Belichick Wins AP Coach of the Year

[chiefzilla1501]

It's Belichick
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d81e139ee/article/patriots-belichick-is-aps-nfl-coach-of-the-year-for-third-time
DALLAS -- Bill Belichick is closing in on Don Shula.

Belichick, the New England Patriots' coach, won The Associated Press 2010 NFL Coach of the Year award Wednesday, the third time he has earned the honor. Belichick, who also won in 2003 and 2007, now trails only Shula, a Hall of Famer and four-time winner of the award.

For leading the Patriots to a 14-2 record, the best in the league, Belichick received 30 votes from a nationwide panel of 50 media members who regularly cover the NFL. That easily beat Raheem Morris, who led a turnaround in Tampa Bay and received 11½ votes.

Belichick has overseen a transition in New England to a younger team, particularly on defense. Of course, he still has NFL Offensive Player of the Year Tom Brady at quarterback.

"I will say the foundation of the Patriots organization, which starts with Mr. Kraft and Coach Belichick, has not changed since the day I arrived," Brady said. "They have and will always do what is in the best interest of the team, and they will continue to find selfless players that love to work hard, compete and strive to be the best they can possibly be."

Then Belichick makes them even better.

"He really stays on top of us," wide receiver Wes Welker said. "He makes sure that we're not getting overconfident or believing in the noise outside the locker room and understand that every game's tough in the NFL."

Belichick's record with the Patriots is 126-50, plus a 14-5 mark in the playoffs, with losses in the last three tries with teams that went a collective 40-8. His career winning percentage of .716 ranks eighth, tied with Hall of Famer Paul Brown, and no other coach has four 14-victory regular seasons.

This might have been Belichick's most impressive work as the Patriots retooled much of the roster, yet had a dominant regular season in which they won their final eight games.

"When you have so many things that go into a team, so many things that go into what's happened over the last decade, which ones do you point to?" he said. "You can make an argument for a lot of different things. In the end, it's each individual team and that collection of players that particular year and that particular time during the season or whatever it is, that was able to go out there and be successful."

Belichick basically rebuilt the defense, particularly the secondary, where rookie Devin McCourty made the Pro Bowl.

Belichick showed confidence in BenJarvus Green-Ellis as the Patriots' main running back, and he rushed for 1,008 yards. Belichick claimed Danny Woodhead when the New York Jets cut him, and he was a dynamic piece of the offense and special teams.

Then there was the Randy Moss case.

Eager to remove the recalcitrant receiver, Belichick stole a third-round draft pick from Minnesota in early October for Moss, who lasted a month with the Vikings, then was cut.

Meanwhile, Belichick traded with the Seattle Seahawks for Deion Branch, the 2005 Super Bowl MVP with the Patriots. Branch had a rebirth in New England, making the Moss deal look even better.

And making the Patriots a better team -- typical of what Belichick has done since receiving his second chance to be a head coach. The first was a flop with the Browns, where he went 37-45 in four seasons and alienated nearly everyone in Cleveland.

"When I chose him, people at the league office, people in this town, sent me tapes of him in Cleveland and said, 'You don't want to hire this guy,'" Patriots owner Robert Kraft said. "And, remember, he went 5-11 (in his first year with Patriots) and we gave up a No. 1 draft choice (to the Jets to get him). People thought we were nuts.

"So I think that probably was one of the best decisions I've made in football."

Belichick is a disciple of Bill Parcells, the only other New England coach to win the award.

Morris lifted the Buccaneers from 3-13 in his first season to 10-6 in 2010 and in playoff contention until the final week. He did it with the league's youngest roster.

"We put a lot on his plate," Bucs general manager Mark Dominik said, "and he has absolutely handled it all. We all see where this ship is headed."

Also receiving votes were Kansas City's Todd Haley (4½), whose team went 11-5 and won the AFC West; and four coaches with one selection apiece: Atlanta's Mike Smith, Philadelphia's Andy Reid, Chicago's Lovie Smith, and St. Louis' Steve Spagnuolo.

[KurtCobain]

Fucking cheater! Haley should've got that shit for just being a snappy dresser.

[chiefzilla1501]

Can't argue with the top choice. But the fact that Raheem Morris came in 2nd is an absolute load of shit.

[KCrockaholic]

Little late with starting a thread on this. Man we are behind tonight.

[Red Dawg]

FUGGING BULLSHIT!

[Red Dawg]

If you have Tom Brady how can you get coach of the year? If Moss had gone on to actaully do something then maybe getting rid of him would mean more because they won 14 without him, but he didn't. getting rid of him was nothing big.

[Bugeater]

Whatever.

[rad]

How do you get 1/2 a vote? Also, I thought we went 10-6?

[DaneMcCloud]

Raheem Morris should have won, but I'm not at all surprised that Belichick received the award.

The AP writers love him.

[cabletech94]

How do you get 1/2 a vote? Also, I thought we went 10-6?


looks like a rat, smells like a rat.......:hmmm:

[chiefzilla1501]

Raheem Morris should have won, but I'm not at all surprised that Belichick received the award.

The AP writers love him.

I would have put him in 4th, behind Belichick, Mike Smith, and Haley.

Morris had a good season. But if it's at all possible, I'm pretty sure his Strength of Victory was worse than the Chiefs. And he won most of those games pretty unconvincingly.

[milkman]

I would have put him in 4th, behind Belichick, Mike Smith, and Haley.

Morris had a good season. But if it's at all possible, I'm pretty sure his Strength of Victory was worse than the Chiefs. And he won most of those games pretty unconvincingly.

The Bucs play in the same division as the Falcons and Saints.

I highly doubt their schedule was as soft as ours, or even close.

[chiefzilla1501]

The Bucs play in the same division as the Falcons and Saints.

I highly doubt their schedule was as soft as ours, or even close.

Their strength of loss was very high. They lost to some really good teams.

But they only beat one team with a winning record. The Saints, in a meaningless game 16 where the Saints had already clinched (and were banged up anyway). And in spite of the low quality teams they beat, half of those games were won by a field goal or less.

You shouldn't get credit for losing to good teams.

[Rain Man]

He may have got the award, but deep down he knows that Haley is about to take him out.

