# I'm glad someone called Belichick out on this one.



## B Lopez (Feb 4, 2008)

Dude's a wuss.  



> If he's going to lose, Bill Belichick would rather be elsewhere
> 
> By MJD
> 
> ...



If he's going to lose, Bill Belichick would rather be elsewhere - NFL Exper... - NFL - Yahoo! Sports

I also think he needs to dress respectfully on game days. Cut-up hoodies, .


----------



## F1Filter (Feb 4, 2008)

I wasn't too impressed by his post-game interview outside the locker room either. He came off as a really bitter sore loser. You're supposed to be representing a football organization. A little graciousness in the face of defeat was in order here. I don't think he even went out of his way to congratulate the NYG on their win.


----------



## The Dark Wolf (Feb 4, 2008)

I thought his challenge on that one out of bounds play was a little weak, too.

Technically it was correct, and I understand seizing every advantage. But it still felt like he was jumping on technicalities rather than facing his opponents based on their own talents. Like a guy's foot being 6 inches on a football field or whatever would seriously impact the flow of a game?


----------



## zimbloth (Feb 4, 2008)

Whatever. He put up w/ so much bullshit and vitriol this season, he doesn't owe anyone a damn thing. After all he went through the entire season, going 18-0, and to lose the Superbowl on a ridiculous fluke play (Manning somehow not getting sacked and then lobbing a prayer) would piss most of us off too. The greatest coaches in the history of the game are usually pricks because they just care about winning that much more than anyone else. Bill Billichick is about winning, not being a gracious loser. Fuck class. I want someone coaching my team will do anything it takes to win. Obviously the players around the league like him, since they keep flocking to join the Pats, who cares what the media/fans think?


----------



## Steve (Feb 4, 2008)

The clock went down to ZERO.... he took off his head set and headed to thank Coughlin.... THEN they put ONE second on the clock.. EVERYONE was on the field, fans, workers, families...etc.... 

The Giants defensive line dominated that game, the Pats O-line looked like shit. The Giants outplayed them defensively, and they should have one the MVP.


----------



## Jeff (Feb 4, 2008)

zimbloth said:


> Whatever. He put up w/ so much bullshit and vitriol this season, he doesn't owe anyone a damn thing. After all he went through the entire season, going 18-0, and to lose the Superbowl on a ridiculous fluke play (Manning somehow not getting sacked and then lobbing a prayer) would piss most of us off too. The greatest coaches in the history of the game are usually pricks because they just care about winning that much more than anyone else. Bill Billichick is about winning, not being a gracious loser. Fuck class. I want someone coaching my team will do anything it takes to win. Obviously the players around the league like him, since they keep flocking to join the Pats, who cares what the media/fans think?



Dude, no offense, but I couldn't disagree more. It's not just about winning, and doing whatever it takes. it's about being a sportsman. It's about being a gentleman. 

The fact that there is such a mentality that it's only about winning is what's wrong with sports today, and what makes it not as much fun to watch. 

I don't want to turn on the TV to see sore losers and assholes, and people bitter over "fluke" plays.


----------



## Drew (Feb 4, 2008)

> Because Bill Belichick wanted to go hide when he lost, the field ended up being flooded with people, and the officials had to clear the area before the Giants could take their final snap and make it official. When you lose, you take your loss. You don't leave early because it makes you feel sad inside. Your opponent deserves more respect than that.



What Steve said. The clock went down to zero, fans began flooding the field, and then Belichek ran out, not to congratulate the other coach, but to talk with a ref. It was only after that conversation that he congratulated the Giants head coach and walked off the field. 

Regardless of what you think of his decision not to stay for the final second, trying to blame him for the fans celebrating a little early is duplicitous at best. 

That's really the one thing that kills me about last night - the Pats had a LOT of shit slung at them this season, and the vast majority of it was done so unfairly. Yet, they kept winning. A win last night would have maybe not shut up the critics, but at least kept them back a bit. 

However, because they lost last night, the wolves are going to be out in force, and not becase they blew the biggest game of their season (a fair charge), but because of all the little crap like this that's built up over the course of the year of being the unstoppable favorites that, now that they've blown the game, they'll take the license to say where previously they had to hold their tongues to not look like sore losers.


