position - the Browns had a stronger roster than the Patriots.
Do you want to repeat that? Did you say that but for Brady....the Browns had a stronger roster than the Pats just two years ago? Well first off...you are going to have to explain and expound upon that. Beyond that.....that statement then just supports my position...that it is Brady that is THE main cog in anything the Pats have done over these years.
Not sure if you're a Trial Attorney but you do sound a bit like '12 Angry Men'
I am a trial magistrate...at times. And what I go by are facts and evidence. And all the facts and evidence point in the direction of my argument.
-
Remind me, Gip...
How is it you dismiss 2008? The year the Pats went 11-5 with Cassell at QB?
"When you have a shared vision it is a lot easier to make unpopular decisions." - Paul DePodesta "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." - Paul Brown Complete 2017 Browns Board Mock: http://thebrownsboard.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=46196 -
Gibbs is one of the best, tool Maybe better, based on your select criteria.
Using Belichek's record in Cleveland is foolhardy.
He inherited a horrible team - not as bad as this one, but a horrible team. Not too many coaches are hired to coach Good teams. Granted, he blew some early draft picks - the G he drafted in the 2nd round his first draft and Touchdown Tommy Vardell the following year.
He inherited a team that was just ONE year from having won a division title. NOT using his Cleveland record is foolhardy....because it demonstrates the kind of coach he is without Brady.
And, its NOT like he was here just one year...he was here 5 years.....longer than any coach we have had since. He had 4 losing seasons in 5 years.
Then, when he got them to Good - maybe SB contention - the already-crumbling organization became more visible. The team had no money, the players were thinking about picking up their families and moving, etc.
Well...if you want to attribute SOME blame on Art Modell...well, yes. But BB was here for 4 years without the threat of the "move". And yes, he was building....and again, I repeat....he is a good coach that can field a playoff contending team...but he is sub .500 overall without a guy named Brady playing for him. Brady makes him a champion.
It was just a couple of years ago that - except for the QB position - the Browns had a stronger roster than the Patriots.
Do you want to repeat that? Did you say that but for Brady....the Browns had a stronger roster than the Pats just two years ago? Well first off...you are going to have to explain and expound upon that. Beyond that.....that statement then just supports my position...that it is Brady that is THE main cog in anything the Pats have done over these years.
Not sure if you're a Trial Attorney but you do sound a bit like '12 Angry Men'
I am a trial magistrate...at times. And what I go by are facts and evidence. And all the facts and evidence point in the direction of my argument.
Do you want to repeat that? Did you say that but for Brady....the Browns had a stronger roster than the Pats just two years ago? Well first off...you are going to have to explain and expound upon that. Beyond that.....that statement then just supports my position...that it is Brady that is THE main cog in anything the Pats have done over these years.
I don't need to explain anything, Gip. That was your mantra not too long ago.
It shows that prejudice clouds your judgment
You probably don't like BB because he waived BK. Who knows.
PS What distinguishes a Magistrate from an Attorney - serious question.
-
Remind me, Gip...
How is it you dismiss 2008? The year the Pats went 11-5 with Cassell at QB?
Remind me, Gip...
How is it you dismiss 2008? The year the Pats went 11-5 with Cassell at QB?
I don't. Did I say I did? Again, you just make up you own stupid conclusions. Nor do I dismiss 1994...when the Browns made the playoffs (not sure of their exact record) I said as follows: BB is a good coach that can make a team a playoff contender.....but it is Brady that makes them a champion."
What is it about that you do not comprehend?
In 7 years without Brady BB has a winning record in 2 of them. A losing record in 5 of them. He has made the playoffs in one of them. (though certainly usually 11-5 is good for a playoff berth...but not in 2008). He has a 1-1 record in the playoffs without Brady. (both games in 1994 with the Browns....where he beat the Bills then got stomped by Cowher and the Steelers).
Again....plain, simple, unadulterated facts.
-
Do you want to repeat that? Did you say that but for Brady....the Browns had a stronger roster than the Pats just two years ago? Well first off...you are going to have to explain and expound upon that. Beyond that.....that statement then just supports my position...that it is Brady that is THE main cog in anything the Pats have done over these years.
I don't need to explain anything, Gip. That was your mantra not too long ago.
It shows that prejudice clouds your judgment
You probably don't like BB because he waived BK. Who knows.
PS What distinguishes a Magistrate from an Attorney - serious question.
I don't need to explain anything, Gip. That was your mantra not too long ago.
It shows that prejudice clouds your judgment
You probably don't like BB because he waived BK. Who knows.
PS What distinguishes a Magistrate from an Attorney - serious question.
A. I will be glad to defer to your "judgment" if you can convince a majority of people on here to agree with you that just two years ago (which is what you said) the Browns had a "stronger roster" than the Browns...with the exception of Brady.
And people who feel they don't need to explain their positions.....lose.