[kcxiv]

meh nevermind

[dirk digler]

What a crock of shit.

[DaneMcCloud]

Their strength of loss was very high. They lost to some really good teams.

But they only beat one team with a winning record. The Saints, in a meaningless game 16 where the Saints had already clinched (and were banged up anyway). And in spite of the low quality teams they beat, half of those games were won by a field goal or less.

You shouldn't get credit for losing to good teams.

And who, exactly, did the Chiefs beat with a winning record?

Furthermore, the Bucs coordinators stayed intact from 2009 to 2010. Can the same be said for the Chiefs?

Mike McCarthy got his team to the Super Bowl, despite 15 guys on IR (including their starting running back, linebacker and tight end), yet you put Haley above him?

That's laughable,

[milkman]

And who, exactly, did the Chiefs beat with a winning record?

I was going to ask the same question.

Furthermore, the Bucs coordinators stayed intact from 2009 to 2010. Can the same be said for the Chiefs?

I really believe that's irrelevent.

Mike McCarthy got his team to the Super Bowl, despite 15 guys on IR (including their starting running back, linebacker and tight end), yet you put Haley above him?

That's a good point.

That's laughable,[/quote]

[dirk digler]

And who, exactly, did the Chiefs beat with a winning record?

Furthermore, the Bucs coordinators stayed intact from 2009 to 2010. Can the same be said for the Chiefs?

Mike McCarthy got his team to the Super Bowl, despite 15 guys on IR (including their starting running back, linebacker and tight end), yet you put Haley above him?

That's laughable,

When you have a team that was 4-12, 2-14, 4-12, and then turns it around and wins the division and goes to the playoffs I believe that head coach should be coach of the year.

[chiefzilla1501]

And who, exactly, did the Chiefs beat with a winning record?

Furthermore, the Bucs coordinators stayed intact from 2009 to 2010. Can the same be said for the Chiefs?

Mike McCarthy got his team to the Super Bowl, despite 15 guys on IR (including their starting running back, linebacker and tight end), yet you put Haley above him?

That's laughable,

Mike McCarthy was a miss on my part. I would put him in 2nd above Smith, now rethinking the list.

But I'd still have Haley over Morris. There's no way he should have gotten 2nd. Belichick, McCarthy, Smith, Haley, Morris.

[DaneMcCloud]

I really believe that's irrelevent.



Personally, I think that's the $64,000.00 Dollar Question.

It'll be interesting, to say the least, to see what transpires with the Chiefs offense in 2011,

[DaneMcCloud]

Mike McCarthy was a miss on my part. I would put him in 2nd above Smith, now rethinking the list.

But I'd still have Haley over Morris. There's no way he should have gotten 2nd. Belichick, McCarthy, Smith, Haley, Morris.

Then either you don't watch the Bucs, don't know anything about their roster or their division, or you're just a Chiefs homer.

I'm guessing all of the above.

Oh, and Mike Smith has always been, IMO, Marty Schottenheimer part two.

Great regular season coach, awful post season coach.

[milkman]

Personally, I think that's the $64,000.00 Dollar Question.

It'll be interesting, to say the least, to see what transpires with the Chiefs offense in 2011,

One could argue that the continuity contributed to their turnaround.

[DaneMcCloud]

When you have a team that was 4-12, 2-14, 4-12, and then turns it around and wins the division and goes to the playoffs I believe that head coach should be coach of the year.

Not when you go 2-4 in your division and get blown out by a cumulative score of 61-17 in your final two games, which includes a huge home playoff loss.

[DaneMcCloud]

But I'd still have Haley over Morris. There's no way he should have gotten 2nd. Belichick, McCarthy, Smith, Haley, Morris.

If that's what you think, you clearly don't follow the NFL or the watch any other games than Chiefs games.

IF Haley had won a few playoff games this year, I'd agree. But instead, he went 2-4 in his division, lost his offensive coordinator during the season and was blown out 61-17 once said coordinator resigned.

Add to the fact that the Chiefs didn't beat a team with a winning record at the time they faced them AND were embarrassed by divisional rivals San Diego, Denver & Oakland, and there's no way you can award him coach of the year.

[DaneMcCloud]

One could argue that the continuity contributed to their turnaround.

Good point. But ten rookie starters is absolutely unheard of, let alone winning 10 games with 10 rookie starters and a second year QB.

But if Morris is as good as he appeared in 2010, I doubt he'll finish second in the voting any time soon.

[Rams Fan]

Oh, and Mike Smith has always been, IMO, Marty Schottenheimer part two.



I think it's a bit to early to tell how good of a HC Smith is in the playoffs. He's coached two games in the playoffs, lost both of them(both to the eventual NFC Champion), one of which were on the road. I could see why you would say that, though, after how the Falcons were beaten by the Packers.

[JD10367]

Yawn.

(And I'm a Patriots fan.)

[Rams Fan]

Also will be interesting to see if Mularkey is hired by the Titans or not. If he is hired, Smith will have lost his QB Coach(now the OC for the Vikings) and Mularkey.

[acesn8s]

Only 4 1/2 votes? Am I missing something here?

[dirk digler]

Not when you go 2-4 in your division and get blown out by a cumulative score of 61-17 in your final two games, which includes a huge home playoff loss.

That's a fair point

[chiefzilla1501]

Not when you go 2-4 in your division and get blown out by a cumulative score of 61-17 in your final two games, which includes a huge home playoff loss.

Well, playoff game doesn't count in the voting. That would be especially unfair, because you have no idea if the Bucs would have gotten blown out by a team like Baltimore too.

But again, the Chiefs' 2-4 division record is not that different from the Bucs going 2-4 (2 wins against the worst team in football) and then winning the 3rd game in a meaningless game against a banged up Saints team.

And if you're going to use the Chiefs' schedule as a deterrent to Haley winning, then you can't discount the fact that Tampa did not beat a SINGLE TEAM over .500. At least the Chiefs beat the Chargers and the Jags, regardless of the weather or the QB situation. In fact, when you look at the Bucs win for win, they are a lot less impressive.

I get that he coached a very young team. I understand your argument for picking him over Haley. But we can't criticize the Chiefs for those things above and not call out that the Bucs had the same situation.