----------



## YYZ2112 (Feb 4, 2008)

Well you Pats fans can say and think what you want, but I've always had an issue with Belichick and the way he acts when he loses, which is not often. And it has nothing to do with this loss that I'm now saying something about it because I've been talking about this for a long time.

I'm not quite sure what you guys mean when you say "all that he and the team have been through". Lets be honest, Bellichick brought a lot of this stuff on himself by the way he's conducted himself. And any coach that has his team in the superbowl has been though a lot no matter what you say. I also can't think of another team that was so backed by the media as the Pats were. All you ever heard was that the Giants are incredible underdogs. Every night on Sports Center Brady was put on a pedestal as a QB god. 

I know I'll get a lot of shit for this, but I think it was a great game where both teams had their chances to win and to say Eli threw up a prayer on that last drive when the Pats should have sacked him at least three times is really weak. I think Eli looked to be the more confident of the two and proved to the nation he can make big plays on the biggest stage in the world. 

And finally, I'm a Bears fan and I don't care for either team at all. I'm pretty neutral other than my hatred for the Sox that sometimes spills over into other New England/Boston sports, but in this case it was just a great game with a great ending.


----------



## Jeff (Feb 4, 2008)

YYZ2112 said:


> Well you Pats fans can say and think what you want, but I've always had an issue with Belichick and the way he acts when he loses, which is not often. And it has nothing to do with this loss that I'm now saying something about it because I've been talking about this for a long time.
> 
> I'm not quite sure what you guys mean when you say "all that he and the team have been through". Lets be honest, Bellichick brought a lot of this stuff on himself by the way he's conducted himself. And any coach that has his team in the superbowl has been though a lot no matter what you say. I also can't think of another team that was so backed by the media as the Pats were. All you ever heard was that the Giants are incredible underdogs. Every night on Sports Center Brady was put on a pedestal as a QB god.
> 
> ...



I agree completely. With the coverage the way it was, you'd think this was a Harlem Globetrotters game, where no one cares about the Washington Generals 

It was a tough, good game all the way through, regardless of the last 5 minutes, and whether or not Eli "got lucky" the Giants deserve credit for their win. 

Games are often won on "luck", and in the end, it doesn't matter. The score is the score. 

In the end I feel a little bad for the Pats not taking it all, as while I wanted the Giants to win I don't really have anything against the Pats, other than being tired of hearing about them. 

But I don't feel bad for Bellichick in particular, because he is most definitely a sore loser.

*EDIT*

And having already talked to quite a few folks across the country already this morning as part of my job, I think you'll find that most people aren't going to sympathize with Bellichick, even if the do like the rest of the team.


----------



## Nick (Feb 4, 2008)

zimbloth said:


> Whatever. He put up w/ so much bullshit and vitriol this season, he doesn't owe anyone a damn thing. After all he went through the entire season, going 18-0, and to lose the Superbowl on a ridiculous fluke play (Manning somehow not getting sacked and then lobbing a prayer) would piss most of us off too. The greatest coaches in the history of the game are usually pricks because they just care about winning that much more than anyone else. Bill Billichick is about winning, not being a gracious loser. Fuck class. I want someone coaching my team will do anything it takes to win. Obviously the players around the league like him, since they keep flocking to join the Pats, who cares what the media/fans think?




Absolute 100% unquestionable FACT!!!



Jeff said:


> Dude, no offense, but I couldn't disagree more. It's not just about winning, and doing whatever it takes. it's about being a sportsman. It's about being a gentleman.
> 
> The fact that there is such a mentality that it's only about winning is what's wrong with sports today, and what makes it not as much fun to watch.
> 
> I don't want to turn on the TV to see sore losers and assholes, and people bitter over "fluke" plays.




i completley disagree.

You need to come and see sports here in the UK where its all about 'being a sportsman' and 'taking part' as a result our sports system is fucked and everyone is congradualted on being mediocre. you should rejoice that your sports system rewards winners because thats the way it should be.

Noone remembers the 'sportsman' or who 'took part' Everyone remembers the team at the end of the year standing with the winners medal. The object of sports is to win, nothing else, and the truth of it is that most of the time the people who want to win most are the ones that win most.

