Which New England/Boston Coach Leaves First?

[hpantazo]

wow, some Pats fans have gotten pretty spoiled with past success and forgot what a legendary coach they have. I have to go with Doc leaving first, mainly because each of these guys will leave on their own terms and Doc will not hang around for rebuilding, there is nothing for him to prove. As a bonus, I predict Thidedue (sp) will take over for him.

[PierceMVP08]

I am a very casual football fan, but do like the pats when I do watch it.  For those of you saying bellichick could be fires, my question is who could replace him?  What coach could come in here and demand the respect from his players like Bellichick can.  I'm just wondering how you improve on the best coach in the game

[Eja117]

I am a very casual football fan, but do like the pats when I do watch it.  For those of you saying bellichick could be fires, my question is who could replace him?  What coach could come in here and demand the respect from his players like Bellichick can.  I'm just wondering how you improve on the best coach in the game

You can't. That's why you don't fire him.  Maayyybbee Cowher. I guess that's about it. Dunghy? The Saints head coach?

[Fafnir]

One scenario that is fairly common is a team finishes last in their division, gets a cream puff schedule, bounces back and has a huge year. What happens the next year? They now have one of the hardest schedules in the league and they aren't nearly as good. Happens all the time.

That just isn't true, where you finish in your division only effects two of your opponents. The other 14 are fixed!

Now you can argue that being a high profile team leads to a tougher schedule to cram in more national games, but I'd have to see evidence of that as well.

So you don't think that playing Oakland and Cleveland rather than Pittsburgh and San Diego can be the difference in a tough schedule and a cream puff schedule?

You don't think that if you're in the NFC that the difference between having to play Detroit and Tampa Bay rather than New Orleans and Minnesota doesn't change your schedule from being tough to easy?

I think that makes a huge difference when 12.5% of you schedule just went from almost impossible to win game to almost impossible to lose games. It could be the difference between a mediocre 9-7 missing the playoffs year and and 11-5 first round bye playoff year.

I think 12.5% of your schedule is a very small portion and given turn over in the NFL isn't all that relevant.

Look at the Bengals, Atlanta's season last year, the Titans stunning early swoon, etc.

Nick go back and look at the SB loser's. How many of them would have turned their season's around with two "easier' games?

[nickagneta]

One scenario that is fairly common is a team finishes last in their division, gets a cream puff schedule, bounces back and has a huge year. What happens the next year? They now have one of the hardest schedules in the league and they aren't nearly as good. Happens all the time.

That just isn't true, where you finish in your division only effects two of your opponents. The other 14 are fixed!

Now you can argue that being a high profile team leads to a tougher schedule to cram in more national games, but I'd have to see evidence of that as well.

So you don't think that playing Oakland and Cleveland rather than Pittsburgh and San Diego can be the difference in a tough schedule and a cream puff schedule?

You don't think that if you're in the NFC that the difference between having to play Detroit and Tampa Bay rather than New Orleans and Minnesota doesn't change your schedule from being tough to easy?

I think that makes a huge difference when 12.5% of you schedule just went from almost impossible to win game to almost impossible to lose games. It could be the difference between a mediocre 9-7 missing the playoffs year and and 11-5 first round bye playoff year.

I think 12.5% of your schedule is a very small portion and given turn over in the NFL isn't all that relevant.

Look at the Bengals, Atlanta's season last year, the Titans stunning early swoon, etc.

Nick go back and look at the SB loser's. How many of them would have turned their season's around with two "easier' games?

In a 16 game season 2 easy games versus two difficult games is all tha difference in the world.

If the Red Sox could trade in every game they play against the Yankees to instead play 38 games against Baltimore would that make their schedule significantly easier?

If the Celtics could trade in every game they have to play versus Cleveland, Orlando and the Lakers to play New Jersey 14 times, do you think that would make their schedule significantly easier.

Just because those two games wouldn't make a difference for those Superbowl teams that had bad records the next year, doesn't mean that 2 easy games versus two really tough games doesn't make the difference in a schedule being easy or hard.

Two games in a 16 game season can mean everything from making the playoffs to having home field in the playoffs. The same way 10 games can make that difference in the NBA or NHL and 20 games can make that difference in MLB.