[Rams Fan]

But again, the Chiefs' 2-4 division record is not that different from the Bucs going 2-4 (2 wins against the worst team in football) and then winning the 3rd game in a meaningless game against a banged up Saints team.



A meaningless game? I thought the Saints were still playing for the 1st seed at the time the game started.

[notorious]

Yawn.

(And I'm a Patriots fan.)

Spoiled.

[chiefzilla1501]

A meaningless game? I thought the Saints were still playing for the 1st seed at the time the game started.

The Saints were locked into a 5 seed and pulled a lot of their starters in the 4th, including Brees (down by only a TD). They had nothing to play for and given how banged up they were, were probably more cautious than usual.

A win is a win, but the Saints weren't even close to full strength in that game.

[Rams Fan]

The Saints were locked into a 5 seed and pulled a lot of their starters in the 4th, including Brees (down by only a TD). They had nothing to play for and given how banged up they were, were probably more cautious than usual.

A win is a win, but the Saints weren't even close to full strength in that game.

At kickoff, the Panthers and Falcons game was still going on. It might have been meaningless in the latter part of the game, but in the beginning, the Saints had something to play for. If the Falcons had lost and if the Saints had won, the Saints would have had the 1st seed.

[chiefzilla1501]

At kickoff, the Panthers and Falcons game was still going on. It might have been meaningless in the latter part of the game, but in the beginning, the Saints had something to play for. If the Falcons had lost and if the Saints had won, the Saints would have had the 1st seed.

Well, if they did have something to play for, then curious strategy to pull starters in the 4th and your QB before the game was over.

And that's not even bringing up that the Saints were minus Malcolm Jenkins, Colston, Ivory, Pierre Thomas, and Jimmy Graham. But that's a totally different argument.

[DaneMcCloud]

I get that he coached a very young team. I understand your argument for picking him over Haley. But we can't criticize the Chiefs for those things above and not call out that the Bucs had the same situation.

Going 3-3 in the NFC South is far different than going 2-4 in the AFC West.

The Chiefs didn't start 10 rookies.

The Chiefs didn't face five playoff teams, they faced two.

The Bucs didn't have ONE sellout crowd the entire season.

The Bucs were only beaten once by 20 or more by one of their divisional opponents and they later beat that team decisively. They lost divisional games by 6, 25 & 4 points and went 3-3 in their division, not 2-4. The Chiefs lost by 3, 20, 31 and 20 points to divisional rivals.

Finally, the Bucs ranked 10th in Offense and 8th in Defense against superior opponents, while the Chiefs ranked 12th & 14th respectively against inferior opponents.

There's no way to spin it in Haley's favor, no matter how hard you try.

[JD10367]

Spoiled.

No, I just don't think awards like COTY or OPOY or MVP mean a whole lot when your team shits its pants in the first round.

And, for that matter, I don't know why they vote for these awards before the playoffs. Last time I checked, the playoffs count as part of the calendar season. When the regular season ended, the Patriots looked like world-beaters at 14-2 and the Packers limped their way into the playoffs with the sixth seed. If they voted now, McCarthy would get it in a landslide.

[OnTheWarpath15]

No, I just don't think awards like COTY or OPOY or MVP mean a whole lot when your team shits its pants in the first round.

And, for that matter, I don't know why they vote for these awards before the playoffs. Last time I checked, the playoffs count as part of the calendar season. When the regular season ended, the Patriots looked like world-beaters at 14-2 and the Packers limped their way into the playoffs with the sixth seed. If they voted now, McCarthy would get it in a landslide.

Attaboy.

Wish that attitude would rub off on this fanbase.

[JD10367]

Attaboy.

Wish that attitude would rub off on this fanbase.

And I clarify and stress the "shits its pants" aspect. Because of the way the Pats and Chiefs played in the postseason, frankly I don't think Belichick OR Haley deserved it. Yes, one finished with the best record in the league and the other made a dramatic improvement in the W-L column; but both took their home field and basically bent over and let the other team **** them up the ass. They were not slightly outplayed by a better opponent, they didn't lose a close game with dignity after giving 110%, they didn't lose on an unlucky bounce of the ball. They flat-out shit their pants. If your team does that, you obviously didn't coach them properly for the game.

Discounting the playoffs, it was a tight contest IMO between Haley, Belichick, Omar Epps in Pittsburgh, and McCarthy (who managed to take a ridiculously-injured team to 10-6 and a playoff berth). But, again, I don't see why they only count the regular season. If you count the playoffs, McCarthy is the winner.

[charlesjones]

I think coach of the year should be based on regular season and playoffs. Tomlin should've won it in my opinion.

[chiefzilla1501]

Going 3-3 in the NFC South is far different than going 2-4 in the AFC West.

The Chiefs didn't start 10 rookies.

The Chiefs didn't face five playoff teams, they faced two.

The Bucs didn't have ONE sellout crowd the entire season.

The Bucs were only beaten once by 20 or more by one of their divisional opponents and they later beat that team decisively. They lost divisional games by 6, 25 & 4 points and went 3-3 in their division, not 2-4. The Chiefs lost by 3, 20, 31 and 20 points to divisional rivals.

Finally, the Bucs ranked 10th in Offense and 8th in Defense against superior opponents, while the Chiefs ranked 12th & 14th respectively against inferior opponents.

There's no way to spin it in Haley's favor, no matter how hard you try.

Points are fine about the Offense/Defense rankings and number of rookies.

But this division record and schedule are not valid arguments. I get that they lost to better competition, but should we really give credit because you lost admirably? They did not beat a single team .500 or above. And their division record... 2 of those wins were against the Panthers, the worst team in the NFL. The third win, as I mentioned already, was against a super banged up team that mailed it in in the 4th by sitting their starters.

The Chiefs didn't beat anybody meaningful in a game that mattered. Neither did the Bucs.