Iv played basketball for my country at every age group since i was 15 and i can guarantee you that i have never done it to take part i play only to win and thats what it should be about.


----------



## playstopause (Feb 4, 2008)

Nick said:


> The object of sports is to win, nothing else.



Wow, i hope that's not what you are going to teach your kids. 
How are you able to think that way? What are you gonna do the day you will loose, the day one of your kid will loose?
What if some people do sports for FUN? For the adrenaline of competition? Teamwork?



> Iv played basketball for my country at every age group since i was 15 and i can guarantee you that i have never done it to take part i play only to win and thats what it should be about.



I feel sorry for you. You sound like you're a robot-kid, programmed to win only. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but saying stuff like this and make it it sound like it's an universal truth =


----------



## YYZ2112 (Feb 4, 2008)

You know the more I read about how that pass from Manning was "luck" and a "a prayer" is kind of getting to me. For Manning to compose himself enough to get a throw off after he _SHOULD HAVE_ been sacked in a huge moment in the game with the time ticking away is quite impressive to me. And yes his receiver made an incredible catch as well, but my god, give the dude some credit for even getting a throw off. Why not be upset at your defense for not wrapping him up instead of letting him make that play. 

What would you guys be saying if by chance Brady hit Moss with that deep bomb with just a few seconds left on the clock and won the game. Would you be saying that Brady was "lucky" or "It was a fluke play"?? I don't think so. 

I understand that you guys are bitter and upset, but the Pats had the lead with less than three minutes left on the clock. All you had to do was stop them and you didn't. All I seem to be hearing from Patriot fans it that two "lucky" plays from the Giants is why the Pats lost. 

I know I'm asking for a lot of shit for this post, but it bothers me that you guys are taking this loss like this. The Patriots are an incredible team and maybe on the best ever but you can't win every time even with a perfect season hanging in the balance.


----------



## Nick (Feb 4, 2008)

playstopause said:


> Wow, i hope that's not what you are going to teach your kids.
> How are you able to think that way? What are you gonna do the day you will loose, the day one of your kid will loose?
> What if some people do sports for FUN? For the adrenaline of competition? Teamwork?
> 
> ...



not at all 

the team i play for are far from the best team in the country and we have lost our last 3 games. I can handle defeat quite graciously as i have to deal with it regularly. Especially when the guys beating my team i play with on the national team. It doesnt mean i have to like it.

Who actually plays sports and doesnt care when they get beat?

Some people arent competitive and thats fair enough. Il teach my kids that if you are going to play a sport you play hard because thats the most rewarding thing to do. If you can say at the end of the game i gave 110% then thats fine thats the WINNING mentality.

Id also say that i dont think anyone would be happy paying their money for season tickets to watch a group of multimillion dollar contracted athletes go out and have fun and 'take part'

If you support a team and pay them your money you want them to be a bunch of guys that are going to go out and do anything they can to win.

Do you think guys like Michael Jordon, Pele and Pete Sampras played to 'take part'?

lastly if you want to have fun when playing a sport your best bet is to win because i guarantee youl have 100% more fun doing that than you will getting beat.

*Edit* I accept that some people play sport for fun and arent caring much about winning or losing but lets keep in perspective that the guy in question here gets paid enough money to buy your family home and bulldoze it to the ground if he wants to. (im merely using that as a humourous annalogy im not meaning any offence)


----------



## playstopause (Feb 4, 2008)

Nick said:


> Who actually plays sports and doesnt care when they get beat?



A lot! Those who do sport are not all pros, semi-wanna-be-pros or the like that want to get a trophy in the end. What do you think is the % of people that do sports for fun vs those who do it for win-at-all cost?

Imo, there is far more people that do sports as a recreation thing than competition.



> Il teach my kids that if you are going to play a sport you play hard because thats the most rewarding thing to do. If you can say at the end of the game i gave 110% then thats fine thats the WINNING mentality.



Well, that's a different thing, isn't it? That not the way you exposed things in the first place. I believe this makes more sense.



