Giant Octopodes
Well-known member
So I saw this article when it was written, 3 years ago. It was after Belichick had won his 4th Super Bowl as a head coach, and there was the start of a lot of the GOAT talk for him and Brady, much less for him than for Brady. Though I disagree with much of the methodology, arguments, and certainly the conclusion, it was written in a way that was relatively fair and balanced, and I respect that. However what is stunning to me is looking back on it just 3 years down the road, and seeing what a remarkable difference 3 years can make. Here is the article:
https://phinphanatic.com/2016/08/24/shula-vs-belichick-who-is-the-greatest/
Let's reexamine this, but in a way I consider more "fair", and with the past 3 years taken into account.
The Regular Season
Shula: 328 W, 156 L, .677
Belichick: 261 W, 123 L, .679
So in the past 3 years, Belichick has surpassed Shula's regular season record, in terms of winning percentage. In order to exceed Shula's percentage, Belichick must maintain an average of 11 wins a season. He has hit that mark or exceeded it every single year since 2009, and has achieved that mark or higher 15/19 years as the coach of the Patriots. The author of the original article indicates Shula's peak, before he fell off, was even more impressive, which it was. However he asserts it's common for coaches to fall off near the end of their career, with no support for that assertion, and if anything the opposite seems to be occurring with Belichick. So if we examine their peaks, we'll want to cut off the end of Shula's career, and the beginning of Belichick's. In his time in New England, Belichick has a record of 225-79, which is a mark of .740, higher than Shula's peak for the regular season.
At this point, by the way, Belichick is 6 seasons out from surpassing Shula's regular season win total, assuming he continues winning at his historic rate with this team. Personally I'll take the higher winning percentage over the higher volume stat, especially when the win total was achieved over a final 10 seasons where Shula went 89-70, with two division titles, 3 playoff wins, and 4 losses, and achieved nothing of note.
Much is made by the way of Belichick's "5 losing seasons", a carefully worded and measured metric where Shula's 4 8-8 seasons are not held against him. I'd counter that with the fact that Shula did not have a winning season 6x vs Belichick's 5x, and Belichick failed to win his division 8x total, while Shula failed to win his division 18x.
The Post Season
Shula 19 Playoff Appearances, 13 Division Titles (the original article is in error), Playoff Record 19-17 (.527), 2 Super Bowls
Belichick 17 Playoff Appearances, 16 Division Titles, Playoff Record 31-11 (.738), 6 Super Bowls
I mean this one is incredibly obvious, but he makes much ado about there being fewer teams who got into the playoffs during Shula's era. Sure, but Belichick has made the playoffs as a wild card team once, with the Browns. Shula has made it despite not winning his division (as a wild card, in other words) 5x. The times Shula missed the playoffs, it was because he failed to win his division, which every time but 1 Belichick has done so he missed them as well. This is a gaping, ridiculous, colossal win for Belichick.
Developing Great Players
In the era before Free Agency, acquiring great players was exactly the same as developing them. Personally, I'd take the fact that Belichick has not had as many all time greats as a win for him, not for Shula, considering their respective accomplishments. However I think this is a ridiculous position to argue at this time, from either side. In the last 3 years 2 players he didn't even have on his list of potentials (Randy Moss and Ty Law) have gotten into the Hall of Fame, and there are several who he doesn't have, which are writing their way into Canton with their performance now, such as Gilmore. The story isn't written yet. You can't compare folks in the hall of fame between an active head coach and one who has been retired for over 20 years. It's just a stupid to do.
Level of Coaching Competition
In here as well, he uses the coaches who are top 10 all time in wins as of now, meaning after Shula's contemporaries are all done and have finished tallying up their wins. Andy Reid, for example, was not on that list, but is now #7 all time in wins. Sean Peyton, Pete Carroll, Mike Tomlin, John Harbaugh, and Jon Gruden are all active head coaches with 100+ wins, and any or all of them could be in the 200+ win range when they retire. We just don't know, their tale isn't finished yet.
He also talks about multiple super bowl champions, but that's incredibly deceiving as well, not only because some may yet win multiple championships, some already have but were not given credit (Mike Tomlin), and some Would be multiple Super Bowl champions were it not for Belichick (Pete Carroll, Mike Martz at minimum, possibly also many more who were knocked off in earlier rounds of one of his 9 appearances, it's tough to know with certainty).
Integrity
https://www.thephinsider.com/2015/5...cing-players-to-take-painkillers-to-remain-on
Welp. The phrase "he who lives in a glass house should not throw stones" comes to mind. There's also the allegations of scheduling impropriety (the Dolphins faced 2 teams with a winning record in their "perfect season" year, and their opponents had an average winning percentage of .332, and this was before position based, set scheduling), and that's just the stuff we know about.