[chiefzilla1501]

And I clarify and stress the "shits its pants" aspect. Because of the way the Pats and Chiefs played in the postseason, frankly I don't think Belichick OR Haley deserved it. Yes, one finished with the best record in the league and the other made a dramatic improvement in the W-L column; but both took their home field and basically bent over and let the other team **** them up the ass. They were not slightly outplayed by a better opponent, they didn't lose a close game with dignity after giving 110%, they didn't lose on an unlucky bounce of the ball. They flat-out shit their pants. If your team does that, you obviously didn't coach them properly for the game.

Discounting the playoffs, it was a tight contest IMO between Haley, Belichick, Omar Epps in Pittsburgh, and McCarthy (who managed to take a ridiculously-injured team to 10-6 and a playoff berth). But, again, I don't see why they only count the regular season. If you count the playoffs, McCarthy is the winner.

I think the rationale is that if you did it that way, is there any doubt that 9 times out of 10 the COTY award would go to the Super Bowl winner or runner-up?

[LiveSteam]

Yawn.

(And I'm a Patriots fan.)

THIS

[DaneMcCloud]

They did not beat a single team .500 or above.

Yeah, the Saints were 0-16. I forgot.

:rolleyes:

Give it up, Dude. It's a losing argument.

[alpha_omega]

The expected outcome.

[chiefzilla1501]

Yeah, the Saints were 0-16. I forgot.

:rolleyes:

Give it up, Dude. It's a losing argument.

I pretty clearly brought up that game.

If people are going to blame weather for the Chargers' win against the Chiefs or for the Chiefs beating the Jags with a backup QB, then it's certainly worth calling out that the Saints were missing Ivory/Pierre Thomas, Colston, Malcolm Jenkins, and Jimmy Graham AND sat their starters in the 4th, not to mention pulled Drew Brees out of the game when they were only down by a TD in the 4th.

[Rams Fan]

I think coach of the year should be based on regular season and playoffs. Tomlin should've won it in my opinion.

If it was playoffs, it would be hard to not give it to McCarthy.

[Ras-al-Ghul]

The force is strong with the Hoodie!

[DaneMcCloud]

I pretty clearly brought up that game.


Uh no, you didn't, hence the quote.

Furthermore, the AP disagrees with your lame-ass take, rendering it a moot point.

[Chiefaholic]

looks like a rat, smells like a rat.......:hmmm:

What does Mike Shannahan have to do with this? :D

[WebGem]

Can't argue with the top choice. But the fact that Raheem Morris came in 2nd is an absolute load of shit.

Morris had a pretty damn good season..

[Rams Fan]

Morris had a pretty damn good season..

This. Even if he didn't make the playoffs, going 10-6 in the NFC South is nothing to laugh at.

[Rams Fan]

Also, the Bucs had the largest improvement in wins this season(7). And they had plenty of close games(losing to the Lions at home, though, is what likely cost them a Wild Card).

[chiefzilla1501]

Morris had a pretty damn good season..

Which is why I had him as the #5 guy.

[DaneMcCloud]

Which is why I had him as the #5 guy.

Which also makes you look like a homerific retard.

[Rams Fan]

Which is why I had him as the #5 guy.

He had the largest win improvement in the NFL in 2010(7 games). With a bunch of rookies, to boot.

[DaneMcCloud]

He had the largest win improvement in the NFL in 2010(7 games). With a bunch of rookies, to boot.

That doesn't matter. Chiefs, baby! /Chiefzilla

[Rams Fan]

That doesn't matter. Chiefs, baby! /Chiefzilla

I sort of see Chiefzilla's point, though. The Bucs beat one team over .500 all season long(the Saints), won a game because of a botched XP(at the 'Skins) and gave the Lions their first win on the road since 2007. If there is a 2011, though, the Bucs will have an easy schedule.

[chiefzilla1501]

This. Even if he didn't make the playoffs, going 10-6 in the NFC South is nothing to laugh at.

They play in a good division. But again, they didn't beat anybody. If you go by Strength of Win, the teams they beat are actually less impressive than the teams the Chiefs beat. The Panthers twice. The NFC West. The Bengals, Skins, and Browns?

Again, the only legit team they beat was the Saints. And like I said, it was game 16 and the Saints pulled their starters, and were minus their top 2 RBs, their #1 WR, their top 2 Tight Ends, and their starting Safety.

I think Morris is one hell of a coach. But let's not pretend that those 10 wins came off of a tough schedule.

[Rams Fan]

Freeman reminds a lot like Roethlisberger, except without the rings.

[DaneMcCloud]

I sort of see Chiefzilla's point, though. The Bucs beat one team over .500 all season long(the Saints), won a game because of a botched XP(at the 'Skins) and gave the Lions their first win on the road since 2007. If there is a 2011, though, the Bucs will have an easy schedule.

His point is ridiculous.

Morris took a 3-13 team with a rookie QB, added ten rookies and won 10 games the following season. They lost by narrow margins to teams within their division and went 3-3 in one of the tougher divisions in the NFL.

It's ludicrous to state that Raheem Morris isn't deserving of being COTY runner-up.

IMO, he should be COTY, but he's not.

[chiefzilla1501]

That doesn't matter. Chiefs, baby! /Chiefzilla

You have a million and a half Chiefs homers calling Todd Haley Coach of the Year.

I'm calling him #4 coach in the NFL.

That's homerism... how?

[DaneMcCloud]

I think Morris is one hell of a coach. But let's not pretend that those 10 wins came off of a tough schedule.

So, any coach could have added 10 rookies, coached up a second year QB and won 10 games in the NFC South?

You're fucking smoking crack again. Lay off the pipe.

[DaneMcCloud]

You have a million and a half Chiefs homers calling Todd Haley Coach of the Year.

I'm calling him #4 coach in the NFL.

That's homerism... how?

They're fucking idiots.

I thought you were smarter than that.

[Rams Fan]

They play in a good division. But again, they didn't beat anybody. If you go by Strength of Win, the teams they beat are actually less impressive than the teams the Chiefs beat. The Panthers twice. The NFC West. The Bengals, Skins, and Browns?

Again, the only legit team they beat was the Saints. And like I said, it was game 16 and the Saints pulled their starters, and were minus their top 2 RBs, their #1 WR, their top 2 Tight Ends, and their starting Safety.

I think Morris is one hell of a coach. But let's not pretend that those 10 wins came off of a tough schedule.