> Id also say that i dont think anyone would be happy paying their money for season tickets to watch a group of multimillion dollar contracted athletes go out and have fun and 'take part'.
> 
> If you support a team and pay them your money you want them to be a bunch of guys that are going to go out and do anything they can to win. Do you think guys like Michael Jordon, Pele and Pete Sampras played to 'take part'?



These guys are the exceptions that confirms the rule. There's one Jordan, one Pele and one Sampras. Seriously, how many obscure players (wich no one will ever know the names) on a team are there, only "taking part" for 5 minutes per game? There's a lot. People don't pay to see these guys, but they're the majority, out of the spotlight.

I believe many are there simply enjoying the fact they're good enough to be playing at a pro level, beeing grateful at the opportunity they have of beeing paid big bucks to play a sport. Even if they don't make that much of a difference in the team's scoring. 
Even if they have 0% to say in the win-loss verdict, i'm pretty sure they enjoy their spot.



> lastly if you want to have fun when playing a sport your best bet is to win because i guarantee youl have 100% more fun doing that than you will getting beat.



_In general_. Some do sports just to be in good physical shape, you know. Or because they just need to move.



Nick said:


> *Edit* I accept that some people play sport for fun and arent caring much about winning or losing but lets keep in perspective that the guy in question here gets paid enough money to buy your family home and bulldoze it to the ground if he wants to. (im merely using that as a humourous annalogy im not meaning any offence)



What does that have to do with it?!? Like money would an argument of some kind?


----------



## Nick (Feb 4, 2008)

as someone who has played against pros of different levels and as somoene who could go pro myself i know you have to want to win especially in american sports. There are so many people with the 'i want to be a pro athlete' dream in america the guys that make it to the NFL NBA and MLB are pretty much all of that mentality they have to be because there are only so many hundred player spots to go for legitamate millions of people who want them.

I know what your saying about the whole playing for fun thing but this threads about a guy who gets paid to win.

My initial reaction was to the fact that Jeff said that sports of that high a level should be about fun etc. its not so, the guys are paid to win. On your point about the no name players that are there to only take part. those guys in the NBA are still the creme of the crop of 1million people each they just arent the super human guys that are playing all the mins. In the NBA the minimum contract is $1million a year (or it was a few years back its probably more now) so anyone whos getting that money id expect to be pretty focused on winning even if only for 5 mins. And lets not forget that the better they do in those mins means more mins and more mins means more $$£$£


----------



## playstopause (Feb 4, 2008)

Nick said:


> the guys are paid to win.



That's why sport is turning into a business. Now, it's all about million-dollars contracts and how much money a team makes per year. Sport's ideals does not correspond with those of money, imho.


----------



## Nick (Feb 4, 2008)

again i disagree. i have no idea how much money any of my favourite basketball players make or what their teams salary cap is or anything money related.

What i do know is that they are good players and they go out and play hard and play to win every game.


----------



## playstopause (Feb 4, 2008)

Yeah, right. One thing you know for sure is that they ain't getting minimum salary.



> What i do know is that they are good players and they go out and play hard and play to win every game.



That sounds insightful and all, but really, how many players on a pro team thinks like that today? Not many imo.
I mean, we're not talking about the 1920's NY Yankees dynasty. That when players played with heart (as a majority). 
Now they start negociating their contracting 6 months before it ends, trying to suck as much $$$ as possible. That's sport?


----------



## Drew (Feb 4, 2008)

YYZ2112 said:


> You know the more I read about how that pass from Manning was "luck" and a "a prayer" is kind of getting to me. For Manning to compose himself enough to get a throw off after he _SHOULD HAVE_ been sacked in a huge moment in the game with the time ticking away is quite impressive to me. And yes his receiver made an incredible catch as well, but my god, give the dude some credit for even getting a throw off. Why not be upset at your defense for not wrapping him up instead of letting him make that play.
> 
> What would you guys be saying if by chance Brady hit Moss with that deep bomb with just a few seconds left on the clock and won the game. Would you be saying that Brady was "lucky" or "It was a fluke play"?? I don't think so.
> 
> ...



Yes and no. 

