The Nation's Tears: Volume III

cornwalls@6

Less observant than others
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
1,957
from the wilds of western ma
Even Kornheiser, whose old DC radio show was excellent, has had to turn into a hot takes guy and has gone from reporter to lazy talking head.

But Kornheiser has always given credit to greatness and so has been very complimentary to Belichick even if his takes on spygate were a bit lazy. I think in the beginning Wilbon’s “hate” for the Pats was shtick so they could do their back and forth. But somewhere along the line it turned real. He has been especially panicked this year about the danger of Brady being compared with his beloved MJ.
I think Wilbon hates the NFL, far more than any dislike he has for the Patriots. He's a hard core NBA guy, and always looks for reasons to slag the NFL. His rant yesterday struck me as more of an indictment on the quality of the game Sunday, rather than a shot at the Patriots. In fact as the show went on, he absolutely credited Brady and Belichick as the best ever, and usually does. He went on to say, paraphrasing, that they are, and absolutely should be, the odds on favorites every year until they retire. And that anyone who doubts them is a fool(directing that mostly at Kornheiser). Like seemingly everyone else in that business, he has become a hot-take guy. But labelling him a Patriots hater is not really accurate, IMO.
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
13,068
Brady vs Jordan is a really, really stupid argument. It's hard enough to compare basketball players across different eras, let alone different sports. I guess you could argue that Brady's NFL dominance is enough to join Ruth, Ali and Jordan on the Mount Rushmore of American Sports, but I'm not sure Brady has the cultural relevancy that the other three (and Jackie Robinson) have.
 

pappymojo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2010
5,314
Brady vs Jordan is a really, really stupid argument. It's hard enough to compare basketball players across different eras, let alone different sports. I guess you could argue that Brady's NFL dominance is enough to join Ruth, Ali and Jordan on the Mount Rushmore of American Sports, but I'm not sure Brady has the cultural relevancy that the other three (and Jackie Robinson) have.
Cultural relevance has nothing to do with a discussion of how great an athlete is.
 

Seels

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
3,392
NH
Brady vs Jordan is a really, really stupid argument. It's hard enough to compare basketball players across different eras, let alone different sports. I guess you could argue that Brady's NFL dominance is enough to join Ruth, Ali and Jordan on the Mount Rushmore of American Sports, but I'm not sure Brady has the cultural relevancy that the other three (and Jackie Robinson) have.
Look, I'm not even looking the argument, though I'm up for it.

The fact is people are and have made the argument, and that makes bitter losers out of people like Wilpon who all they have to grab on to are championships from 20 years ago.
 

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
5,429
LA's real team is the Raiders and always has been. They didn't want the Rams back and they sure as hell didn't want the Chargers.
If you are of a certain age, maybe. But they were only in LA for 12 years and rarely sold out the (admittedly large) LA Coliseum. The Rams have a much deeper history (and the Raiders belong to Oakland anyway).
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
13,068
Cultural relevance has nothing to do with a discussion of how great an athlete is.
I'm not saying it does; but the Mount Rushmore analogy is geared more towards cultural relevancy than actual athletic skill. You could argue that Washington, Jefferson, Roosevelt and Lincoln are not the four greatest presidents of all-time; but they were the most culturally relevant presidents in American history at the time it was constructed.
 

simplyeric

aggressively nonsensical
SoSH Member
Feb 14, 2006
12,296
Richmond, VA
I'm not saying it does; but the Mount Rushmore analogy is geared more towards cultural relevancy than actual athletic skill. You could argue that Washington, Jefferson, Roosevelt and Lincoln are not the four greatest presidents of all-time; but they were the most culturally relevant presidents in American history at the time it was constructed.
Roosevelt is Jeter. The other three are pretty legit, at least arguably (sure, you could argue Adams over Jefferson I suppose?)
Thing is, cultural relevance means something different in relation to the presidency than it does to athletes.
 

drbretto

guidence counselor
SoSH Member
Apr 10, 2009
9,983
Concord, NH
I'm not saying it does; but the Mount Rushmore analogy is geared more towards cultural relevancy than actual athletic skill. You could argue that Washington, Jefferson, Roosevelt and Lincoln are not the four greatest presidents of all-time; but they were the most culturally relevant presidents in American history at the time it was constructed.
Some could argue that Roosevelt was in there because he happened to be friends with the sculptor. The real Mt Rushmore is kinda dumb.