So you don't think the 'Skins, Bengals or Browns were tough opponents? The Browns beat the Saints in NOLA, the Bengals beat the Chargers in Cincy and the 'Skins beat the Packers in DC. Did you see any of the Bucs wins vs the NFC West? They won in AZ because of an interception, absolutely destroyed the Seahawks and came back to beat the Rams in the last 10 seconds of the game.

[Rams Fan]

His point is ridiculous.

Morris took a 3-13 team with a rookie QB, added ten rookies and won 10 games the following season. They lost by narrow margins to teams within their division and went 3-3 in one of the tougher divisions in the NFL.

It's ludicrous to state that Raheem Morris isn't deserving of being COTY runner-up.

IMO, he should be COTY, but he's not.

I thought either him or Domink deserved an award. It shocked me how Dominik didn't get EOTY, to be honest. Pioli was deserving, but not many drafts(if any) have produced a 1,000 yard WR and RB. And they didn't even draft the RB.

[Rams Fan]

And there are worthy candidates for COTY. I find it laughable that Reid got a vote. Vick bailed his ass out. I wouldn't have had a problem if Haley, Smith, McCarthy or Spagnuolo would have won it. I know some may disagree about Spagnuolo, but the Rams also had a 6 win improvement.

[chiefzilla1501]

So, any coach could have added 10 rookies, coached up a second year QB and won 10 games in the NFC South?

You're ****ing smoking crack again. Lay off the pipe.

Like I said, I think Morris did a hell of a job as a coach. And a great job with the rookies and Freeman.

But let's forget the idea that they're in the NFC South. Could a lot of coaches win 10 games with this:
Carolina
Carolina
Cleveland (pre Colt McCoy)
Cincinnati
Washington
Detroit
Rams
Cardinals
Seahawks
49ers
Not to mention a Saints team missing 5 key offensive starters and their starting Safety (who got embarrassed against Seattle?). That's a very cooshy 10-11 games.

I kept Haley out of top 3 contention for the same reason I kept Morris out. I can understand your point about picking Morris over Haley, but no way do I put him in the top 3. Those two coaches engineered great turnarounds, but they got a LOT of help from their cooshy schedule. I think the COTY goes to a coach who actually won tough games in key spots.

[Tribal Warfare]

Freeman reminds a lot like Roethlisberger, except without the rings.

Freeman reminds me of a stronger version of Carson Palmer when Carson wasn't fucking up.

[DaneMcCloud]

I think the COTY goes to a coach who actually won tough games in key spots.

Then Mike McCarthy should have won the award, hands down with no competition.

[chiefzilla1501]

So you don't think the 'Skins, Bengals or Browns were tough opponents? The Browns beat the Saints in NOLA, the Bengals beat the Chargers in Cincy and the 'Skins beat the Packers in DC. Did you see any of the Bucs wins vs the NFC West? They won in AZ because of an interception, absolutely destroyed the Seahawks and came back to beat the Rams in the last 10 seconds of the game.

Those three teams are not layups, but they had losing records for a reason. The Browns on opening day with Delhomme were nowhere near the Browns that got hot under Colt McCoy. The Bengals, minus the TOchocinco distraction were a decent team that did everything in their power all season long to find ways to lose games. The Redskins... average team with a lousy defense. And the NFC West? They should have destroyed all three of those teams, if they were legit contenders.

There's something to be said for beating the teams you're supposed to beat. But for my money, I saw the Pats, the Pack, and the Falcons beat a lot of tough teams as well. That's the differentiator for me.

[Rams Fan]

Those three teams are not layups, but they had losing records for a reason. The Browns on opening day with Delhomme were nowhere near the Browns that got hot under Colt McCoy. The Bengals, minus the TOchocinco distraction were a decent team that did everything in their power all season long to find ways to lose games. The Redskins... average team with a lousy defense. And the NFC West? They should have destroyed all three of those teams, if they were legit contenders.

There's something to be said for beating the teams you're supposed to beat. But for my money, I saw the Pats, the Pack, and the Falcons beat a lot of tough teams as well. That's the differentiator for me.

Just because you see something doesn't mean you're seeing the whole story. Who did the Falcons beat? I only see two good teams they beat on the road(Bucs, Saints). Lets not forget they lost to the Saints at home. And the final score doesn't tell the whole story. For example: The game against the Rams was close throughout the whole game except when Bradford threw a pick at the Falcons 2. That's when it got out of hand.

[chiefzilla1501]

Then Mike McCarthy should have won the award, hands down with no competition.

I think Belichick was a good choice because the AFC East's schedule was just plain brutal this year. But McCarthy would have been an excellent choice as well. You know, now looking, I think MIke Smith's season may have been overrated as well based on teams he beat, just as I thought New Orleans was hugely overrated. The NFC South quietly had a very cooshy schedule.

I can understand a Haley/Morris swap. But I think Belichick and McCarthy as the top 2, whichever order, is uncompromisable by a mile.

[DaneMcCloud]

the Falcons beat a lot of tough teams as well. That's the differentiator for me.

This is laughable.

The Falcons lost to Philly, lost to New Orleans and lost to Pittsburgh. Those were by far, their toughest foes.

They beat Baltimore at home by 6 and Green Bay by 3 (home field advantage). They were then obliterated by Green Bay in the playoffs.

Lay off the pipe.

[chiefzilla1501]

Just because you see something doesn't mean you're seeing the whole story. Who did the Falcons beat? I only see two good teams they beat on the road(Bucs, Saints). Lets not forget they lost to the Saints at home. And the final score doesn't tell the whole story. For example: The game against the Rams was close throughout the whole game except when Bradford threw a pick at the Falcons 2. That's when it got out of hand.

They did beat Tampa twice, Green Bay, New Orleans, and Baltimore. Those are 5 very legit wins.

[Rams Fan]

I think Belichick was a good choice because the AFC East's schedule was just plain brutal this year. But McCarthy would have been an excellent choice as well. You know, now looking, I think MIke Smith's season may have been overrated as well based on teams he beat, just as I thought New Orleans was hugely overrated. The NFC South quietly had a very cooshy schedule.

