Yes, this more or less gets stirred up every so often every time a Belichick disciple gets dropped on his head, and I'd like to clarify something before we go any further; I feel as though Belichick is currently the best coach in the NFL, and is a Hall Of Fame head coach. This isn't an indictment on Belichick's career, so much as a pondering on what the difficulty seems to be.
Because, for whatever reason, Belichick's coordinators, when they leave Billy's side, tend to be flops as head coaches. Consider the evidence:
Romeo Crennel:
24-40 Record as a Head Coach; only one winning season as a Coach.
Eric Mangini:
24-33 Record as a Head Coach; Only one playoff appearance
The Jury seems to still be out on Josh McDaniels, so it's not too fair to judge him at this moment. He seemed to have the Broncos in the right position, before the team fell back down to Earth.
Charlie Weis:
35-27 Record at Notre Dame. The combined 15 losses from 2007-08 marks the most losses for any two-year span at Notre Dame. That, plus he only defeated one team that would wind up staying in the top twenty five after the season.
It would seem apparent, from a statistical standpoint, that all of Belichick's Disciples tend to fall by the way side. The question is simple; why?
Personally, this only increases my respect for Belichick, as it makes me wonder the credentials of the leadership of all the coaches names. Sure, they can be great minds for their side of the football, but this only goes to remind me how difficult it is to bring all together, and lead a football team. Could it be possible that all of Belichick's coordinators were truly working under a genius, who tended to make them look better by his work?
Or, is it possible that all of these coaches took jobs that were doomed to fail. Remember, two of those coaches took jobs with the Browns. That job can officially be rendered toxic. Coaches go there to die. As for Notre Dame, you're dealing with an unrealistic fan base, that expects to be back in the 1950s, while working with athletes who are just flat out inferior. We've already seen one disciple land in a pretty decent job in McDaniels, and he's more or less revitalized Bronco football. So is it possible that these men took on more than they could chew?
Personally, I can see both. But it seems startling that one of the greatest coaches' coaching tree is extremely rotted. The coaching lineage for Belichick seems to just not be that good, and the question is, why? More over, will this affect Belichick's legacy at all?
Because, for whatever reason, Belichick's coordinators, when they leave Billy's side, tend to be flops as head coaches. Consider the evidence:
Romeo Crennel:
24-40 Record as a Head Coach; only one winning season as a Coach.
Eric Mangini:
24-33 Record as a Head Coach; Only one playoff appearance
The Jury seems to still be out on Josh McDaniels, so it's not too fair to judge him at this moment. He seemed to have the Broncos in the right position, before the team fell back down to Earth.
Charlie Weis:
35-27 Record at Notre Dame. The combined 15 losses from 2007-08 marks the most losses for any two-year span at Notre Dame. That, plus he only defeated one team that would wind up staying in the top twenty five after the season.
It would seem apparent, from a statistical standpoint, that all of Belichick's Disciples tend to fall by the way side. The question is simple; why?
Personally, this only increases my respect for Belichick, as it makes me wonder the credentials of the leadership of all the coaches names. Sure, they can be great minds for their side of the football, but this only goes to remind me how difficult it is to bring all together, and lead a football team. Could it be possible that all of Belichick's coordinators were truly working under a genius, who tended to make them look better by his work?
Or, is it possible that all of these coaches took jobs that were doomed to fail. Remember, two of those coaches took jobs with the Browns. That job can officially be rendered toxic. Coaches go there to die. As for Notre Dame, you're dealing with an unrealistic fan base, that expects to be back in the 1950s, while working with athletes who are just flat out inferior. We've already seen one disciple land in a pretty decent job in McDaniels, and he's more or less revitalized Bronco football. So is it possible that these men took on more than they could chew?
Personally, I can see both. But it seems startling that one of the greatest coaches' coaching tree is extremely rotted. The coaching lineage for Belichick seems to just not be that good, and the question is, why? More over, will this affect Belichick's legacy at all?