#DFG: Canceling the Noise
- Thread starter nattysez
- Start date
Was the NFL spokesperson referred to in the subject line, identified?E5 Yaz said:
Roger: Hey Troy did you ok this?
Troy, Wasn't me boss, I bet it was Dean Blandino
Blandino: No way, lets ask Mikey.
Mike Kensil: Nope wasn't me. Woody Johnson told me to fuck the Pats. Maybe it was Johnny Mara. He was pretty pissed he had to go to court on this thing.
John: Morons
Myt1 said:
Perhaps you missed what I wrote, but I am most certainly not missing the forest for the trees.
amarshal2 said:
amarshal2 said:
Emphasis added.
His overall success cannot be separated from his media strategy but that does not mean that he's not worse off because of it.
What I am saying is really not all that controversial. Ask anybody you know who doesn't like Belichick why they don't like him and they use words like "arrogant" and "smug" and "dickhead." It's clearly the same thing within the game. People HATE Belichick and they HATE the Patriots. There's no support from anybody right now because they wanted the Patriots to get their "comeuppance".
Next, ask the people who don't like Belichick to point to evidence of his arrogance or smug attitude. To a person they will stumble over their words and ultimately come back to cheating allegations and how he handles himself in press conferences. They will not be able to give you one quote that actually demonstrates their opinion of Belichick the person because it's all projected onto him by the media and by their beliefs.
Belichick has done nothing to push back or change the narrative. He's played into it. It's contributed to having no support within the game, historical penalties for technical infractions and phantom scandals, and distractions for his team -- they've been accused of cheating in 3 of the last 4 competitive games they've played.
Myt1 said:
The notion that we can't blame somebody for not accounting for the tendencies of the media in their media relations strategy is obviously misguided. Are you arguing that the media not liking Belichick was unforeseeable? Do you disagree that there are significant differences in how people treat someone they like vs. someone they dislike? If Belichick did anything to try and play the game and be likable, he would have had completely different reactions from the media and the NFL community going back to Spygate. But instead they think he's an arrogant ass and they're glad he's getting his.
Your argument boils down to "you can't blame the victim" but we're not talking about assault or rape. We're talking about media strategy. Of course he could have affected the narrative.
JGray38 said:
I saw the original. [SIZE=10.5pt]I said up above that he's either "unable or unwilling" to play the media game. I think most people would argue that he's unable. I actually think he is able but is unwilling. We've seen him be nice and human with the media and he comes across quite well in my opinion. In the aftermath of the Super Bowl he was downright pleasant. I wasn't sure if it was the Super Bowl glow or if he was realizing his approach to the media was creating a monster in the aftermath of the AFCCG. Unfortunately it seems like it was more the former than the latter.[/SIZE]
Apropos to nothing, has anyone else taken to the habit of seeing Tom Brady on the video in a bar and shouted out, "There he is! The greatest human to ever have lived!" I mean, outside of Boston.
Ok so three nightmare scenarios predicted over the last 8 days alone have not transpired.
No investigation of stolen play sheet allegations.
No crucifixion over head sets in Pitts game -- to the contrary, cleared in less than 24 hours.
No discipline or further proving of these two guys.
So collectively some of us have to get a grip.
No investigation of stolen play sheet allegations.
No crucifixion over head sets in Pitts game -- to the contrary, cleared in less than 24 hours.
No discipline or further proving of these two guys.
So collectively some of us have to get a grip.
I think you're drawing a conclusion that is not supported.amarshal2 said:
Belichick got nailed for Spygate primarily because he inexcusably ignored Goodell's direct "no videotaping" memo. The penalty had nothing to do with his relationship with Ron Borges or Tom Jackson. Belichick himself admitted he made a mistake on that one; that is truly the one episode where Belichick deserved CHB's "hubris and arrogance" label. The team went 16-0 in the distraction of Spygate.
Similarly, Belichick's relationship with the media had nothing to do with Deflategate, which was entirely the creation of the Mensa's in the league office that think it sucks that a Boston-based team keeps winning season after season in a league where such continued success is discouraged by the rules. The team won a Super Bowl under the "distraction" of DFG.
The cheating "accusations" beyond the deflated footballs did not have any legs, and again were started by opposing coaches that can't help themselves. The last set of cheating accusations have been rebuffed even by the league office as well as most of the media. The media keep running the story because... it draws eyeballs and clicks and viewers. I'm not convinced being best friends with Borges or CHB would have moved the needle in the slightest.
