Originally Posted by RaidersOftheCellar:
IMO, if the Patriots had never drafted Brady, they'd still be considered a pretty good organization. They helped to create Brady, and Belichick would have won at a decent clip with another QB.
The Patriots rank 20th in wins from 1966 (merger) through 1999 (year prior to Belichick) and there were 31 teams in 1999.
They had never won a SB prior to 1999.
> they had 6 seasons with double digit wins from 1980-1999
> they had 7 playoff appearances in those 19 seasons
> they had a 6-7 playoff record
> 9 seasons over .500
> 7 seasons under .500
> 231 wins and 278 losses
That can rank as 'pretty good'... and Belichick had a losing record as a HC, having recently spurned the Jets (IIRC) for their HC job prior to going to NE.
They get all the credit for drafting Brady, even as late as they did... but he only started because Bledsoe got hurt.
So, I don't know that I would paint that situation as you did, but it's totally your opinion and there's nothing wrong with it. I just don't think the history supports it. [Reply]
Originally Posted by RaidersOftheCellar:
KC had a stretch that was equally bad in the 70s-80s. They kind of cancel each other out.
Similar, but not as bad.
1966 (merger) through 2021: Denver 473 wins and Chiefs 463 wins
1966 (merger) through 1989: Denver 185 wins and Chiefs 169 wins
1960 through 1989: Chiefs 213 wins and Denver 207 wins
1960 through 1982: Chiefs 167 wins and Denver 134 wins
Pat Bowlen turned the franchise around when he bought the team. I'm not suggesting that the previous 22 years don't count by any means.
Going back to 1960 - The two teams have met each other 124 times (including 1 postseason game), with the Denver Broncos winning 55 games and the Kansas City Chiefs winning 69 games.
Mahomes has put KC head in the overall series for sure with his 9 wins (puke). [Reply]
Originally Posted by Mile High Mania:
The Patriots rank 20th in wins from 1966 (merger) through 1999 (year prior to Belichick) and there were 31 teams in 1999.
They had never won a SB prior to 1999.
> they had 6 seasons with double digit wins from 1980-1999
> they had 7 playoff appearances in those 19 seasons
> they had a 6-7 playoff record
> 9 seasons over .500
> 7 seasons under .500
> 231 wins and 278 losses
That can rank as 'pretty good'... and Belichick had a losing record as a HC, having recently spurned the Jets (IIRC) for their HC job prior to going to NE.
They get all the credit for drafting Brady, even as late as they did... but he only started because Bledsoe got hurt.
So, I don't know that I would paint that situation as you did, but it's totally your opinion and there's nothing wrong with it. I just don't think the history supports it.
I'm saying that I think they'd still have had decent success in the Belichick era without Brady. And overall, they'd be considered a pretty good franchise. I'm not saying they'd be considered elite.
Do you disagree? He went 11-5 with Cassel and went to the playoffs last year with a rookie QB who isn't overwhelmingly talented. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Mile High Mania:
Similar, but not as bad.
Splitting hairs.
From 1972-1988 (same number of seasons), KC's win % was .407. Denver's win % from 1960-1976 was .363. KC actually had more losses in that span. [Reply]
Originally Posted by RaidersOftheCellar:
I'm saying that I think they'd still have had decent success in the Belichick era without Brady. And overall, they'd be considered a pretty good franchise. I'm not saying they'd be considered elite.
Do you disagree? He went 11-5 with Cassel and went to the playoffs last year with a rookie QB who isn't overwhelmingly talented.
Sure, he went 11-5 with Cassel after 7 years and 3 SBs with Brady.
Bill will go down as the best or one of the top 2-3 best HCs of all time... I'm suggesting that may not be the case had it not been for Brady. There were no strong indicators prior to his arrival in NE that he was the greatest HC of all time.
That division as a whole has consistently sucked for soooo long too. [Reply]
Originally Posted by RaidersOftheCellar:
Splitting hairs.
From 1972-1988 (same number of seasons), KC's win % was .407. Denver's win % from 1960-1976 was .363. KC actually had more losses in that span.
We can play with date ranges all day long.
