Dan has a column about the rout in Foxborough yesterday. Not as smug as you would think, but some cliched digs. A reference to the CBS Scene (get over it, Dan) and a ludicrous claim:
It's been well-documented that Belichick's genius seemed to start around the same time Brady became his quarterback.
Dan is just about a decade off. Belichick was the man behind the defense that shut down the Jim Kelly led Bills.
Shaughnessy seems to lead a 'decade-off' life with all his references to the 1990s. What, to prove that he was alive then? Talk about a tiresome media hack.
If Shank raises the "42-58 without Brady" cliche, point out that this was with a Cleveland Browns team that had far less effective ownership than the present Patriots ownership - and BTW, Belihick made them a playoff team.
He's hardly the leader on the "Randy Moss as Malcontent" angle; the post-game show on television went so far as to draw circles around Moss as he went through the motions on several plays.
Belichick was 36-44 with Cleveland, a record which includes consecutive 11-5 and 5-11 seasons and it took five years to rebuild to the point of making the playoffs after Belichick was fired in the February after the 5-11 season.
But facts are so inconvenient when it comes to spewing venom.
Belichick was 36-44 with Cleveland, a record which includes consecutive 11-5 and 5-11 seasons and it took five years to rebuild to the point of making the playoffs after Belichick was fired in the February after the 5-11 season.
But facts are so inconvenient when it comes to spewing venom.
So he takes a 3-13 team to 11-5 and a first round playoff win, the team is then torn apart by the announcement of the move to Baltimore. He is fired, and then everything afterward is his fault? Nothing to do with Ted Marichibroda's coaching? Or with Ozzie Newsome's great drafts after Belichick left?
The 1994 Browns went 11-5. Two wins against teams with a winning record.
The Browns move was confirmed in 1995 at a time when the team was 4-4 with two of the wins against teams that finished 4-12 and 6-10 (the other two, to be fair, were against teams that went 10-6.) Belichick then presided over a seven game losing streak after word leaked on Nov. 3, a Friday, that Modell would sign the contract with Baltimore on the following Monday.
"Two (1994) wins against teams with a winning record." Meaning what? That the Browns made no improvement as a team? And that seven game losing streak came after the move was confirmed - in other words, the Browns as an oragnization declared there was nothing left to play for in 1995, so they jaked it the rest of the year.
Yup. You're right. Professional football players with an average career span that's the athletic equivalent of that of a fruit fly "jaked it" because the franchise was moving.
OB, you obviously don't pay attention because that's exactly what happened - with Cleveland moving the players had nothing to play for that season. The same thing happened to the Oilers in 1996 - they just fell into a better record that year than the Browns had in 1995, and we're seeing it with the Rams now - the team is going to be sold, it might even move back to LA, and the players see there's nothing to play for this year.
Gee Monkey, you really think football players with the most limited career of any athlete in any sport give up in the middle of the season, jeopardizing their pensions and any time they have left in the NFL because they will be leaving exotic Cleveland for even more exotic Baltimore six months later.
"Nothing to play for?" How about their livelihood, their future, their career?
Begging your pardon, but you seem to have Mr. Belichick's bum print on your face.
Bruce, you show ourself to be a total idiot. "Play for their livelihood" and all that crap doesn't come into play given the salaries most of the players get; there has never been a single example of a team that kept pushing for the win after realizing there was nothing left to play for with a goo portion of the season left - not the Rams of 1994, not the Browns of 1995, not the Oilers of 1996, no one. There was nothing to play for in Cleveland once Modell made the move to Baltimore official, and the team as a group responded as would be expected.
Get your facts straight before you post again, Bruce.
He does float the "Randy Moss as Malcontent" innuendos out there; he wants to be the leader on that front.
ReplyDeleteShaughnessy seems to lead a 'decade-off' life with all his references to the 1990s. What, to prove that he was alive then? Talk about a tiresome media hack.
ReplyDeleteIf Shank raises the "42-58 without Brady" cliche, point out that this was with a Cleveland Browns team that had far less effective ownership than the present Patriots ownership - and BTW, Belihick made them a playoff team.
ReplyDeleteHe's hardly the leader on the "Randy Moss as Malcontent" angle; the post-game show on television went so far as to draw circles around Moss as he went through the motions on several plays.
ReplyDeleteBelichick was 36-44 with Cleveland, a record which includes consecutive 11-5 and 5-11 seasons and it took five years to rebuild to the point of making the playoffs after Belichick was fired in the February after the 5-11 season.
But facts are so inconvenient when it comes to spewing venom.
Belichick was 36-44 with Cleveland, a record which includes consecutive 11-5 and 5-11 seasons and it took five years to rebuild to the point of making the playoffs after Belichick was fired in the February after the 5-11 season.
ReplyDeleteBut facts are so inconvenient when it comes to spewing venom.
So he takes a 3-13 team to 11-5 and a first round playoff win, the team is then torn apart by the announcement of the move to Baltimore. He is fired, and then everything afterward is his fault? Nothing to do with Ted Marichibroda's coaching? Or with Ozzie Newsome's great drafts after Belichick left?
Okay.
ReplyDeleteThe 1994 Browns went 11-5. Two wins against teams with a winning record.
The Browns move was confirmed in 1995 at a time when the team was 4-4 with two of the wins against teams that finished 4-12 and 6-10 (the other two, to be fair, were against teams that went 10-6.) Belichick then presided over a seven game losing streak after word leaked on Nov. 3, a Friday, that Modell would sign the contract with Baltimore on the following Monday.
Ob:
ReplyDeleteWay to go, sport! Someone's been spending lots
o' time on the Internet! Stay away from those naughty sites, you ol' perv, you!
Your pal,
Timmy
Bruce,
ReplyDelete"Two (1994) wins against teams with a winning record." Meaning what? That the Browns made no improvement as a team? And that seven game losing streak came after the move was confirmed - in other words, the Browns as an oragnization declared there was nothing left to play for in 1995, so they jaked it the rest of the year.
And that's Belichick's fault? Is that your point?
Yup. You're right. Professional football players with an average career span that's the athletic equivalent of that of a fruit fly "jaked it" because the franchise was moving.
ReplyDeleteSurrrrrrrrrrrreee.
Timmy! Jumping to conclusions again! Without wasting time on such things as having an original thought!
ReplyDeleteHere's one for you pal: Condolezza Rice and I have the same favorite all-time pro football player! So I knows my Browns!
OB, you obviously don't pay attention because that's exactly what happened - with Cleveland moving the players had nothing to play for that season. The same thing happened to the Oilers in 1996 - they just fell into a better record that year than the Browns had in 1995, and we're seeing it with the Rams now - the team is going to be sold, it might even move back to LA, and the players see there's nothing to play for this year.
ReplyDeleteWhat an ass you are, Bruce.
Gee Monkey, you really think football players with the most limited career of any athlete in any sport give up in the middle of the season, jeopardizing their pensions and any time they have left in the NFL because they will be leaving exotic Cleveland for even more exotic Baltimore six months later.
ReplyDelete"Nothing to play for?" How about their livelihood, their future, their career?
Begging your pardon, but you seem to have Mr. Belichick's bum print on your face.
Bruce, you show ourself to be a total idiot. "Play for their livelihood" and all that crap doesn't come into play given the salaries most of the players get; there has never been a single example of a team that kept pushing for the win after realizing there was nothing left to play for with a goo portion of the season left - not the Rams of 1994, not the Browns of 1995, not the Oilers of 1996, no one. There was nothing to play for in Cleveland once Modell made the move to Baltimore official, and the team as a group responded as would be expected.
ReplyDeleteGet your facts straight before you post again, Bruce.