I can understand a Haley/Morris swap. But I think Belichick and McCarthy as the top 2, whichever order, is uncompromisable by a mile.

Hmmm, so Belichick gets the nod because of playing in the AFC East? The Jets were the only good team outside of the Pats in the AFC East. The Bills were better than their record was, but were not a good team and the Dolphins were atrocious at home.

[chiefzilla1501]

This is laughable.

The Falcons lost to Philly, lost to New Orleans and lost to Pittsburgh. Those were by far, their toughest foes.

They beat Baltimore at home by 6 and Green Bay by 3 (home field advantage). They were then obliterated by Green Bay in the playoffs.

Lay off the pipe.

The playoffs aren't considered in COTY voting.

Based on regular season, Atlanta beat some very good teams to get to the playoffs.

He was one of the worst playoff coaches this year. But as a regular season coach, one hell of a season.

[chiefzilla1501]

Hmmm, so Belichick gets the nod because of playing in the AFC East? The Jets were the only good team outside of the Pats in the AFC East. The Bills were better than their record was, but were not a good team and the Dolphins were atrocious at home.

It's not just about who's in your division. It's who your off-divisions are too.

The AFC East was a decent division with two stellar teams.

But they also faced the AFC North and NFC Central. Two very good divisions.

Steelers, Ravens, Bears, Packers, Jets, Jets (again), and then SD and Indy as your off games? That's 8 games against very good playoff-level teams.

[DaneMcCloud]

Based on regular season, Atlanta beat some very good teams to get to the playoffs.


Yeah, they beat Green Bay at home by 3 and Baltimore at home by 6.

AT HOME.

The rest of their record looks eerily similar to Tampa Bay's, who you've discounted earlier in this thread.

[Rams Fan]

I think Tomlin deserves some COTY votes, going 3-1 the first 4 games of the season with guys like Dixon and Batch probably wasn't easy.

[chiefzilla1501]

Yeah, they beat Green Bay at home by 3 and Baltimore at home by 6.

AT HOME.

The rest of their record looks eerily similar to Tampa Bay's, who you've discounted earlier in this thread.

The schedule was eerily similar.

But they also beat 5 legit teams to Tampa's 1 (Tampa twice, Green Bay, Baltimore, New Orleans).

And they won 13 games compared to Tampa's 10.

And they didn't lose to any bad teams. The three teams they lost to were playoff contenders.

In terms of regular season, it's hard to get a whole lot better than that.

[DaneMcCloud]

The schedule was eerily similar.

But they also beat 5 legit teams to Tampa's 1 (Tampa twice, Green Bay, Baltimore, New Orleans).

And they won 13 games compared to Tampa's 10.

And they didn't lose to any bad teams. The three teams they lost to were playoff contenders.

In terms of regular season, it's hard to get a whole lot better than that.

Chiefs. 1995. 1997.

Smith is Marty, jr.

Furthermore, if there's free agency this offseason, they're likely to take a step back in 2011 because they have some fairly key guys that will most likely leave. Add to the rise of Tampa and the likely return of the Saints, and the Falcons are looking at another 2009-like season.

They're pretenders.

[Rams Fan]

Furthermore, if there's free agency this offseason, they're likely to take a step back in 2011 because they have some fairly key guys that will most likely leave.

It's pretty likely they'll take a step back because of this odd fact, no team that has won the NFC South has won it two years consecutively.

[chiefzilla1501]

Chiefs. 1995. 1997.

Smith is Marty, jr.

Furthermore, if there's free agency this offseason, they're likely to take a step back in 2011 because they have some fairly key guys that will most likely leave. Add to the rise of Tampa and the likely return of the Saints, and the Falcons are looking at another 2009-like season.

They're pretenders.

Too soon to say that. But I would reluctantly say that I'd rather have Morris than Mike Smith as my coach. But who I'd rather have coach my team is a completely different conversation than who deserves COTY honors. Hell, I'm happy with Haley, but with the Coordinator dispute, I'd even wonder if the Chiefs would be better off with Morris too.

[Rams Fan]

Too soon to say that. But I would reluctantly say that I'd rather have Morris than Mike Smith as my coach. But who I'd rather have coach my team is a completely different conversation than who deserves COTY honors. Hell, I'm happy with Haley, but with the Coordinator dispute, I'd even wonder if the Chiefs would be better off with Morris too.

Morris shit canned both of his coordinators before the season even ended. People in Tampa wanted him to be fired.

[chiefzilla1501]

Morris shit canned both of his coordinators before the season even ended. People in Tampa wanted him to be fired.

Good point.

[DaneMcCloud]

Good point.

Who cares what the fans think, especially after one season?

[Rams Fan]

Who cares what the fans think, especially after one season?

True. And I'm the first one to admit I was wrong about Morris, I thought he was in over his head.

[keg in kc]

We Chiefs fans spend a lot of time slamming the Chiefs, don't we.

[CrazyPhuD]

Does the AP have a schedule of the year award? Because we own that one!

[DaneMcCloud]

We Chiefs fans spend a lot of time slamming the Chiefs, don't we.

You who callin' we, Kimosabe?

[Amnorix]

No, I just don't think awards like COTY or OPOY or MVP mean a whole lot when your team shits its pants in the first round.

And, for that matter, I don't know why they vote for these awards before the playoffs. Last time I checked, the playoffs count as part of the calendar season. When the regular season ended, the Patriots looked like world-beaters at 14-2 and the Packers limped their way into the playoffs with the sixth seed. If they voted now, McCarthy would get it in a landslide.

I agree with all this, but I think the reasoning is that whoever wins the SB would always get Coach of the Year, and that the QB/RB of the winning team would have a substantial advantage in winning the MVP award, which is reasoning that I understand.

But the hollowness of winning these awards when your team is bounced far too easily out of the playoffs is certainly real.

[JD10367]

I agree with all this, but I think the reasoning is that whoever wins the SB would always get Coach of the Year, and that the QB/RB of the winning team would have a substantial advantage in winning the MVP award, which is reasoning that I understand.

But the hollowness of winning these awards when your team is bounced far too easily out of the playoffs is certainly real.

Which makes the point. It's Coach Of The Year. Not Coach Of The Regular Season.