In that 1960-1976 span (birth of the franchise through the year before their first playoff appearance), Broncos led the league in losses with 147 and the Chiefs had 94.
And, someone mentioned how bad the last 15 years or so have been (pre/post Manning). It's interesting that the Broncos have 127 losses and Chiefs have 122 losses in the last 16 seasons (I used that timeframe to match the 16 year timeframe above). The Chiefs have 151 wins and the Broncos have 146 wins in that most recent 16 year span.
Originally Posted by Mile High Mania:
We can play with date ranges all day long.
In that 1960-1976 span (birth of the franchise through the year before their first playoff appearance), Broncos led the league in losses with 147 and the Chiefs had 94.
Why are you comparing the worst era of Broncos football to the 2nd best era of Chiefs football?
I compared the worst era for KC to the worst era for Denver. Both exactly 17 seasons. The point was that they basically cancel each other out. [Reply]
Originally Posted by RaidersOftheCellar:
Why are you comparing the worst era of Broncos football to the 2nd best era of Chiefs football?
I compared the worst era for KC to the worst era for Denver. Both exactly 17 seasons. The point was that they basically cancel each other out.
Because this whole thing started with 'culture of winning'. And, whether it was by you or others, various comments have been added about different slices of times and records.
I made reference to the absolute worst period for Denver in those 60/70 seasons and you followed with a comment that things were similar in that era and likely a wash. (paraphrasing)
So, I just put it out there that those first 16 seasons were tragically more worse than anyone... sure, KC had some bad stretches there as well, but nothing like that 16 year run of shit.
Denver started changing that following year (1977) when they put Morton behind center, they advance to the playoffs for the first time and faced Morton's former team in the SB. After that, there were 5 years of decent success and then Bowlen buys the team... Elway comes to town and that my friend is when this culture of winning started. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Mile High Mania:
If we're being honest
That's rich...
Since I caught you in a rare moment of disclosure...
Had Manning not made the choice to deliberate skirt NFL protocols...and not only used HGH to heal a neck that Indianapolis's medical experts were convinced was irreparable...but continued it's use to set NFL records...what would be the realistic trajectory of the Donks past decade with Tebow and Horseface at the helm?
The drunkard became exposed the moment Manningstein's arm fell off...and HGH-boys ability to recruit FA ring-chasers ended.
My guess is Reid's dominance over your cheating scumbag of a franchise would extend back into the Smith era....Sanders wouldn't have touched your team. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Mile High Mania:
The Patriots rank 20th in wins from 1966 (merger) through 1999 (year prior to Belichick) and there were 31 teams in 1999.
They had never won a SB prior to 1999.
> they had 6 seasons with double digit wins from 1980-1999
> they had 7 playoff appearances in those 19 seasons
> they had a 6-7 playoff record
> 9 seasons over .500
> 7 seasons under .500
> 231 wins and 278 losses
That can rank as 'pretty good'... and Belichick had a losing record as a HC, having recently spurned the Jets (IIRC) for their HC job prior to going to NE.
They get all the credit for drafting Brady, even as late as they did... but he only started because Bledsoe got hurt.
So, I don't know that I would paint that situation as you did, but it's totally your opinion and there's nothing wrong with it. I just don't think the history supports it.
I think it's possible Belichick becomes a footnote in history if Bledsoe doesn't get hurt.
Started out with a 5-11 season with the Pats, and in their first Super Bowl season, they had a really rough start before Bledsoe got hurt. I think while a Bledsoe was a better QB at the time overall, Brady was more risk-averse in that initial season, and that's what won them the necessary regular season games to get into the playoffs.
They probably would have put shit together eventually with Bledsoe, but who knows how long that would have taken. More than likely they don't go to the playoffs that year.
Would the team have had the patience to stick by him? A lot of what kept Belichick so successful was the winning momentum, because winning will solve most if not all of the misery that is the Patriot Way. Without those wins, does the team gel at all? Does Brady ever get a chance? [Reply]
I've heard the donks will change names to Denver Checkouts. In honor of their checkout lanes but mostly because they check out by mid season every year.
