BB absolutely STUNK in Cleveland.....ya ya ya
everyone does....but I give the edge to Walsh (& so does coach Siefert) 

Joe Gibbs 62.1%.....3 superbowls

With three different QBs.  Can you name them?
Exactly.  That's why he was a great coach.  


 can't really argue with any of the lists. 

...and Bill Belichick was the head coach of a lame-duck team that was on their way out of town

Wasn't Belichick also coach of the Jets for a day? 

Pablo, that's a really good point.  I put Sid Gillman on there, as he was the forerunner of a lot of things Coryell improved on later.  But I definitely gave a shout out to Coryell for the same reasons.  The flex defense the power sweep and a lot of other innovations from the 60's/70's aren't around anymore, but his innovations in the passing game are still here - and for good reason.  Ditto pass-blocking.  Prior to Gillman/Coryell (and Jim Hanifan as OL coach) linemen just threw a shoulder and hoped for the best.  

So much of what future coaches did ... even several of the other ones on this list - depend on Gillman and Coryell's innovations.   

1.Don Shula has the most win as a head coach

2. George Halas

3. Paul Brown

4.Vince Lombardi

5. Bill Walsh

6. Chuck Noll

7. Joe Gibbs

8. Tom Landry

9. Bill Belichick

10. Bill Parcells

Don Shula -  he averaged almost 10 wins a year for his entire career.  That's unheard of and will never be duplicated.  He's got to be #1

because of lack of longevity. He only coached the 'Boys for 5 years?

Does this somehow diminish what he accomplished during that short time?  The guy won an NCAA title, 2 Super Bowls and set the groundwork for another.  Literally all Barry Switzer had to do was get out of his own way for Dallas to win another one.  The amount of talent Jimmy Johnson put on that team is just mind-boggling.    

On top of that, if I'm going to hold BB's record in Cleveland against Bill, I have to hold Jimmy's record in Miami against him just to be fair.

If that's the case, you should hold the very mediocre and/or bad seasons by Chuck Noll (basically everything not in the 70's), Tom Landry and Bill Walsh (both with the 49ers and Stanford) against them.  Also, Paul Brown's time with the Bengals was pretty bad.   

And again, how does this take away from the fact that they've won multiple Super Bowls?  Do you have to give back a Super Bowl for every sub .500 season you have?  Are you not allowed to win one after a certain number of losing seasons?  

RE Belichick:  I hate the Patriots as much as anybody, but he's re-tooled the Patriots 3 times and gotten to a Super Bowl with each different variation of the team.  Most coaches just make their run and play out the string (of seasons) until they're fired/replaced.  That's deserving of a place among the greats, IMHO.  

It was still a fumble.        

I for one could see air cor over a guy like BP because he truly changed the game.

But can't hardly say with a straight face a guy who only had two rings is more deserving than a guy with three can you?  ...   But that doesn't mean I don't reconize what they accomplished or didn't per say.

Never said Parcells was a better coach than Belichick.  But by continually saying "Parcells never won anything without BB," you certainly make it sound like you're not recognizing Parcells accomplishments. Sounds like you're laying it all at someone else's feet.

BB should be #3 imo. Goes
1. Vince Lombardi(damn trophy is named after him for god's sake)
2. Bill Walsh
3. Bill BelichickWalsh and Belichick close.

BB is not in my top ten, period. If you don't like that, that's your problem. First, he sucked in Cleveland. I know Pats fans want to throw that out the window and just pretend that only his record in NE counts but that's not how it works. You have to examine his WHOLE record as a HC, not just the part in NE. In Cleveland he had a losing record and made the playoffs just one time out of 4 seasons.

John Madden won 75% of his games and he did it against guys like Noll and Shula.

Also add to that BB won his titles while cheating. Since he no longer has the tapes he can get his team there, but he can't win the big one anymore. That speaks volumes.

You can't be that stupid. Guess who was the last head coach to win a playoff game in cleveland?  This is basically saying the same thing as Peyton threw a lot of int and lost a lot of a games his rookie season so he CANT be a top quarterback you can't just ignore his first first season. BB did not win his titles by cheating, the rule he "broke" started in 2006. He won all his titles before 2006 so it was not cheating. The same logic applies to the Steelers and steroids. You can't have it both ways. Pats didn't come up short vs the Colts and Giants(twice) because they didn't have tapes. Pats could very easily have 3 more super bowls. Belichick is one of the greats only a moron would argue otherwise.