 

simplyeric

aggressively nonsensical
SoSH Member
Feb 14, 2006
12,296
Richmond, VA
Its all going to come down to which side makes better adjustments after the reformation.
You just know he'd get flagged for illegal reformation on the shift, but people would still claim that the refs were giving him indulgences.
He might not be on Rushmore, but he was at least knocking on the door.
ok ok, should we put a nail in this one?
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
13,068
The thread title is misleading: there are rivers of deliciously salty tears here from SteelerNation.com.
I like how people keep bringing up how they are somehow doing this without any "great" players other than Brady; when Ty Law was just voted into the Hall of Fame last week.

Also this gem:

I agree... there has to be something going on somewhere.... I don’t know what “it” is exactly but I just can’t believe, having watched this sport for 40 plus years and seeing how hard it is to get to and win a Super Bowl. Great teams... 70’s Steelers, 80’s 49’ers, 90’s Cowboys and 49’ers.. HOF’ers all over the place.... none even coming close to accomplishing what the Patriots have with, as far as I can tell, 1 HOF’er... Brady. Like I said before, take away two fluke catches and Brady is hoisting his 8th Lombardi. It all just flies in the face of the laws of probability.
If you are so baffled that they are able to do this with only one Hall of Fame player that you have to resort to the idea that they are cheating...isn't the obvious explanation that people are just underrating all of the other players?
 

snowmanny

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
11,549
I like how people keep bringing up how they are somehow doing this without any "great" players other than Brady; when Ty Law was just voted into the Hall of Fame last week.

Also this gem:



If you are so baffled that they are able to do this with only one Hall of Fame player that you have to resort to the idea that they are cheating...isn't the obvious explanation that people are just underrating all of the other players?
And this is a franchise that won four Super Bowl titles with Terry Bradshaw as their quarterback.

Ed: tell me that’s not fishy
 

Adrian's Dome

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 6, 2010
4,424
Steeler fans: the gift that keeps on giving.

They're Jets fans, just without the wallowing and self-pity (although a select few are getting there.)
 

Marbleheader

Dope
Dope
Sep 27, 2004
10,468
Stillers fans I know really, really liked being the only franchise with 6. They celebrated last year's Super Bowl almost like it was their team that won. I got texts and emails the day after. Nothing this year. They aren't unique or special any more. There's a legitimate threat the Patriots will pass them now and it's killing them.
 

OnWisc

Microcosmic
SoSH Member
Apr 16, 2006
3,949
Chicago, IL
The thread title is misleading: there are rivers of deliciously salty tears here from SteelerNation.com.
The willingness of the tinfoil hat crowd to demean themselves publicly by asserting their unwavering belief in preposterous theories all in the name of supporting an organization and players wholly unaware of their existence just baffles me. I always think of Meyer Lansky's response to Bugsy Siegel's plan to kill Mussolini when I read shit like this.
 

simplyeric

aggressively nonsensical
SoSH Member
Feb 14, 2006
12,296
Richmond, VA
I like how people keep bringing up how they are somehow doing this without any "great" players other than Brady; when Ty Law was just voted into the Hall of Fame last week.

Also this gem:



If you are so baffled that they are able to do this with only one Hall of Fame player that you have to resort to the idea that they are cheating...isn't the obvious explanation that people are just underrating all of the other players?
But also, the basic premise of the offense is to not be one-dimensional, to always have multiple options and looks, and to have the one key guy, TB, the type of QB who is perfectly happy to hit any and all of his receivers (WR, TE, RB, LB) at any time. I forget the numbers (somewhere in the TB thread probably) of just how many different receivers he's thrown TD passes too, and it's not just a longevity thing.
 

Al Zarilla

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
51,885
San Andreas Fault
I tuned in to NFL radio coming home last night to see what they were saying about the game. Polian was one of the hosts. The poor guy just can’t deal with the Patriots. Every compliment was backhanded and you can just hear how badly he is trying not to come off like a sourpuss and to at least give the appearance that he is objective.