David Ortiz has been one of the most media friendly personalities around; doesn't stop Shank from attacking him every time Papi has an 0-5 with 3 bases-loaded K's. Sometimes a spade really is a spade; the media truly does suck.
I'm not Bill Belichick, but I think he would tell you the vast majority of the externalities you identified don't matter (or more accurately, only matter if you let them) in any material way, and it's not worth spending time on things that don't matter.amarshal2 said:
Beyond that, I think you're kinda crazy to think a different approach would have obtained a different result, even just in that specific area. If Belichick spent the last fifteen years smiling, the same folks would be calling him the falsest, most smarmy two-faced son of a bitch that ever lived, and the team would still be short a couple of draft picks. "It's the winning, stupid!"
I suppose it doesn't really matter if the Pats have come up with alternate responsibilities that still justify their employment...Van Everyman said:
But I can't help but think that none of the above NFL stipulations should matter whatsoever if the NFL follows its new fangled process for handling game balls. Hell, even if they just followed their old process, the ability of these 2 guys to affect game ball pressure (post-ref inspection) would effectively be neutered.
I just watched it. The main subject is extreme political correctness and "micro aggressions". DFG/Goodell/Brady/Belichick is a metaphor that is threaded throughout the story, along with Jenner (who is at the heart of the PC issue).soxhop411 said:
Cartman's hero is Tom Brady. As you can imagine, that's not too flattering, but in the end, they allude to the fact that Brady always wins.
Sadly, Goodell-Bot doesn't make an appearance.
Also of note, the episode introduces a new meaning for the term "Hot Cosby" into the UrbanDictionary vernacular (not there yet as of this post).
I am a little late on this but I think you are on the right track just a little off.Salva135 said:
Peyton is a folksy, "aw shucks", play type of guy who plays along with the media and also looks like he could be working at your nearest Home Depot. Not to mention every head coach he has played for has been revered by the media (specifically Saint Dungy)
Brady doesn't have the same Everyman appeal, is one of the best looking people on the planet, and plays for a guy that is basically thought of as an evil genius (who also doesn't play along with the media and expects his teams not to as well).
There's less for the general public to empathize with when it comes to Brady. People want to see faults or failures when it comes to athletes/celebrities. When there aren't any readily apparent, they begin to search for cracks in the mystique/reasons to justify why they are so successful (of course it can't being more prepared for all types of situations because that's too logical and casts aspersions on Peyton).
All of this is a toxic mix for Brady and people were far too willing to accept and jump on the deflated ball angle because it helped fit a narrative that was pre-written in their head. It also helps to explain the Pats success for this long when no one else has been able to sustain this type of run. Basically a perfect storm for all the mouth breathers in the general public and media to latch onto
We've covered that before. And it's been said that the most amazing thing about the Peyton/Brady "rivalry" and public perception is that the silver-spoon, pure-bred, #1 overall draft pick, sure thing Manning has somehow convinced the world that he's the "aw shucks" everyman while the backup, 6th Round, 3rd String Brady is somehow the one that deserves to be taken down a peg is just fucking insane.
I mean, it's also a perfect example of the sad reality of how perception in America works, which is the opposite of how most Americans like to think it works.
I mean, it's also a perfect example of the sad reality of how perception in America works, which is the opposite of how most Americans like to think it works.
This is all true but also incomplete. Manning is from a Southern football family. Brady's from a Bay Area upper middle class family. Brady is married to a super model. Peyton is married to Mrs. Manning. Brady looks like and dresses like a Givenchy model. Manning wears flannel and denim and probably the same socks two days in a row.drleather2001 said:
Marciano490 said:
Right. Peyton is a fucking phony. But because he pretends to be "one of the guys", he can do no wrong. And no sports writer will ever call him out on it, for some reason.
I mean...he choreographs "impromptu" celebrations, and shits all over the little guy.
drleather2001 said:
I agree with both of you. Manning may have been born into his job, but he carefully cultivated his everyman image. And there's some of the southern/northern thing.
Marciano490 said:
Gary Myers, who just wrote a book on Brady and Manning said on the radio this morning that Brady was much quicker to open up and that Manning was like dealing with a corporation. Which is the opposite of the public image pushed by the media.
Jimbodandy said:
Living in Indianapolis, there have been rumors of widespread infidelity for a decade. Not groundbreaking but it's pretty much thought to be fact.
I don't know if that makes him more of an everyman or less of an everyman...
