ARE YOU NEW HERE? NOT LOGGED IN? PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO REGISTER FOR AN ACCOUNT AND LOGIN TO REMOVE THIS WINDOW
Welcome to PatsFans.com. Do you have an account? If not - please take a moment to register for our forum and experience a much smoother experience with fewer ads, along with no longer having to see this notification window. Also learn about how you can receive a free Patriots T-Shirt from the Patriots Official ProShop by CLICKING HERE. Please enjoy your stay here, and Go Pats!
My theory is that CHB really hates football but is compelled by his employer to write about it. So he ends up always being snide, smug and pointedly provocative when writing about the Pats and their fans. He takes a passive-aggressive approach when he can't write about baseball, which also covers up for his terrible lack of knowledge about football. Whenever he writes something that pisses Pats fans off and they let him know it, I think he goes off somewhere and giggles himself to orgasm.
Folks, it all comes down to one thing and one thing only. Kraft is not from the right family and right neighborhood for Shaughnessy's liking. Before that, it was Will McDonough who rode the Parcells is great and Kraft has no business owning the Patriots argument. This is merely an Old Boston versus the New World battle that was at its height and hottest during the late 90's Parcells battle and then the stadium fight in Southie.
For over a decade now Shaughnessy has been waging a battle that the Patriots are NOT #1 in the Boston market and that the Red Sox are.
For years people knew he was on the wrong side of history.
This year he conceded.
Now it is on to his next battle. The ludicrous idea that Kraft/Belichick/Brady are not as repsonsible for the Patriots dynasty as much as Parcells (the guy who never won a ring here and hasn't been around in 16 years) is. Parcells is more responsible for the Carroll era than he is of the SB rings. Anyone with half a cerebellum knows that.
Nothing more than revisionist fantasy from someone who hates the sport and hates the Patriots.
__________________
"They (Patriots) may be the greatest team ever" - Chris Mortenson, January 18, 2005 on espn.com
FEATURED ADVERTISEMENT
DONATE TO PATSFANS.COM
RECEIVE A FREE PATS T-SHIRT AND SAVE 15% OFF WHEN YOU BUY FROM THE OFFICIAL PROSHOP!
Free T-Shirt & Save 15% Off!
Like Our Site? Please help support our site and server costs by DONATING TO PATSFANS.COM and receive a FREE PATRIOTS T-SHIRT and SAVE 15% off EVERY purchase you make from PatriotsProShop.com. You'll also receive added benefits to your account including Removing All Ads During Your Experience Here At Our Forum.
NEEDED YEARLY SITE DONATIONS: 345 | CURRENT # OF SUBSCRIBED SUPPORTERS: 98
Folks, it all comes down to one thing and one thing only. Kraft is not from the right family and right neighborhood for Shaughnessy's liking. Before that, it was Will McDonough who rode the Parcells is great and Kraft has no business owning the Patriots argument. This is merely an Old Boston versus the New World battle that was at its height and hottest during the late 90's Parcells battle and then the stadium fight in Southie.
For over a decade now Shaughnessy has been waging a battle that the Patriots are NOT #1 in the Boston market and that the Red Sox are.
For years people knew he was on the wrong side of history.
This year he conceded.
Now it is on to his next battle. The ludicrous idea that Kraft/Belichick/Brady are not as repsonsible for the Patriots dynasty as much as Parcells (the guy who never won a ring here and hasn't been around in 16 years) is. Parcells is more responsible for the Carroll era than he is of the SB rings. Anyone with half a cerebellum knows that.
Nothing more than revisionist fantasy from someone who hates the sport and hates the Patriots.
no parcells likely means no: bruschi,mcginest,law,milloy......hell, not having parcells here could have easily prevented any kind of exposure that kraft had with BB that would have led to kraft signing BB. non eof the relationships that precipitated BB's move to new england would have existed.
parcells has a big ego.......BB has a big ego......how much would you like BB if he had stayed with the Jets? they're all big ego's, but it's great when it works for you
everyone hated rodney harrison until he signed here......many hated dillon until he came here....many hated moss until he came here....
it's all just a show to give football fans something to talk about.........