"Never said Parcells was a better coach than Belichick.  But by continually saying "Parcells never won anything without BB," you certainly make it sound like you're not recognizing Parcells accomplishments. Sounds like you're laying it all at someone else's feet."...................Ok I'm listening. What did Parcels win without BB on staff? How many championships? No scratch that, that's not fair. How many playoff games? Look my point then was to defend BB? And pointing out the truth/reality of him and Parcels. Frankly I don't like either guy but to think for a second BB isn't a top 10 coach all time is ridiculous. You can have your man crush for a former Dallas coach that did nothing for Dallas all you want. I didn't sugar coat anything, didn't exaggerate anything, just pointed out a FACT that you don't like in support of BB.

What did Parcels win without BB on staff? How many championships?

What did BB accomplish without the greatest QB of our generation leading his team?

Frankly I don't like either guy but to think for a second BB isn't a top 10 coach all time is ridiculous.

Again, never said he wasn't. If you think I did, kindly show me where.

You can have your man crush for a former Dallas coach that did nothing for Dallas all you want.

Don't have a "man-crush" on Parcells, as much as you need to use homophobic slurs. I'm simply able to recognize that he's a two-time Super Bowl winner, took another team to the Super Bowl, took a third to the AFC championship game, and took a fourth team to the playoffs.

If you can tell me who else did that, again -- I'm more than happy to review your quality research.

just pointed out a FACT that you don't like in support of BB.

Just as I'm pointing out that if you can say Belichick should get the lion's share of credit for Parcells' success, I can say Tom Brady gets the lion's share of credit for BB's success. You can't have this both ways, no matter how much you cry.

For the record I think Belichick is the best coach of our generation. Not sure what pre-conceived notion you think I have about Belichick.

And we have yet another Pats fan that wants to throw out Cleveland when it comes to BB's record. Guess what? Not going to happen. It's part of his body of work whether you like it or not. And yes, he DID cheat to win titles. Let me clue you in on something, PatsFan....in 2006 there was no rule change. The memo only clarified the existing rule. Now, logic dictates that means there was already a rule in place. And it was in place in 200 when BB started. He cheated his way to 3 championships. Simple as that. Without the tapes he's got no Lombardi's. His record in Cleveland and the FACT that he cheated drop him out of my top 10.

    

And we have yet another Pats fan that wants to throw out Cleveland when it comes to BB's record

.
=

You never apologized for putting those words in my mouth you idiot.  

Not only that but you AGAIN willfully misrepresent what was said.  Your ignorance and hatred borders on insanity.

The horse is DEAD.....let it go.

20 years from now when you are 80 you will still be harping on Spygate, or will it be Bountygate.....or maybe even Ray Lewis suit.

You think I misrepresented what he said? Really? So what exactly did he mean when he brought Cleveland and how few coaches win there? Hmmm?

You think I misrepresented what he said? Really? So what exactly did he mean when he brought Cleveland and how few coaches win there? Hmmm?

You actually think I'm going to fall AGAIN for that asinie ruse?

It simply doesn't matter how slowly or logically or DUMBED DOWN I explain something.  It goes into that vaccuum between your ears and you IGNORE it.  Nobody can explain anything to you.


The fact is you DID misrepresent what he said, as you do with pretty much everybody.  You put your own spin on it and use that as your platform.  You strawman more than anybody I've ever seen.

As for what a strawman is, look it up your own damn dumb self.    

Not a ruse, Y - you just don't have an answer. The ONLY reason for discrediting Cleveland is to try to distance BB from it. It's a way of saying, "It's not BB's fault, so you can't hold that against him". Sure I can - and I do. He was horrible there. Guess what? It counts. It's on his record, like it or not. So yes, when I look at how he's been as a HC I look at his WHOLE BODY of work. You know...just like you can't look at just one of my posts - you have to look at the WHOLE body. Right? There you go, Y. BB is not in my top ten because he sucked in Cleveland and he cheated.