C'mon ... "Lyin' Eyes" oozes authenticity.drleather2001 said:
It was composed on napkins in a bar over the course of a day or two. And it really pisses off my wife and some of her MILF friends when the song so evidently amuses me and my friends.
amarshal2 said:
This may be spoiled milk already, but:
hasn't BB shown active disdain for the media when they ask stupid questions in press conferences? I love him for it, but it's there. Maybe that is or is not "arrogance" or "smugness", but you couldn't fault a guy for thinking that it is.
I basically think that it is arrogance. But "arrogance" in the most complimentary way. A stupid question is a stupid question. If a client asks me a stupid question, I answer it in a humble and helpful way...there's a long slow process of "educating the client". If a coworker or friend or family member asks a "stupid" question, there are ways of handling it. If I had to talk to the media every week and they asked me stupid questions every week, at a certain point I could see just saying "yknow what? That's a dumb question and you know it." It arrogance, but it's productive arrogance.
I completely agree and it's infuriating. To add to it, Brady was the good soldier who bought into the idea of a TEAM while Manning (I am completely convinced he had a decent sized say in personnel, much more than Brady) always sought to better the things that would make his life easier and make him look better to the detriment of the overall team.drleather2001 said:
It's completely insane and I don't fucking get it
tbb345 said:
Because they're two different things.
On the field, Brady is recognized as a winner, who gets hyper on the sidelines and will bang helmets with his lineman. Manning is seen as a cool tactician who, despite his obvious gifts, comes up short more often than not when it matters most.
Off the field, Brady is the good-looking, somewhat reclusive guy who married a supermodel after having an actress for a baby-mama and who rarely does anything commercial. Manning is seen as the guy who will do just about anything for a laugh, do any commercial, who is rather plain, married a longtime girlfriend and is a homebody who is family oriented.
Add in the cities. Brady plays to the rabidity of the New England market, with its natural rivalry with all things New York and a hot button media. Manning earned his rep in Indianoplace, in basketball country, and moved onto another city not exactly known for media mania.
It doesn't matter what may, or may not, be true about their attitudes behind the scenes. Their personas are already entrenched.
The idea that Belichick is "arrogant" is so misplaced. Just ask any reporter covering a major college football program and they will tell you that just about ANY college coach is more arrogant than Bill Belichick, with about 0.04% of the justification for that attitude. As Shaughnessy of all people opined on in his piece this week, BB not only preaches that football is a players game – he has demonstrated time and again that the actually believes it.
As for the League reinstating the DoritoDinks, I'd have given anything to have been a fly on the wall during their interview with the NFL. Whats the over/under on the number of hours we think McNally and Jastremski had to be coached not to blow their tops every time Vincent referred to what they "did" or made them promise not to diminish the integrity of the game "again"?
As for the League reinstating the DoritoDinks, I'd have given anything to have been a fly on the wall during their interview with the NFL. Whats the over/under on the number of hours we think McNally and Jastremski had to be coached not to blow their tops every time Vincent referred to what they "did" or made them promise not to diminish the integrity of the game "again"?
Obviously not pleased with the short shelf life of Van Natta's hatchet job last week, ESPN announced on air there will be (possibly several) follow ups by Van Natta in the coming weeks. ESPN seems to be implying there is more fire to report.
Can't wait.
Can't wait.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/early-lead/wp/2015/09/17/there-might-be-more-to-come-from-espn-on-the-patriots-spygate-and-deflategate/riboflav said:
This quote from Van Natta is hilarious
How many facts were in his story that was full of anonymous sources and former coaches not willing to go on the record?
How many facts were in the story at all? Wasn't it mostly accusations along the lines of "we always thought they did xyz..."?CantKeepmedown said:
Tough to get the facts wrong when the only 'facts' are that someone who wasn't willing to go on the record told you something that they self-admittedly had no proof about.
His quote says nothing. If he doesn't count innuendo and opinions as facts he is still correct.CantKeepmedown said:
What "on-the-records, [and] documents" did he rely on? I did not see a single one.
That article does say there will be dirt on other teams as well.
Edit:
Also I love this
Where has this code of silence been for the past few months? Someone forgot to tell Tomlin? also saying something anonymous is not taking part in a "code of silence".
This guy has put in so much work in justifying his piece, it makes you wonder even more.
Sure you can but the missing piece is that after the anonymous source provides you with information, you then have to investigate the claim and find actual evidence that proves the information as truthful. If you want an example, look to the original "gate" story and note how dogged the reporters were in uncovering the truth of that story. Van Natta is lazy.
