Yet more proof

LRJets wrote:The Patriots are looking more and more "human" each day.  Or should I say more "Bengals" or "Raiders"?

How about the Broncos?  Same deal with that organization.

Like the Roman Empire, it's going down quickly.  Brady is good enough to make lemonade from lemons, but overall there will be an almost certain significant drop off in the play, the image, the fan base toleration.

Last night they showed BB in "A Football Life".  He stated he won't be a Marv Levy coaching in his 70s.  I'm looking at him losing patience sooner than later.



As a Patriots fan, let me clarify one thing, and hopefully George you can finally give it a rest.  Listen up.  There is no "Patriot Way", OK, that somehow makes the Patriots more special, or puts them above everyone else.  Read that again.  No "Patriot Way".  The Patriots are but one team among a group of 32.  They do things just like everyone else, and try to put the best product on the field that they can.  There is no so-called superior "Patrioit Way" that Pats fans rely on to look down their noses at other teams.  Simply not true.   If you really listen to what Pats fans are saying, which I don't think you do, I don't hear anyone crowing about a "Patriot Way".  When was the last time BB used the term "Patriot Way"?   I haven't heard him say it once.  When was the last time Kraft spoke those words?  Haven't heard it.  He does talk about being concerned about his brand.  And he should be.  What the hell do you want him to say?  That he doesn't care about the brand?  Please.  "The Patriot Way"  has evolved into something the national media uses, and fans of other teams, like you, uses to take your shots.  It is not something I hear being thrown around by people connected with the organization, or by NE fans.  In fact, most of Boston media says it is a myth.  Its time for the rest of the country to get up to speed.  Its like still crying Spygate cause you can't come up with anything current.  Move on.  

Once again, I am the truth teller.  

Others can cling to their postions as Vice Presidents In Charge Of Hyperbole And Embellishment.

George1963 wrote:In fact, most of Boston media says it is a myth.

They're right about that. It's always been a myth.




Ya, a myth.  I told you, and I was speaking as a Pats fan, that they are 1 of 32 in the league, basically doing business no differently than anyone else.  I'm not the one promoting the myth.  Ask yourself the question.  Who is promoting this myth anyway? 

The Pats have their procedures, just like everyone else has their own procedures.  Nobody can claim moral superiority over anyone else.  Some might do things better than others.  But "better" does not mean the same as "morally superior". 

Just like every team, there are veterans in the locker room that set the tone for young guys coming in.  Work hard.  Do your job.  The Pats veterans (Wilfork, Mayo, Brady, Mankins, Ninkovich, etc.) set the tone for those things by example.  But that's not to say that all other teams do not the same thing also.  

Robert Kraft saying he wants to run his club a certain way is not the the same thing  as him saying "we do it better than everyone else".  He's merely describing the way he wants to do it for his club.  In saying that, he's not putting anyone else down.   He's not claiming to be better than anyone else.  That's the part that you don't get.  If that is your impression, that is media created.  It does not come from the Patriots themselves.  They almost never talk about other teams --- except in complimentary terms.  If you have been watching them closely at all, you would have known that by now.      
 
So then, what's your problem? 

You used a single quote from Kraft 17 years ago.  

You used a single quote from Pioli 9 years ago.

You even went so far as to use a recent quote from an accused murder and liar to try to make your point.  Nice source there.

Interestingly, but not surprisingly, I also see that you couldn't find even a single Bill Belichick quote on the subject.  Hmmm.  Wonder what that tells us? 

"Yet more proof" you say.   I say, yet more proof of what exactly?  


"Yet more proof" is just another example of what you do.  Just like the title of your other thread, you use a phrase to imply something, but you then leave it vague, open ended and unsubstantiated so that your words could mean just about anything.   You imply something negative, but then don't back it up. 

You titled your thread about Hernandez,  "But BB didn't know?"   

Same question goes for "But BB didn't know?", as it does for "Yet more proof." 

Know WHAT? 

Yet more proof about WHAT?

That the player, who was a model citizen for over two years when he was at the Foxboro facility, was leading another life after hours when he left the facility?  I think its fair to say that Hernandez kept his other life extremely well hidden and secret.  Do you fault BB for not discovering that AH kept another apartment as a "flop house", or that he had all kinds of firearms in his closet?  Do you fault BB or Robert Kraft for not having him followed and watched 24/7 once he left the Gillette grounds? 

Alfonzo Dennard was swerving all over the road in Nebraska.  Do you blame BB for not being on top of the situation and calling Dennard a cab? 

I thought conservatives were not into blaming organizations for the bad conduct of individuals.  It goes against the conservative manta that "people have to take responsibility for their own actions".   I'm sure you do believe, as I do, in people being responsible and accountable for their own actions. 