But then he slips. After I was listening for about 30 minutes he made the “point” not to get too crazy about Belichick being great, because the Chiefs beat the Patriots great game plan and basically won the game except for the offsides.
All due respect to one of the best SOSH posters, but there are always haters and why repeat their garbage here?
 

simplyeric

aggressively nonsensical
SoSH Member
Feb 14, 2006
12,296
Richmond, VA
The thread title is misleading: there are rivers of deliciously salty tears here from SteelerNation.com.
This low-salt stuff is for the birds:
Enough with the cheating - they are excellent
I grew up on the winning side of excellence. It was awesome. The 70s Steelers were excellent. The talent was awesome, the coaching was awesome, and the result was excellence. It was a bar that no other team could get over. Dallas came close. They were tremendous, but they were not excellent. When the game was on the line, the Steelers of that era were not great, they were excellent. A level above. The entire team rose above the other team, and there was nothing the other team could do about it.

That's the New England Patriots of today. I recognize their excellence, and it's nice to see again
 

RSN Diaspora

molests goats for comedy
SoSH Member
Jul 29, 2005
7,497
Washington, DC
This low-salt stuff is for the birds:
The good stuff really starts on the second page and just continues from there. Posts like this:

The pats***** have skewed the entire NFL for almost 20 years. How many teams lost SBs or chances at the SB because of this fraud of an organization? Yes, they are good. But they have a lot of help. The cheating hasn't stopped and the refs still favor them like their own children. The Steelers would of had only one more chance at a SB a few years ago because they haven't played the pats*** in the playoffs but one time since Tomlin arrived. But many other teams have suffered because of them. I'm sorry I don't see the greatness. An impossible ability to win with a bunch of nobodies and 2nd rate players. No No NO NOOOOOO. It isn't possible mathematically or logically. They are frauds and the NFL should be ashamed of themselves as well as the ownership of the Steelers for letting this farce continue.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
29,637
AZ
All due respect to one of the best SOSH posters, but there are always haters and why repeat their garbage here?
(A) Thanks. (B) I don't really know. I guess I got caught up in the thread a little bit.

I generally don't care about the various blogs or fan sites or weird commentators like Kellerman who seem mostly to serve to fire the Patriots up. I guess I just thought that Polian was a bit different and I think it's kind of psychologically interesting in that I think he actually believes this stuff and the extent to which these guys have to go through these gymnastics to deny what's right before their eyes is weird.
 
Last edited:

Leather

given himself a skunk spot
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
26,300
If you are so baffled that they are able to do this with only one Hall of Fame player that you have to resort to the idea that they are cheating...isn't the obvious explanation that people are just underrating all of the other players?
The central flaw in this argument is that the premise is incorrect. The Patriots have had lots of players on their team that are either HOF worthy or almost that good. The issue is that most of them weren't on the team A) very long; and/or B) at the same time as one another.

Law, Milloy, McGinest, Vinatieri, Seymour, Light, Wilfork, Moss, Welker, Revis (one stellar year), and Gronk may not all make it to the HOF, but they each had HOF level stints with the Patriots.

But the thing that makes the Patriots able to succeed year after year is exactly because they don't hang on to those guys beyond the point where it no longer makes financial sense. So by their very operational design, the Patriots are not going to have reputation guys on their team for a particularly long time.
 

Jed Zeppelin

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2008
39,015
The cheating argument is my lifeblood. Like, what is the rationale for cheating only enough to win by one score in all of these big games? If they are so good at cheating and that is the only reason they win all these Super Bowls, why don't they win every one of them? How do they ever lose to inferior teams? Why haven't they historically cheated against Wade Phillips defenses or against Denver/Baltimore? Is there some kind of deal with Roger to lose some games in exchange for looking the other way? Do they lose games early in the season on purpose to create an exciting narrative that they are done, with the knowledge that they will push the cheating button later on anyway?