(And, actually, I don't think the SB-winning coach would always get it. Let's say, for example, the Packers lose to the Steelers in a close game. On the one hand you have a Pittsburgh coach who, yes, did a fine job holding the fort for four games while his starting QB was out, but who also had a pretty talented team and an easy road to the SB (two home games). On the other hand you have a Green bay coach who had to deal with a ridiculous number of injuries and claw his way into the playoffs with the six seed and then beat three strong teams on the road to get to the SB. Yes, that set of circumstances is rare, but still. And if the SB-winning coach gets it most of the time... so what? His team won the Super Bowl. Wouldn't he more than likely deserve it?)

When you think about it, why do they even give out awards like COTY or OPOTY or whatever? They're kind of pointless. Even the MVP award is sort of hollow. I think the only award with any merit is ROTY.

[Gracie Dean]

what a joke.

[Rams Fan]

what a joke.

Explain? Belichick deserved to finish somewhere in the Top 3, but I could see a case for Morris.

[Gracie Dean]

Explain? Belichick deserved to finish somewhere in the Top 3, but I could see a case for Morris.

It should have been Haley. He took a team expected to be in the bottom and one who is still rebuilding and led them to the playoffs.

BB has a team that is pretty solid has been for some time and has been tainted by cheating and he wins?

[DJ's left nut]

Lots of very deserving candidates.

Belichick, Morris, Smith, McCarthy and Haley all deserved significant consideration and any one of them could've won it in a given year.

I'd have given it to Morris, then probably Belichick, Smith, Haley and McCarthy. Remember - the COY is based on the regular season performance only and for as stubborn as the Packers were (and as elite as they've been in the playoffs), they were on the ropes for about 4 weeks there. McCarthy did a good job to get them through it, but he also dicked up a few early games that put them in that spot.

[ChiefsCountry]

Lots of very deserving candidates.

Belichick, Morris, Smith, McCarthy and Haley all deserved significant consideration and any one of them could've won it in a given year.

I'd have given it to Morris, then probably Belichick, Smith, Haley and McCarthy. Remember - the COY is based on the regular season performance only and for as stubborn as the Packers were (and as elite as they've been in the playoffs), they were on the ropes for about 4 weeks there. McCarthy did a good job to get them through it, but he also dicked up a few early games that put them in that spot.

Thats mainly bc Rodgers was hit in the head and was basically Roy III.

[JD10367]

It should have been Haley. He took a team expected to be in the bottom and one who is still rebuilding and led them to the playoffs.

BB has a team that is pretty solid has been for some time and has been tainted by cheating and he wins?

The "pretty solid (and) has been for some time" shows you know nothing about the Patriots team.

The "tainted by cheating" shows you're a moron.

[Rams Fan]

JD, how much credit does O'Brien deserve for how the offense performed?

[JD10367]

JD, how much credit does O'Brien deserve for how the offense performed?

Honestly, I don't know. He was ripped mercilessly by the fans until after Moss left. Suddenly things changed. It's clear that O'Brien did change his style somewhat, but it's unclear as to how much effect that had vs. Brady simply no longer looking for Moss (not to mention the addition of Danny Woodhead, and the continued progression of Benjarvus Green-Ellis, and--last but not least--the return of Logan Mankins). If I had to guess, I would say that O'Brien, like McDaniels, gets a little too much credit.

[Rams Fan]

Honestly, I don't know. He was ripped mercilessly by the fans until after Moss left. Suddenly things changed. It's clear that O'Brien did change his style somewhat, but it's unclear as to how much effect that had vs. Brady simply no longer looking for Moss (not to mention the addition of Danny Woodhead, and the continued progression of Benjarvus Green-Ellis, and--last but not least--the return of Logan Mankins). If I had to guess, I would say that O'Brien, like McDaniels, gets a little too much credit.

So, you think it's more of a scheme thing? And did Belichick call the plays on Defense this year?

[JD10367]

So, you think it's more of a scheme thing? And did Belichick call the plays on Defense this year?

Belichick had no coordinators but IIRC Matt Patricia was calling in the plays. I'm sure he took input from everyone but ultimately I think the D was his this year.

[Rams Fan]

Belichick had no coordinators but IIRC Matt Patricia was calling in the plays. I'm sure he took input from everyone but ultimately I think the D was his this year.

Was it Pees in '09? Or did Belichick have a lot of input?

[JD10367]

Was it Pees in '09? Or did Belichick have a lot of input?

It was mainly Pees when he was here. He didn't distinguish himself. Honestly, the only decent DC they had was Romeo; before him, I'd have to dig all the way back to Al Groh, maybe.

[Rams Fan]

It was mainly Pees when he was here. He didn't distinguish himself. Honestly, the only decent DC they had was Romeo; before him, I'd have to dig all the way back to Al Groh, maybe.

I've looked at Belichick's wiki once or twice and it astounds me how many HCs and GMs have been assistants/scouts under Belichick. In Cleveland, only one assistant(I think), Saban, went on to become a HC. It's incredible that so many HCs and GMs have studied under Belichick. He may not be a likable figure(still dislike him from the SB), but I respect him.

[JD10367]

I've looked at Belichick's wiki once or twice and it astounds me how many HCs and GMs have been assistants/scouts under Belichick. In Cleveland, only one assistant(I think), Saban, went on to become a HC. It's incredible that so many HCs and GMs have studied under Belichick. He may not be a likable figure(still dislike him from the SB), but I respect him.

If you're referring to SB36 in '01, if there's a coach to dislike it's Martz. His ego basically killed that game for the Rams. He stubbornly refused to give up on his game plan and adapt to what the Pats were doing, until it was too late.

[Amnorix]

Belichick had no coordinators but IIRC Matt Patricia was calling in the plays. I'm sure he took input from everyone but ultimately I think the D was his this year.

Right on all counts. Patricia called in the plays, but BB was all over the defense from the start this year, given how young the players were.

[Amnorix]

I think Belichick was a good choice because the AFC East's schedule was just plain brutal this year. But McCarthy would have been an excellent choice as well. You know, now looking, I think MIke Smith's season may have been overrated as well based on teams he beat, just as I thought New Orleans was hugely overrated. The NFC South quietly had a very cooshy schedule.