Just not when it comes to one certain professional sports team though, huh?  

 

George1963 wrote:

"Yet more proof.........That BB is smarter than everybody else"

You put the words in quotes.  Who are you quoting? 


Alfonzo Dennard was swerving all over the road in Nebraska.  Do you blame BB for not being on top of the situation and calling Dennard a cab? 

No, I blame BB for again trying to prove he's the smartest guy in the class by taking a flyer on a bad guy.
BTW, I also blame him for writing a character reference to the judge at his sentencing.
For punching the cop.
Character reference.
Do you think he was just completely 'duped' by Dennard when he did that, or do you think he knew what he was writing was crap but just wanted to keep the guy out of jail?

No duping.  I think he just wanted to help keep the guy out of jail. 



Alright, so I think I'm clear now.  You absolutely resent the impression you have of BB that he thinks he's the smartest guy in the class, when in fact he's not.  You know he thinks he's the smartest guy in the class not through his words, because he's never verbally claimed as such.  But rather through his actions because he takes flyers now and then on bad guys, thinking he can get them to straighten out.  I suppose that could be viewed as arrogant.  I can agree with that.  Obviously, he makes mistakes.  But you can both be smart, and still make mistakes.   

If his biggest flaw is trying to prove he can do positive things with certain players that he should not be trying to do because the odds are against being successful in such efforts, then I say that's not so bad.  Not a felony anyways.

George1963 wrote:
I have a serious question;
You apparently think that it was perfectly reasonable for BB to take Hernandez given what he knew about him at the time, which I'm sure you'll agree was more than what you and I have learned about him in college recently and probably more than what anybody else knew at the time given his relationship with Meyer.
Does that mean you think the teams that wouldn't even consider drafting him at the time were wrong?


And I have a serious answer.  You got me wrong here.   I never said it was perfectly reasonable for BB to take AH.  I said BB gambled.  Obviously, he was willing to take a gamble that others were not willing to take.  I called it arrogant.  I called it a mistake.  I said shame on the Pats for doing it.  I said fans have a right to be upset.  I said, next time the Pats need to "smarten up".    I called them "careless".  The other teams that wouldn't draft him were not wrong.  They were right.  BB was wrong.  Obviously, they have a right to say to him, "See, we told you so.  You're not so smart after all.  At least not this time."  

 

I don't have a problem per se with the idea of gambling on a player who brings with him some risk.  I don't have a problem with doing every now and then if you think in your own judgment that its a risk worth taking because you think you can handle the risk.  But you better be pretty darn sure of yourself.  And you better have a good handle on exaclty what that risk entails.  You can't do it often.  You have to pick your spots.   Make sure that if it does not work out, that your downside will be relatively small and manageable.  The case of AH was the wrong spot to pick.  The other teams who  passed him over were not wrong.  Bill Belichick and the Pats organization was wrong.  Its a mess.  But its a mess they brought on themselves.  Shame on them.   

George1963 wrote:"Yet more proof.........That BB is smarter than everybody else"

You put the words in quotes.  Who are you quoting?

Good God. Myself. I said that.


I have a serious question;
You apparently think that it was perfectly reasonable for BB to take Hernandez given what he knew about him at the time, which I'm sure you'll agree was more than what you and I have learned about him in college recently and probably more than what anybody else knew at the time given his relationship with Meyer.
Does that mean you think the teams that wouldn't even consider drafting him at the time were wrong?


George, I think you are looking for a fight with me on this.  But you're not going to find one.   All I do is comment objectively on the evidence.  I try to stay away from making assumptions.  When you make assumptions, typically that is when I fight with you.  We had differing opinions on what kind of risk Hernandez posed coming out of college.  We both agree that he did pose a risk.  We only disagreed on the magnitude of it.  You said the Pats knew he was a "huge" problem.  I said that I agreed that they knew he was a problem.  I just didn't go as far as saying -- based on the evidence I had seen -- that he was a "huge" problem, as if he was a totally out of control person.   The Pats saw his risk as "manageable".  They miscalculated.  They were wrong.  At the same time, AH gave them 2 pretty trouble free years.  I think he regressed, for whatever reason, money maybe.  But he clearly went backwards, and you wouldn't believe someone in that position could possibly be so stunningly stupid, and so mixed up in his values and priorities.  Having said that, I am not excusing the Patriots misjudgment in this case.  But it cannot be denied that there is an element of either (1) him fooling people, or (2) him simply rejecting his good side, and embracing his evil side, once he got his contract, something that makes normal thinking people scratch their head and say to themselves, "I can't believe anyone would do that.  Did the money all of the sudden make him become mentally retarded or something?"