SOMETHING IS FISHY HERE YOU GUYS.
 

drbretto

guidence counselor
SoSH Member
Apr 10, 2009
9,983
Concord, NH
Stillers fans I know really, really liked being the only franchise with 6. They celebrated last year's Super Bowl almost like it was their team that won. I got texts and emails the day after. Nothing this year. They aren't unique or special any more. There's a legitimate threat the Patriots will pass them now and it's killing them.
The majority of my team at work is in the heart of Stiller's country. I'm the only New Englander on the team and of course am the proxy for all things Patriots to them. Not a peep this year. I was completely expecting them to at least poke fun of Brady's performance, but it's like they just gave up.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
35,896
Anyone that brings up cheating I ask them to explain Spygate to me. 99% of people get it completely wrong. People think they cheated but don't actually know what it was and how trivial it was.
Tomase’s crap article about the walk through has absolutely stuck in everyone’s minds. It’s never going away.
 

RGREELEY33

Potty Mouth
SoSH Member
Nov 28, 2005
4,318
Orange County, CA
Anyone that brings up cheating I ask them to explain Spygate to me. 99% of people get it completely wrong. People think they cheated but don't actually know what it was and how trivial it was.
I would just argue it is 99.99%. For me, it has been 100%. NOBODY has ever answered correctly when I asked "Tell me what the Patriots were fined for with Spygate?" Even ardent NFL fans -- not a single one.
 

loshjott

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2004
9,868
Silver Spring, MD
I would just argue it is 99.99%. For me, it has been 100%. NOBODY has ever answered correctly when I asked "Tell me what the Patriots were fined for with Spygate?" Even ardent NFL fans -- not a single one.
So nobody responds with "For bruising the frail ego of the new Commissioner?"
 

RGREELEY33

Potty Mouth
SoSH Member
Nov 28, 2005
4,318
Orange County, CA
So nobody responds with "For bruising the frail ego of the new Commissioner?"
My personal pyrrhic victory at the Superbowl was screaming "Die in a fire with your children watching Goodell" right before he spoke and handed out the trophy -- it was the perfect lull, and I got cheers. LOL.
 

( . ) ( . ) and (_!_)

T&A
SoSH Member
Feb 9, 2010
5,293
Providence, RI
I like how people keep bringing up how they are somehow doing this without any "great" players other than Brady; when Ty Law was just voted into the Hall of Fame last week.

Also this gem:



If you are so baffled that they are able to do this with only one Hall of Fame player that you have to resort to the idea that they are cheating...isn't the obvious explanation that people are just underrating all of the other players?
The quote is great because he has been watching football for 40+ years which includes the last 18 years where the Patriots have dominated. So a team being dominant for almost half of the time that he has been watching football is not enough time to convince him that you don't need multiple hall of famers to win super bowls. outstanding.
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
46,359
deep inside Guido territory
On the Edelman HOF debate: I don't think he's a Hall of Famer unless they start valuing slot receivers differently than outside receivers. I just don't think he'll have the total stats to match up because he sat his first few years in the league. If they measure Edelman against his true peers then his chances get better. Pile on his postseason stats and yes he's got a shot.
 

scott bankheadcase

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 1, 2006
1,018
hoboken
The NFL HOF committee confirmed that counting stats are not the only requirement to get into the hall of fame when they elected Tony Dungy. Guy was a mediocre player and has a good but not all time great coaching resume. He was put in more for his effect in the game in a later context then for what he accomplished on the field.

Personally I’m ok with the NFL HOF being less about stat totals and more about moments, influence on the history of the game, etc... people will argue that Frank Gore should be a hall of famer and when you look at only the stats he has complied then you might agree. But has Gore ever had a signature play or moment on the biggest of stages? Something like Edelman’s catch against the falcons, throw against the ravens or his performance last night?

I don’t think anyone would argue that Frank Gore has had a larger impact to the history of the NFL then Edelman. A HOF that puts in Gore over Edelman is kind of broken.
http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-super-bowl/0ap2000000135588/Gore-33-yard-gain

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlights/0ap2000000135467/Gore-6-yard-TD-run

But yeah, because Harbaugh called three pass plays on the goal line (one of which was a clear defenseless receiver call missed), Frank Gore didn't have any big game plays.

Also Gronk did nothing in the game this year, who cares about his catch down to the 2, it was michel that ran it in right?

