Coming to the defense of Bill Belichick, and other thoughtsThat sounds like a misleading premise, in that Shank implies an undefined but nonetheless solid majority opinion in favor of giving Tom 'all the credit'. Has this been the Boston talk radio theme earlier this week?
Dan Shaughnessy, our man in shining armor! Picked-up pieces while desperately seeking a better new year . . .
▪ The rush to give Tom Brady all the credit for the last two decades of Patriots success is unfair and inaccurate.
At this hour Brady is leading bigly in the “Tom vs. Bill” debate, but none of those six Super Bowls happen without the Hoodie. Week in and week out, year in and year out, the Patriots won because of preparation, coaching, and abject intimidation of the opposition — in addition to talent. In these dark hours along Route 1, it’s a mistake to assign New England’s two-decade dynasty solely to Brady. History will treat Bill Belichick much better than what he’s been hearing from all of us these last couple of weeks. Does anyone ever challenge Red Auerbach’s credentials as a head coach? No. And Auerbach the coach never won a championship without Bill Russell. In 20 seasons on the bench, Red won nine championships, all with Russell on the court. We still built a statue for Red.All that's true / obvious, but I suspect this is a head fake. Come tomorrow afternoon the Patriots could very well lose badly. I've been a pessimist all year about them, and after the Bills game last week I think this last part of the season will be payback for the past two decades, thus last week's ass kicking and at least a loss tomorrow. At that point you know who's going to come out with guns blazing like the 4th and 2 column and the Kansas City Massacre columns. We're onto your old tricks!
It's a mixed bag from there, probably worth reading.
2 comments:
Dan is a fraud
Dan is a fraud
Post a Comment