Well, I don't know what party a person in a barroom may be, but if they think that Bochy and Francona are not good managers then they are either a Republican or Democratic dumbass.

As for Belichick....I am sorry that facts get in the way of your delusion. But it is a FACT that without Brady at QB BB has a losing record as a head coach. He has been lucky and blessed to have had one of the greatest QBs of all time play for him. Now, maybe he would have had some way for his teams to be competitive, but what kind of record do you think he would have had with the QBs the Browns have been "blessed" with the last 15 years?

I am talking about a conversation in a barroom, Gip, for Chrissakes. Joe the Plumber. You know, a stupid, crude Republican.

PS Get over your hatred of BB for cutting Kosar and, just maybe, you will see the light of day.

@chicopee-john said:

I would disagree with that. I would think they would both rank very high on the best managers list by anyone doing the ranking....if they didn't then the person/persons doing the ranking are dumbasses.

Well, you probably know that I'm a Red Sox fan and like Francona a lot.

Neither he nor Bochy will get their names mentiond in a "Name the best 5 managers in MLB" discussion - at least outside of Cleveland or SF.

I would disagree with that. I would think they would both rank very high on the best managers list by anyone doing the ranking....if they didn't then the person/persons doing the ranking are dumbasses.

BTW, Belichick took over a piss, piss poor team in Cleveland and nearly took them to the playoffs

Not in his first year...by no means. It took him 4 years to make the playoffs.

- all the while, the entire organization was crumbling behind him. That experience is why he puts so much emphasis on organization and management stability and, precisely, the reason he chose not to accept the Jets' HC position when his mentor 'anointed' him Head Coach.

If the Browns organization didn't crumble under his tenure, IMHO, he would have gotten the team to the SB. Looking at the numbers, without consideration circumstances, situations, etc. is a dangerous way to evaluate talent.

Well, I don't know if the organization crumbled. Modell wanted more money. That was the root of any crumbling.

Look at what Franconia did - for example - before he joined the Sox. Look at Toree with the Mets or in St. Louis. Shitty numbers.

Neither had the talent in those places to go far. That is what I say about BB.....he has perhaps the best QB in history having played for him. Fine that he recognized that talent......but without TB...he has been less than mediorce.

Figures Lie and Liers Figure.

And Bill Parcells said "you are what your record says you are"......and sans Brady, BBs record is below .500.

Come on man, I'll give Francona may not be in that talk but Bochy has gotten 3 rings in 5 years with totally different teams. If he's not a top 5 manager in the MLB right now who the hell is above him.

Neither he nor Bochy will get their names mentiond in a "Name the best 5 managers in MLB" discussion - at least outside of Cleveland or SF.

@chicopee-john said:

Not even close, Gip. Do you believe the Pats would have fallen apart if their Center got injured like some here like to believe happened to the Browns? They would have plugged somebody else in and not skipped a beat. You can say it's all Brady, but you'd be wrong (to paraphrase Peter J. Franklin).

I am not saying it is ALL Tom Brady....90-95%. Like I said, if you went position by position the talent may be very, very close.

Also the Pats have the best HC in the NFL

Do they? I am NOT convinced of that. In all of BBs years as a HC in the NFL he has 2 winning seasons and 5 losing seasons where his full time starting QB was not Tom Brady.

and the Giants have the best Manager in MLB.

Great pitching staffs make any manager look great....but Bochy manages that staff well for sure.

They get 100% out of 100% of their players 100% of the time.

Though I am not convinced that Bruce Bochy is better .than Terry Francona. Both outstanding

Organization is HUGE, as well.

OK, but, sometimes a great pitching staff and a great QB is what makes an organization great.

I hope Pet can grow into the top-tier coaches in the league over the next few years. I sense, however, acrimony, between him and Farmer. That won't end pretty, IMHO.

Winning will resolve all that, no? And I am convinced that winning for this team requires merely a quality QB.

Not even close, Gip. Do you believe the Pats would have fallen apart if their Center got injured like some here like to believe happened to the Browns? They would have plugged somebody else in and not skipped a beat. You can say it's all Brady, but you'd be wrong (to paraphrase Peter J. Franklin).

I am not saying it is ALL Tom Brady....90-95%. Like I said, if you went position by position the talent may be very, very close.

Also the Pats have the best HC in the NFL

Do they? I am NOT convinced of that. In all of BBs years as a HC in the NFL he has 2 winning seasons and 5 losing seasons where his full time starting QB was not Tom Brady.

and the Giants have the best Manager in MLB.

Great pitching staffs make any manager look great....but Bochy manages that staff well for sure.

They get 100% out of 100% of their players 100% of the time.

Though I am not convinced that Bruce Bochy is better .than Terry Francona. Both outstanding

Organization is HUGE, as well.

OK, but, sometimes a great pitching staff and a great QB is what makes an organization great.

I hope Pet can grow into the top-tier coaches in the league over the next few years. I sense, however, acrimony, between him and Farmer. That won't end pretty, IMHO.

Winning will resolve all that, no? And I am convinced that winning for this team requires merely a quality QB.

Besides QB, Running back and Receivers also.

The Browns may actually have a more talented overall team than the New England Patriots......except the Pats have Tom Brady.

The Ravens are as much a "low end" team as the Browns. The Browns have more overall talent than the Ravens.....but, again, just like they have more overall talent than the Steelers, they don't have that top notch QB.

He's gonna be a FA and won't want to come to play in Cleveland.

I guess the Cleveland Indians have a better team than the San Francisco Giants except for the pitching staff.

The Ravens are as much a "low end" team as the Browns. The Browns have more overall talent than the Ravens.....but, again, just like they have more overall talent than the Steelers, they don't have that top notch QB.

He's gonna be a FA and won't want to come to play in Cleveland. I laughed to myself when I saw this on SC this morning because I knew the thread would pop up. Aging elite players don't want to play for lower end teams, it hardly ever happens when they are still useful.

My bet is the Seahawks or Ravens.

Exactly - if he comes here on the same exact deal as Austin, and is healthy, then sure, but what are the chances of that? It's not a direct substitution, there's money involved that could be spent improving other areas of the team.