(signed, salty Niners fan who thinks Gore is an easy HOFer)
 

Al Zarilla

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
51,885
San Andreas Fault
(A) Thanks. (B) I don't really know. I guess I got caught up in the thread.

I generally don't care about the various blogs or fan sites or weird commentators like Kellerman who seem mostly to serve to fire the Patriots up. I guess I just thought that Polian was a bit different and I think it's kind of psychologically interesting in that I think he actually believes this stuff and the extent to which these guys have to go through these gymnastics to deny what's right before their eyes is weird.
It would be cool to me if someone could gather all the + and - articles and crunch them down into a trend graph showing hate or love (ha) over time for the Patriots. One thing, I am seeing less hate Tom Brady and more appreciation for him for what he has done. Belichick also. Maybe I’m crazy, I don’t know. For myself, as a Celtics fan, I always still liked Michael Jordan because he was so much fun to watch. Didn’t care how many titles he won. Magic also but it was much better when Bird beat him of course. I reserved the “Beat LA” disdain, if not hate for Kareem, Worthy and Rambis. Cooper?
 

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
33,198
It would be cool to me if someone could gather all the + and - articles and crunch them down into a trend graph showing hate or love (ha) over time for the Patriots. One thing, I am seeing less hate Tom Brady and more appreciation for him for what he has done. Belichick also. Maybe I’m crazy, I don’t know. For myself, as a Celtics fan, I always still liked Michael Jordan because he was so much fun to watch. Didn’t care how many titles he won. Magic also but it was much better when Bird beat him of course. I reserved the “Beat LA” disdain, if not hate for Kareem, Worthy and Rambis. Cooper?
I'm with you. Other than the Yankees of course (and maybe the bad boy Pistons of the 80's), I've never really had a deep disdain for other "dynasties" or great teams. I don't find myself hating Steph Curry and the Golden State Warriors for what they are doing right now in the NBA. I'm more aggravated by the lack of parity in the league that allows for them to do what they're doing, but when I turn on a game and watch them play, I'm not thinking of reasons to hate them or tear them down. I don't really even understand the desire to do that. Greatness is greatness and as a sports fan first and foremost, it's fun to watch, even when it isn't your team.

Except when it's the Yankees. Fuck them. Long and hard.
 

Dahabenzapple2

Mr. McGuire
SoSH Member
Jun 20, 2011
7,858
Wayne, NJ
I would just argue it is 99.99%. For me, it has been 100%. NOBODY has ever answered correctly when I asked "Tell me what the Patriots were fined for with Spygate?" Even ardent NFL fans -- not a single one.
Same here - I've never heard anyone know what it was - most of them think it was the alleged taping of the run-through. Plus when I explain it NONE of them believe it.
 

Was (Not Wasdin)

family crest has godzilla
SoSH Member
Jul 26, 2007
2,378
The Short Bus
This is maybe my favorite part of the Spygate wikipedia page

On February 15, 2008, former Rams safety Willie Gary filed a $100 million lawsuit in a New Orleans, Louisiana United States district court against the Patriots, Belichick, and Patriots owner Robert Kraft seeking compensation for the Rams' Super Bowl XXXVI loss in light of the allegations.[40] The class action lawsuit was filed by nationally-recognized attorney, Hugh K. Campbell, Jr. Campbell also represented the Rams' season ticket holders in the lawsuit. After being stonewalled by the NFL commissioner, Roger Goodell, Campbell withdrew the lawsuit on March 10, 2008, on grounds securing testimony from Walsh regarding his possible knowledge of the allegation was an "exercise in futility."[
Gee, who do you think edited that piece in?

I would have liked to respond to that filing as opposing counsel Hugh G. Rection.
 

[icon]

Member
Jul 30, 2005
230
Memphis, TN
Interesting text message....

My brother lives in FL and has a lot of very wealthy / high profile clients for his business. One happens to be a huge Pats fan. Reportedly this guy was told by a FBI agent buddy that Kraft is under some huge investigation and is going to be raided sooner than later. IMO there's no way an agent would risk his career leaking that, even IF it were true... but figured I'd share on the snowball's chance in hell it's true. :D