Anyway, setting aside bogus arguments, the big thing I wanted to focus on was this: 3 years ago some thought Shula vs Belichick was actually close, based on Shula's wins, winning percentage in the regular season, and so forth. In the past 3 years, Belichick has achieved the following:
38-10 in the regular season (.791)
Passed Shula's regular season win percentage
8-1 in the post season (.888)
2 Super Bowl championships
3 Division titles, seasons with double digit wins, AFC Championship appearances, AFC Championship wins, etc.
46 total wins, cutting the distance in total wins from 100 to 55
Give it another 3 years, and let's see where things land. If he coaches for another 6, will Shula Supporters be left with anything at all to stand on?
https://phinphanatic.com/2016/08/24/shula-vs-belichick-who-is-the-greatest/
Let's reexamine this, but in a way I consider more "fair", and with the past 3 years taken into account.
The Regular Season
Shula: 328 W, 156 L, .677
Belichick: 261 W, 123 L, .679
So in the past 3 years, Belichick has surpassed Shula's regular season record, in terms of winning percentage. In order to exceed Shula's percentage, Belichick must maintain an average of 11 wins a season. He has hit that mark or exceeded it every single year since 2009, and has achieved that mark or higher 15/19 years as the coach of the Patriots. The author of the original article indicates Shula's peak, before he fell off, was even more impressive, which it was. However he asserts it's common for coaches to fall off near the end of their career, with no support for that assertion, and if anything the opposite seems to be occurring with Belichick. So if we examine their peaks, we'll want to cut off the end of Shula's career, and the beginning of Belichick's. In his time in New England, Belichick has a record of 225-79, which is a mark of .740, higher than Shula's peak for the regular season.
At this point, by the way, Belichick is 6 seasons out from surpassing Shula's regular season win total, assuming he continues winning at his historic rate with this team. Personally I'll take the higher winning percentage over the higher volume stat, especially when the win total was achieved over a final 10 seasons where Shula went 89-70, with two division titles, 3 playoff wins, and 4 losses, and achieved nothing of note.
Much is made by the way of Belichick's "5 losing seasons", a carefully worded and measured metric where Shula's 4 8-8 seasons are not held against him. I'd counter that with the fact that Shula did not have a winning season 6x vs Belichick's 5x, and Belichick failed to win his division 8x total, while Shula failed to win his division 18x.
The Post Season
Shula 19 Playoff Appearances, 13 Division Titles (the original article is in error), Playoff Record 19-17 (.527), 2 Super Bowls
Belichick 17 Playoff Appearances, 16 Division Titles, Playoff Record 31-11 (.738), 6 Super Bowls
I mean this one is incredibly obvious, but he makes much ado about there being fewer teams who got into the playoffs during Shula's era. Sure, but Belichick has made the playoffs as a wild card team once, with the Browns. Shula has made it despite not winning his division (as a wild card, in other words) 5x. The times Shula missed the playoffs, it was because he failed to win his division, which every time but 1 Belichick has done so he missed them as well. This is a gaping, ridiculous, colossal win for Belichick.
Developing Great Players
In the era before Free Agency, acquiring great players was exactly the same as developing them. Personally, I'd take the fact that Belichick has not had as many all time greats as a win for him, not for Shula, considering their respective accomplishments. However I think this is a ridiculous position to argue at this time, from either side. In the last 3 years 2 players he didn't even have on his list of potentials (Randy Moss and Ty Law) have gotten into the Hall of Fame, and there are several who he doesn't have, which are writing their way into Canton with their performance now, such as Gilmore. The story isn't written yet. You can't compare folks in the hall of fame between an active head coach and one who has been retired for over 20 years. It's just a stupid to do.
Level of Coaching Competition
In here as well, he uses the coaches who are top 10 all time in wins as of now, meaning after Shula's contemporaries are all done and have finished tallying up their wins. Andy Reid, for example, was not on that list, but is now #7 all time in wins. Sean Peyton, Pete Carroll, Mike Tomlin, John Harbaugh, and Jon Gruden are all active head coaches with 100+ wins, and any or all of them could be in the 200+ win range when they retire. We just don't know, their tale isn't finished yet.
He also talks about multiple super bowl champions, but that's incredibly deceiving as well, not only because some may yet win multiple championships, some already have but were not given credit (Mike Tomlin), and some Would be multiple Super Bowl champions were it not for Belichick (Pete Carroll, Mike Martz at minimum, possibly also many more who were knocked off in earlier rounds of one of his 9 appearances, it's tough to know with certainty).
Integrity
https://www.thephinsider.com/2015/5...cing-players-to-take-painkillers-to-remain-on
Welp. The phrase "he who lives in a glass house should not throw stones" comes to mind. There's also the allegations of scheduling impropriety (the Dolphins faced 2 teams with a winning record in their "perfect season" year, and their opponents had an average winning percentage of .332, and this was before position based, set scheduling), and that's just the stuff we know about.
Anyway, setting aside bogus arguments, the big thing I wanted to focus on was this: 3 years ago some thought Shula vs Belichick was actually close, based on Shula's wins, winning percentage in the regular season, and so forth. In the past 3 years, Belichick has achieved the following:
38-10 in the regular season (.791)
Passed Shula's regular season win percentage
8-1 in the post season (.888)
2 Super Bowl championships
3 Division titles, seasons with double digit wins, AFC Championship appearances, AFC Championship wins, etc.
46 total wins, cutting the distance in total wins from 100 to 55
Give it another 3 years, and let's see where things land. If he coaches for another 6, will Shula Supporters be left with anything at all to stand on?
