That wasn't the point. Rings, got it. I'm not saying he's a failure either (though there's a case there, if he's actually being held accountable for his time in Denver and the Indy debacle). I am saying he's a footnote in the history of the NFL (not a failure, but certainly not rememberable in grand scheme) as it stands and if he's never going to be a HC (which he shouldn't be, but if the Pats want to do that, it'd be fun to watch him preside over the deconstruction of the cheaters fiefdom), I wouldn't go giving him anything similar to the same credit the BB and Brady get- he can't hack it (see Denver and Indy). There's literally no shortage of great teams that won a Super Bowl that I couldn't tell you who the coordinators were. That's him if he wasn't a terrible HC in Denver and a back stabber to Ballard.
The verbiage might be a little off, but I get what the poster you were responding to was getting at. I would have gone with scum or garbage, failure isn't precise enough, but I'm not massaging any element of his football existence at this point. There's not a good reason to.