As I said a few posts earlier, I have a hard time attributing Manning coming out from the Pats entire defensive line unscathed to anything but luck - arguing shrugging off six or so defenders who are literally all on top of you is skill strikes me as a stretch. I think Manning just happened to get jostled out to the edge of the pile and got a step away before anyone could get on him. 

The rest of the play, anyone who isn't willing to give it up to Manning for a hell of a pass on no time to think, and his reciever (whose name eludes me) for a mindbendingly good catch is lying to themselves. As you yourself said earlier, almost no game can be distilled entirely to skill, and all victories come down to a combination of skill and luck, and I think this is no different. 

For your second point, had Moss beat the two defenders on him, gotten a three step jump on them, and then Brady dropped the ball right into his waiting hands, then yeah, I'd be playing the skill card. Had the play unfolded exactly the way it did last night but somehow Moss got and kept a hand on it, then yes, I'd have to say we lucked out on a longshot completion to either get us into kicking range, or possibly to break all the way for the touchdown. 

I also won't even try to defend Belichick's decicion to walk off the field with that final second on the clock - I agree, that's in questionable-at-best taste - but attributing that entire early rush to Belichick is exactly that sort of "and out come the wolves" scavanger attack that I was talking about earlier. The scoreboard clock HAD gone down to zero before people started rushing the field - it was only a couple seconds later that they reset it, and then both teams worked on getting fans off the field so they could finish the game.


----------



## Nick (Feb 4, 2008)

obviously i know theyr getting paid stupid money but i dont know exact figures nor am i interested and if Kevin Garnett said he was getting paid $20k a year i would maybe find it strange but i woulnt think about it for any longer than 5 minutes.

The best players get the best money. Just like if i have $2000 to spend on an amp im not going to give that money to the amp company that i think sounds second best.

I dont see how sports ideals and business ideals dont correspond either. 

Sport - best players get best contracts because they put in the work in the gym and at practice to become the best.

Business - best companies with best products get most money because their products are favoured by most people who are willing to hand over their money for the product.

Its really quite simple.

Do you play any sports? Have you ever been termed 'the best' at sport.

youl find that pride comes into this as well. If people are told they are the best at something they dont want to lose because they think people will think less of them and so they hate losing.


----------



## playstopause (Feb 4, 2008)

Nick said:


> Its really quite simple.



Well, put like that, yes it is. But i don't think it scratches the surface of what things are. Things are just not THAT simple.



> Do you play any sports? Have you ever been termed 'the best' at sport.


 
Yes. But i really don't see what's your point. At all. 
Pffft, i'm tired and this is goin' nowhere. Let's just agree to disagree.


----------



## Jeff (Feb 4, 2008)

Nick said:


> My initial reaction was to the fact that Jeff said that sports of that high a level should be about fun etc. its not so, the guys are paid to win. On your point about the no name players that are there to only take part. those guys in the NBA are still the creme of the crop of 1million people each they just arent the super human guys that are playing all the mins. In the NBA the minimum contract is $1million a year (or it was a few years back its probably more now) so anyone whos getting that money id expect to be pretty focused on winning even if only for 5 mins. And lets not forget that the better they do in those mins means more mins and more mins means more $$£$£



Please don't misinterpret what I said. I said nothing about sports at the pro level being only about fun. I said it's important to display a level of sportsman-like behavior, and to be a gentleman. 

For example, would you consider Michael Jordan to be a highly competitive athlete? I think we'd all agree that he is/was. 

Would you consider Kobe Bryant to be a highly competitive athlete? I think we'd all agree that he is. 

Are they of them same sportsman-like caliber? I don't think they remotely are. 

That's what I am talking about here. All pro sports need more of the former; not the latter.


----------



## Nick (Feb 4, 2008)

Jeff said:


> The fact that there is such a mentality that it's only about winning is what's wrong with sports today, and what makes it not as much fun to watch.



I agree that yes the guy needs to be able to handle defeat better than he did of that theres no doubt its common decency.

But i still dont see there being anything wrong with the winning mentality. 

Britain celebrates mediocrity and theres not many things that we can beat the USA at sports wise. Scotland cant even beat you guys at soccer anymore.


