This really only proves that the AFC East is just as bad as everyone else against the Patriots. But let's take it one step further. How has the rest of the AFC East performed vs other divisions since 2000?
0
This really only proves that the AFC East is just as bad as everyone else against the Patriots. But let's take it one step further. How has the rest of the AFC East performed vs other divisions since 2000?
Ok, this isn't really fair since we're including the Patriots in this and they've been otherworldly as we've already established. On the other hand, if we remove the Patriots from the results the AFC will plummet:
0
Ok, this isn't really fair since we're including the Patriots in this and they've been otherworldly as we've already established. On the other hand, if we remove the Patriots from the results the AFC will plummet:
But again, this isn't fair to the AFC East. Of course you're going to look bad if you take away the best record from your division every year. And it just so happens that the Patriots have finished the season with the best record in the AFC East every year -- even when they don't win the division. So what happens when we remove every season's division winner from the equation?
0
But again, this isn't fair to the AFC East. Of course you're going to look bad if you take away the best record from your division every year. And it just so happens that the Patriots have finished the season with the best record in the AFC East every year -- even when they don't win the division. So what happens when we remove every season's division winner from the equation?
Huh. The AFC East is back on top when you remove the best team from each division, which leads me to believe that the rest of the AFC East hasn't been "easy" by any stretch. What this shows is that in the 2nd - 4th spot in any division, the AFC East has the best record, regardless of who was in that spot.
But some claim that it's unfair to remove the division winner for each season, since that punishes teams that have a good year and win the division occasionally. They argue that the comparison should be removing the best teams from each division since 2000. So let's put that argument to the test and compare divisions when removing the best performing team.
0
Huh. The AFC East is back on top when you remove the best team from each division, which leads me to believe that the rest of the AFC East hasn't been "easy" by any stretch. What this shows is that in the 2nd - 4th spot in any division, the AFC East has the best record, regardless of who was in that spot.
But some claim that it's unfair to remove the division winner for each season, since that punishes teams that have a good year and win the division occasionally. They argue that the comparison should be removing the best teams from each division since 2000. So let's put that argument to the test and compare divisions when removing the best performing team.
So the AFC East isn't at the top anymore, but neither are they far and away the worst division in football in the Brady/Belichick era. Regardless how you run the numbers the AFC East is still not the easiest division, by a long shot.
0
So the AFC East isn't at the top anymore, but neither are they far and away the worst division in football in the Brady/Belichick era. Regardless how you run the numbers the AFC East is still not the easiest division, by a long shot.
It isn't an argument its a hole in his data base....
He is literally using year the patriots did not have Brady on the team....and since he's left the dolphins and bills have had some success which will skew all those numbers in favor of the side of his point...whether a little or a lot... it is not up for debate
0
@njsupreme1
It isn't an argument its a hole in his data base....
He is literally using year the patriots did not have Brady on the team....and since he's left the dolphins and bills have had some success which will skew all those numbers in favor of the side of his point...whether a little or a lot... it is not up for debate
Way more to it than this. But pretty much every standard argument can be countered. Patriots won against every division and made their division look worse than it was, etc., etc. QB issues in divisions are countered, future HOFers are countered, serious challengers within the division is countered. Etc., etc.
Bottom line is people will pretty much choose to believe what they want to believe.
But to not give credence to a dynasty that was that dominant for so long is just being disingenuous, in my opinion.
0
Way more to it than this. But pretty much every standard argument can be countered. Patriots won against every division and made their division look worse than it was, etc., etc. QB issues in divisions are countered, future HOFers are countered, serious challengers within the division is countered. Etc., etc.
Bottom line is people will pretty much choose to believe what they want to believe.
But to not give credence to a dynasty that was that dominant for so long is just being disingenuous, in my opinion.
No one is arguing they werent dominant....they clearly dominated
This thread is about is belichick a 6 time SB winner without Brady....obviously not....Brady almost instantly won a ring without Bill.....Bill is lagging...he's a great coach but not some god winning 6 sb with scrub qbs
0
@Raiders22
No one is arguing they werent dominant....they clearly dominated
This thread is about is belichick a 6 time SB winner without Brady....obviously not....Brady almost instantly won a ring without Bill.....Bill is lagging...he's a great coach but not some god winning 6 sb with scrub qbs
1) Belichick/Brady -- are they both GOATs, or does one make the other.
2) They won so often because the AFC East was weak.
3) Belichick/Brady were/are overrated.
All 3 parts tend to bleed into the myth that the AFC East was, by far, the weakest division -- it was not. It also goes in the direction of one GOAT or the other carrying the other. Then it says that because they won, and so often, Belichick is 'legendary'.
You cannot address Belichick without addressing all 3 parts.
He was NOT lucky because the AFC East was so weak. He is NOT legendary because he won so much. He is great because Brady made him great.
But he is a GOOD coach and still will be great AND can become 'legendary' IF he wins WITHOUT Brady AND while other teams in the AFC East are good.
It all ties together, in my opinion.
0
@dubz4dummyz
It has 3 parts:
1) Belichick/Brady -- are they both GOATs, or does one make the other.
2) They won so often because the AFC East was weak.
3) Belichick/Brady were/are overrated.
All 3 parts tend to bleed into the myth that the AFC East was, by far, the weakest division -- it was not. It also goes in the direction of one GOAT or the other carrying the other. Then it says that because they won, and so often, Belichick is 'legendary'.
You cannot address Belichick without addressing all 3 parts.
He was NOT lucky because the AFC East was so weak. He is NOT legendary because he won so much. He is great because Brady made him great.
But he is a GOOD coach and still will be great AND can become 'legendary' IF he wins WITHOUT Brady AND while other teams in the AFC East are good.
@Raiders22 And ya Brady and beli owned manning.almost felt bad for peyton Then his lil bro goes and beats em twice in the SB
Never forget in both of those games Brady walked off the field after getting the lead and told his defense just stop them one time and we will win because they will never get the ball back. But the defense could not do it in either game. Haha!
0
Quote Originally Posted by dubz4dummyz:
@Raiders22 And ya Brady and beli owned manning.almost felt bad for peyton Then his lil bro goes and beats em twice in the SB
Never forget in both of those games Brady walked off the field after getting the lead and told his defense just stop them one time and we will win because they will never get the ball back. But the defense could not do it in either game. Haha!
I understand the focus on the division the Patriots played in over the years but in order to get to NINE ...that's right...NINE SUPER BOWLS...didn't they need to beat whoever the top teams in the conference were at the time? Did they not beat KC with Mahomes? Did they not beat Peyton Manning and the Colts? In other words, they beat whoever was in front of them to get to NINE SUPER BOWLS. What other coach got to NINE SB?? Will it even be done again in the age of free agency and salary caps?
0
I understand the focus on the division the Patriots played in over the years but in order to get to NINE ...that's right...NINE SUPER BOWLS...didn't they need to beat whoever the top teams in the conference were at the time? Did they not beat KC with Mahomes? Did they not beat Peyton Manning and the Colts? In other words, they beat whoever was in front of them to get to NINE SUPER BOWLS. What other coach got to NINE SB?? Will it even be done again in the age of free agency and salary caps?
Does your dislike for Belichick keep you up at night? A .500 record for the last 2 years cancels out the other 20 years of achievements? Sure, blow him out of there...he's a bum!!
0
@Dolphins1354
Does your dislike for Belichick keep you up at night? A .500 record for the last 2 years cancels out the other 20 years of achievements? Sure, blow him out of there...he's a bum!!
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.