I've asked all the naysayers I know at work (and outside of work) here in NJ to give me ONE fact from this article and none have come back to me with anything. I didn't bother reading it or watching it as I have not tuned in or read anything that says ESPN since before this silly fake controversy started.
Since i get Sports Illusatrated in print and have for a number of years (and I still enjoy much of what is published), I did read the two pieces that were back-to back stories a couple of weeks ago - and the more negative one towards the Patriots also contained NO facts or new information other than innuendo and accusations from mostly the usual same old whiny babies.
So I suppose this fucking dolt will simply double down on more of the same innuendo and accusations from mostly those who have been beaten by the Patriots.
Since i get Sports Illusatrated in print and have for a number of years (and I still enjoy much of what is published), I did read the two pieces that were back-to back stories a couple of weeks ago - and the more negative one towards the Patriots also contained NO facts or new information other than innuendo and accusations from mostly the usual same old whiny babies.
So I suppose this fucking dolt will simply double down on more of the same innuendo and accusations from mostly those who have been beaten by the Patriots.
Kravitz just won't let it go:
"“He always asked for the footballs way, way before he was supposed to get them,’’ said Baltz, who was an NFL official from 1989-2013."
Bob Kravitz @bkravitz 8m8 minutes ago
Jim McNally is back with the Patriots, but retired Indy-based official Mark Baltz had suspicions about him years ago.http://www.wthr.com/story/30056286/kravitz-blogindy-based-nfl-official-baltz-was-suspicious-of-mcnally-years-ago …
Edit: atleast he has a name with the story, unlike DVN.
"“He always asked for the footballs way, way before he was supposed to get them,’’ said Baltz, who was an NFL official from 1989-2013."
Bob Kravitz @bkravitz 8m8 minutes ago
Jim McNally is back with the Patriots, but retired Indy-based official Mark Baltz had suspicions about him years ago.http://www.wthr.com/story/30056286/kravitz-blogindy-based-nfl-official-baltz-was-suspicious-of-mcnally-years-ago …
Edit: atleast he has a name with the story, unlike DVN.
I'm confused. I thought this was the first time anyone had ever taken the balls out of the refs' site, no? It's funny how this is a regular pattern when it suits them, but then the AFCCG behavior was so out of the ordinary as to arouse suspicion when that's convenient.
So this former official reported him to the NFL, and the NFL either A) found nothing or B) ignored it. Further evidence that either nothing was happening or no one ever cared.
tims4wins said:
Let's also not forget that Since McNally stopped asking his crew, it was because he caught on to his suspicions and only didn't ask that particular crew to get the balls early, while obviously continuing to do his evil deeds whenever that official wasn't looking. Rather than, you know, he thought that's when he was supposed to take the balls, then someone corrected him once, so he stopped.
Kravitz is writing for a rabid and still sore Indy audience that eats this stuff up as much as we do. The genesis of that article was probably something along the lines of "hey, Indy ref nobody cares about who has nothing at stake, care to say something bad about the mean old Pats? Truth optional, innuendo preferred."
Also, lol at DVN. The biggest "fact" gleaned from his story was something Belichick already admitted to that people weren't aware of because, well, they're dumb.
edit: The problem with Kravitz is that he received so much positive reinforcement from the aftermath that it just makes sense for him to keep putting this stuff out there. Same with Doyel, who is much, much worse and gave up any attempt at journalism probably since the first time he picked up a pen.
Also, lol at DVN. The biggest "fact" gleaned from his story was something Belichick already admitted to that people weren't aware of because, well, they're dumb.
edit: The problem with Kravitz is that he received so much positive reinforcement from the aftermath that it just makes sense for him to keep putting this stuff out there. Same with Doyel, who is much, much worse and gave up any attempt at journalism probably since the first time he picked up a pen.
He should have enough common sense to let it go. But if not, we should.
I don't give a rat's ass what Kravitz or Van Natta publish. The PR war is lost, the legal case over. Nothing is reopening that case despite fevered imaginations here.
So to the extent you care about this at all, it's probably a good thing net net. We're going to have one pissed off football team to root for all season, it would appear.
I don't give a rat's ass what Kravitz or Van Natta publish. The PR war is lost, the legal case over. Nothing is reopening that case despite fevered imaginations here.
So to the extent you care about this at all, it's probably a good thing net net. We're going to have one pissed off football team to root for all season, it would appear.