----------



## Jeff (Feb 4, 2008)

Nick said:


> I agree that yes the guy needs to be able to handle defeat better than he did of that theres no doubt its common decency.
> 
> But i still dont see there being anything wrong with the winning mentality.
> 
> Britain celebrates mediocrity and theres not many things that we can beat the USA at sports wise. Scotland cant even beat you guys at soccer anymore.



I think you're having a tremendously difficult time differentiating between the desire to win, and the ability to be a good sportsman. 

They can quite easily be achieved simulataneously.


----------



## zimbloth (Feb 4, 2008)

If you're not first, your last. It's all about winning. All the other stuff is for soccer moms bringing orange slices w/ their SUVs. I don't care if my coach is friendly with the media or is a nice guy. I care that he does everything he can galvanize his team, strategize, and WIN.


----------



## Nick (Feb 4, 2008)

Jeff said:


> I think you're having a tremendously difficult time differentiating between the desire to win, and the ability to be a good sportsman.
> 
> They can quite easily be achieved simulataneously.



i never said there wasnt. I agreed with you.

You didnt say the reason this guy is a bad sportsman is because he wants to win really bad and cant take defeat and so has came across as a dick. 

You said that the mentality that its all about winning is whats wrong with sports today. i disagree with that because i do think its all about winning. But i also think that you need to be a gracious loser.

im not disagreeing with the fact that the guy needs to suck it up and take it like a man.


----------



## YYZ2112 (Feb 4, 2008)

I think the bottom line is that Belichick is a jerk on the field with very little class at times. He's smug & arrogant and when he loses it really comes out in full force. I've seen many other coaches who like to win just as much Bill take the time to congratulate other players on the opposing team when they lose. And it wasn't just this game either. When the Pats lost to the Jets in 06 Belichick couldn't even look at Mangini much less shake his hand. He's a jerk. That doesn't make the team bad or change how well they did this year. I just think it's sad that the head coach who should be setting an example of class and pride for the team looks so childish when losing.


----------



## Jeff (Feb 4, 2008)

Nick said:


> i never said there wasnt. I agreed with you.
> 
> You didnt say the reason this guy is a bad sportsman is because he wants to win really bad and cant take defeat and so has came across as a dick.
> 
> ...



Perhaps I need to clarify myself. Obviously all pro sports should be about winning. They're not paid to hand out ice cream cones and be everyone's friend. But it shouldn't be only about winning, as Zimbloth repeatedly states.

If a player or coach is the greatest there ever was, but is a complete piece of shit, his accomplishments, to me, mean nothing. 

If you're not gracious in victory and defeat to your fellow player/coach, it defines you as a human being. Negatively.

This is no different in academia, business, music, etc.

It's what separates Malmsteen from Gilbert, Di Meola from McLaughlin. All amazing guitarists, but no one will be nominating Al or Yngwie for sainthood anytime soon.


----------



## Drew (Feb 4, 2008)

Well, to be fair, I've also seen coaches happier after a loss that Belichick after a win - he's just kind of a grumpy guy in general.


----------



## Jason (Feb 5, 2008)

Maybe he had the shits from some bad chilli from tailgating?


----------



## The Dark Wolf (Feb 5, 2008)

YYZ2112 said:


> I think the bottom line is that Belichick is a jerk on the field with very little class at times. He's smug & arrogant and when he loses it really comes out in full force. I've seen many other coaches who like to win just as much Bill take the time to congratulate other players on the opposing team when they lose. And it wasn't just this game either. When the Pats lost to the Jets in 06 Belichick couldn't even look at Mangini much less shake his hand. He's a jerk. That doesn't make the team bad or change how well they did this year. I just think it's sad that the head coach who should be setting an example of class and pride for the team looks so childish when losing.



Exactly.

The "win at all costs" mentality makes the whole field uneven, because guys just want victory, fuck scruples or sportsmanship. And then what's the point of sport? Just give guys some machetes, tell them "No rules! Go fuck the other guys up!" and let 'em at it.

Pointless. Sport is structured competition between individuals and groups with clear rules to define the nature of the competition, to make it as fair and unbiased as possible.

Something Bill doesn't seem to understand. Any victory gained that way isn't a real victory, IMO.