I made that point repeatedly a few weeks ago when the coach of the year topic was hot. Smith went from 9-7 to 13-3 or whatever, but he had the benefit of the NFC West this year, so that's hardly like improving at all.

I had Haley, McCarthy, Morris and Belichick (not necessarily in that order) all way ahead of Smith. I do like nad respect him, and the Falcons, but I didn't see how he was a great choice for coach of the year with that schedule and that modest "improvement" in wins.

[okcchief]

McCarthy should have won IMO. All of the injuries he had to work around plus three straight playoff wins on the road. His team played the best with their backs against the wall. Yeah, he had more talent than the others but he worked through the adversity and had his team reach their potential.

As much as I hate to say it Haley has a lot to learn as a head coach. He seems to be very good as far as developing players but the play calling and decision making was shit all year. We won in spite of it IMO.

[Amnorix]

Hmmm, so Belichick gets the nod because of playing in the AFC East? The Jets were the only good team outside of the Pats in the AFC East. The Bills were better than their record was, but were not a good team and the Dolphins were atrocious at home.

Patriots beat:

Steelers
Colts
Jets
Packers
Bears
Ravens


So that's, umm, both Super Bowl participants this year, and 4 out of 4 of the Championship weekend participants, and well, yeah. What the hell else could you want?

[Amnorix]

The schedule was eerily similar.



I haven't followed the exchange you guys are having too closely on this, but if you're comparing the Falcons and Bucs schedule, then there's nothing eerie about it -- EVERY team has 14 out of the 16 opponents in common EVERY year under the current scheduling system.

[Hootie]

a little late to this thread...but here are Tampa Bay's wins this year:

Browns
Panthers
Bengals
Rams
Cardinals
Panthers
49ers
Redskins
Seahawks
Saints

beat the Saints when the Saints weren't playing for anything in week 17...

so Dane...color me unimpressed.

They play in the same division as the overrated Saints and Falcons (NFC West just like us) and had 3 division wins (Panthers, Panthers, Saints in week 17)

they beat ONE team (the Saints) with a winning record...and the Saints went on to lose to Seattle one week after the Bucs beat the Saints...

If people want to rag on Cassel for beating up on poor teams all year...guess you can say the same (to a larger extent even) about Josh Freeman...

and the AFC West was as tough of a division as the NFC South (at least arguably)...

[Amnorix]

McCarthy should have won IMO. All of the injuries he had to work around plus three straight playoff wins on the road. His team played the best with their backs against the wall. Yeah, he had more talent than the others but he worked through the adversity and had his team reach their potential..

Voting for coach of the year is after the regular season, and BEFORE the playoff games start.

[JD10367]

http://cdn.bleacherreport.com/images_root/image_pictures/0085/8564/herm_crop_340x234.jpg

:D

(That was just to remind y'all about the bright side. You're arguing that the Chiefs coach was, if not deserving of COTY, definitely in the top tier. Consider how far you've come...)

[Hootie]

and this is a regular season award...

the Packers being a #6 seed doesn't warrant any coach of the year expectations...the Packers were supposed to be a playoff team...

LOVIE SMITH should have won coach of the year...I think what the Bears did this year was more impressive than any team in the NFL...no one predicted the Bears to win the division and come a game away from the Super Bowl.

[Hootie]

Tampa Bay is my early pick to disappoint next year...

although my track record isn't too great on this after this year...since I predicted the Jets and Ravens would be greatly overrated and would both underachieve...neither which happened.

[Amnorix]

Which makes the point. It's Coach Of The Year. Not Coach Of The Regular Season.

(And, actually, I don't think the SB-winning coach would always get it. Let's say, for example, the Packers lose to the Steelers in a close game. On the one hand you have a Pittsburgh coach who, yes, did a fine job holding the fort for four games while his starting QB was out, but who also had a pretty talented team and an easy road to the SB (two home games). On the other hand you have a Green bay coach who had to deal with a ridiculous number of injuries and claw his way into the playoffs with the six seed and then beat three strong teams on the road to get to the SB. Yes, that set of circumstances is rare, but still. And if the SB-winning coach gets it most of the time... so what? His team won the Super Bowl. Wouldn't he more than likely deserve it?).

It wouldn't track 1:1, but you can sure as hell bet that it would track fairly closely.

But I don't care either way -- the MVP, coach of the year, etc. -- they're all regular season awards.

Just like teh Patriots currently hold an all-time NFL record most wins at home in a row streak -- 26 or whatever and counting....

....which, with two consecutive first round at-home playoff losses makes it the hollowest, suckiest record ever held by an NFL team....ever....

So whatever.

[JD10367]

It wouldn't track 1:1, but you can sure as hell bet that it would track fairly closely.

But I don't care either way -- the MVP, coach of the year, etc. -- they're all regular season awards.

Just like teh Patriots currently hold an all-time NFL record most wins at home in a row streak -- 26 or whatever and counting....

....which, with two consecutive first round at-home playoff losses makes it the hollowest, suckiest record ever held by an NFL team....ever....

So whatever.

Yes, pretty much the reason I've said "meh" to both this COTY thread and the OPOY thread for Brady. I just don't measure sports success with the regular season. It's not about winning regular-season awards, or finishing with the best record. The Patriots have performed piss-poorly now for half a decade: losing in '06 by giving up the biggest postseason lead ever; losing in '07 after going 18-0 by choking in the SB in historic fashion; losing in '09 to the Ravens in Gillette, playing horribly; losing in '10 to the Jets in Gillette (after finishing a league-best 14-2), playing horribly.

Some may say I'm a spoiled fan. I don't give a shit. It's not about playing well when it doesn't count. It's about playing well when it does. That's what they did in '01, '03, and '04, and haven't done since. So **** these stupid regular-season awards, IMO.

[GloryDayz]

What did they give Charles Manson? If they like one, they have to love the other!

[Hootie]

I will say...

SpyGate seems worse and worse every time the Pats choke in the playoffs...

are all of those rings tarnished or what??

can't win the big game without cheating?

Tom Terrific?? Or Tom Cheater???