I think BB was the one with clouded judgment when he waived BK....because the Browns...WERE on the path to a winning season. With that move he firebombed the Browns chances.....because he was not replacing Drew Bledsoe with Tom Brady....he replaced BK with Todd Philcox, a move that torpedoed any chance the team had to win. Why? Because Bernie knew how to run an offense better than BB....BB knew that BK knew how to run an offense better than he....but he was too stubborn to give his 3 time AFC conference title game QB the free reign to call or change plays that BB called. BB who had never had experience as an offensive play caller. What I was mad about was the fact that he put the Browns in position to LOSE like all of the rest of the games that season. It took them two years to recover from that.
As far as the difference between an attorney and a magistrate: a magistrate is a "judge". An attorney represents one side or the other, the magistrate is the neutral arbiter.
And no, no one is permitted to be both advocate and arbiter....which I assume you may want to say that that is what I am trying to do in this case. It is not what I am trying to do. But I have enough experience at both jobs to know when the facts and evidence are in my favor. In this case, they are in my favor.
-
I don't need to explain anything, Gip. That was your mantra not too long ago.
It shows that prejudice clouds your judgment
You probably don't like BB because he waived BK. Who knows.
PS What distinguishes a Magistrate from an Attorney - serious question.
A. I will be glad to defer to your "judgment" if you can convince a majority of people on here to agree with you that just two years ago (which is what you said) the Browns had a "stronger roster" than the Browns...with the exception of Brady.
And people who feel they don't need to explain their positions.....lose.
I think BB was the one with clouded judgment when he waived BK....because the Browns...WERE on the path to a winning season. With that move he firebombed the Browns chances.....because he was not replacing Drew Bledsoe with Tom Brady....he replaced BK with Todd Philcox, a move that torpedoed any chance the team had to win. Why? Because Bernie knew how to run an offense better than BB....BB knew that BK knew how to run an offense better than he....but he was too stubborn to give his 3 time AFC conference title game QB the free reign to call or change plays that BB called. BB who had never had experience as an offensive play caller. What I was mad about was the fact that he put the Browns in position to LOSE like all of the rest of the games that season. It took them two years to recover from that.
As far as the difference between an attorney and a magistrate: a magistrate is a "judge". An attorney represents one side or the other, the magistrate is the neutral arbiter.
And no, no one is permitted to be both advocate and arbiter....which I assume you may want to say that that is what I am trying to do in this case. It is not what I am trying to do. But I have enough experience at both jobs to know when the facts and evidence are in my favor. In this case, they are in my favor.
A. I will be glad to defer to your "judgment" if you can convince a majority of people on here to agree with you that just two years ago (which is what you said) the Browns had a "stronger roster" than the Browns...with the exception of Brady
Gip, it was YOU over and over and over again who said the Browns roster was stronger than the Pats roster. The driving difference in W-L records was simply the fact the Pats had Brady at QB.
You have to get the majority of people to agree with your statements.
Are you denying - Mr. Magistrate - that you were not ranting and raving about how the Browns have a stronger roster than the Pats, except at the QB position.
Don't be a Shep.
Since 1999, I've been called an anti-fan (my term) because I always predicted the Browns would have a lousy record. Ironically, I was always optimistic via the rearview mirror.
PS I don't believe we have Magistrates in MA or CT. Or, fortunately, I have yet to find out.
-
A. I will be glad to defer to your "judgment" if you can convince a majority of people on here to agree with you that just two years ago (which is what you said) the Browns had a "stronger roster" than the Browns...with the exception of Brady
Gip, it was YOU over and over and over again who said the Browns roster was stronger than the Pats roster. The driving difference in W-L records was simply the fact the Pats had Brady at QB.
You have to get the majority of people to agree with your statements.
Are you denying - Mr. Magistrate - that you were not ranting and raving about how the Browns have a stronger roster than the Pats, except at the QB position.
Don't be a Shep.
Since 1999, I've been called an anti-fan (my term) because I always predicted the Browns would have a lousy record. Ironically, I was always optimistic via the rearview mirror.
PS I don't believe we have Magistrates in MA or CT. Or, fortunately, I have yet to find out.
Gip, it was YOU over and over and over again who said the Browns roster was stronger than the Pats roster. The driving difference in W-L records was simply the fact the Pats had Brady at QB.
You have to get the majority of people to agree with your statements.
Are you denying - Mr. Magistrate - that you were not ranting and raving about how the Browns have a stronger roster than the Pats, except at the QB position.
Don't be a Shep.
I think you may be taking hallucenogenics. Nevertheless....even if I DID say that....it STILL supports my view that it is ALL about Tom Brady...and not BB. Let me be clear also to say that....despite that, I still believe that BB is a better HC than any of the guys we have had since him.
Since 1999, I've been called an anti-fan (my term) because I always predicted the Browns would have a lousy record. Ironically, I was always optimistic via the rearview mirror.
PS I don't believe we have Magistrates in MA or CT. Or, fortunately, I have yet to find out.
I know you do not have Mayor's Court magistrates as we do have here in Ohio. Actually, only Ohio and Louisiana have them. But you undoubtedly have Magistrates in other courts. They may not be known by that name perhaps...but they are the equivalent. Maybe they are called "Hearing Officers" or something.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login