----------



## zimbloth (Feb 5, 2008)

You guys don't know football. Bellichick and Tom Coughlin are FRIENDS. He DID congratulate him on the field and after. He thought the game was over, as did everyone else, that;s why they were on the field. I don't expect someone who dedicates every moment of his life to winning football and under extreme scrutiniy 24-7 to not be pissed when he loses.

Also, you guys really don't know the whole story regarding the "cheating". Someday when the media sensationalism and hype settles down, perhaps more people can know the truth. The only thing Bill did wrong was being very arrogant. 

Bottom line is: Belichick > *. Giants defensive line completely dominated our O-line, hats off to 'em. Doesn't take anything away from Bill's genius.


----------



## The Dark Wolf (Feb 5, 2008)

_How can we not feel profound brotherhood with Eli Manning, with Tom Coughlin and all the others to whom we owe both the sight of *little Billy Belichick sprinting off the field in an ungracious, you-took-my-Legos huff* and our collective freedom from the Boston Globe's "19-0: The Historic Championship Season of New England's Unbeatable Patriots?"

In their ruthless professionalism and obsession with offensive metrics, in their ends-justify-any-means subterfuge and Only-Sing-When-You're-Winning single-mindedness, the Patriots embodied the most disturbing, dehumanizing aspect of modern athletics: Transforming play into work. In the long term, this attitude is untenable, because football is really nothing more than a complicated version of 5-year-olds chasing a soccer ball around a park, falling into each other and having a good time. It is the gap-toothed smile of Michael Strahan, crusty Coughlin enjoying a Gatorade bath. Joylessness, even under the pretext of competitiveness or dressed up in an extra-colorful Patriots hoodie, is never a force that can make sports worth watching or caring about. That is why today we are all Giants._
ESPN - Page 2


----------



## playstopause (Feb 5, 2008)

zimbloth said:


> You guys don't know football.



We found him! The guy that wrote the book of football!


----------



## Popsyche (Feb 5, 2008)

The Dark Wolf said:


> _How can we not feel profound brotherhood with Eli Manning, with Tom Coughlin and all the others to whom we owe both the sight of *little Billy Belichick sprinting off the field in an ungracious, you-took-my-Legos huff* and our collective freedom from the Boston Globe's "19-0: The Historic Championship Season of New England's Unbeatable Patriots?"
> 
> In their ruthless professionalism and obsession with offensive metrics, in their ends-justify-any-means subterfuge and Only-Sing-When-You're-Winning single-mindedness, the Patriots embodied the most disturbing, dehumanizing aspect of modern athletics: Transforming play into work. In the long term, this attitude is untenable, because football is really nothing more than a complicated version of 5-year-olds chasing a soccer ball around a park, falling into each other and having a good time. It is the gap-toothed smile of Michael Strahan, crusty Coughlin enjoying a Gatorade bath. Joylessness, even under the pretext of competitiveness or dressed up in an extra-colorful Patriots hoodie, is never a force that can make sports worth watching or caring about. That is why today we are all Giants._
> ESPN - Page 2



Here, here, Brother Bobby!


----------



## YYZ2112 (Feb 5, 2008)

zimbloth said:


> You guys don't know football. Bellichick and Tom Coughlin are FRIENDS. He DID congratulate him on the field and after. He thought the game was over, as did everyone else, that;s why they were on the field. I don't expect someone who dedicates every moment of his life to winning football and under extreme scrutiniy 24-7 to not be pissed when he loses.
> 
> Also, you guys really don't know the whole story regarding the "cheating". Someday when the media sensationalism and hype settles down, perhaps more people can know the truth. The only thing Bill did wrong was being very arrogant.
> 
> Bottom line is: Belichick > *. Giants defensive line completely dominated our O-line, hats off to 'em. Doesn't take anything away from Bill's genius.



I don't claim to be an expert in the field of football nor do I really care about the whole cheating thing. Anyway, I'm sure every team has done something like this one way or another. 

I'm what you would call a casual football fan that has been irked one too many times by the football genius, Bill Belichick. I don't like the guy and it has nothing to do with my knowledge of football. It's just sports and that's why fans are fans. We all pick and choose who we like and dislike. It's what makes sports fun IMO.


----------