__________________ “ I think good coaches will coach with the personnel they have, and if you only have one (good) linebacker, you’re not going to play a 3–4. ”
—Hank Bullough, who installed one of the first 3–4 defenses with the New England Patriots.
Why ignorant? Because you don't agree. I agree with him about Patricia. I started a thread about it. The next time you hear a single player praise Patricia will be the first time. Same with the members of the media who follow this team regularly.
Its ignorant because these spoiled fans constantly need to find a scapegoat for a big loss. BB has lost it, Krafts are cheap, defense sucks, Welker Sucks, Brady's a choker, Gisele is Yoko or Patricia needs to go. Its an entitled mindset that the Patriots should have won the superbowl every year and if they didn't then its somebody's fault, coupled with an ignorance as to just how difficult it is to win a superbowl. A loss doesn't necessarily mean that certain players suck or coaches have lost it.
no parcells likely means no: bruschi,mcginest,law,milloy......hell, not having parcells here could have easily prevented any kind of exposure that kraft had with BB that would have led to kraft signing BB. non eof the relationships that precipitated BB's move to new england would have existed.
parcells has a big ego.......BB has a big ego......how much would you like BB if he had stayed with the Jets? they're all big ego's, but it's great when it works for you
everyone hated rodney harrison until he signed here......many hated dillon until he came here....many hated moss until he came here....
it's all just a show to give football fans something to talk about.........
Parcells won zippo SB's with those guys. Outside of one year, he never won a playoff game as a Pats head coach.
He is more "The Godfather" (Shaughnessy's words) for 1997, 1998, 1999 and 2000 than he is of anything thereafter. The further away from an event, the less influence.
Did he give a shot of adrenaline to the New England Patriots? You bet he did - - just like he did to the NY Jets, Dallas Cowboys and Miami Dolphins for 4 years or less in each case - - leaving each franchise on downward spirals. It has been more than a quarter century since he created anything lasting and durable. He is the NFL version of a great lunch at a Chinese food restaurant.
In the meantime without Bob Kraft, the Patriots are playing in a dome in St Louis the past two decades. And without BB and Brady, the Patriots have no Super Bowls rings.
__________________
"They (Patriots) may be the greatest team ever" - Chris Mortenson, January 18, 2005 on espn.com
Folks, it all comes down to one thing and one thing only. Kraft is not from the right family and right neighborhood for Shaughnessy's liking. Before that, it was Will McDonough who rode the Parcells is great and Kraft has no business owning the Patriots argument. This is merely an Old Boston versus the New World battle that was at its height and hottest during the late 90's Parcells battle and then the stadium fight in Southie.
For over a decade now Shaughnessy has been waging a battle that the Patriots are NOT #1 in the Boston market and that the Red Sox are.
For years people knew he was on the wrong side of history.
This year he conceded.
Now it is on to his next battle. The ludicrous idea that Kraft/Belichick/Brady are not as repsonsible for the Patriots dynasty as much as Parcells (the guy who never won a ring here and hasn't been around in 16 years) is. Parcells is more responsible for the Carroll era than he is of the SB rings. Anyone with half a cerebellum knows that.
Nothing more than revisionist fantasy from someone who hates the sport and hates the Patriots.
Boston media writers take great pride in beating their own players and team down and feel a sense of accomplishment when a player leaves and says 'this is a tough media town' and CHB and crew cannot digest that a local team has given them very few things to be happy about inspite of not cozying up to the media.
Parcells won zippo SB's with those guys. Outside of one year, he never won a playoff game as a Pats head coach.
He is more "The Godfather" (Shaughnessy's words) for 1997, 1998, 1999 and 2000 than he is of anything thereafter. The further away from an event, the less influence.
Did he give a shot of adrenaline to the New England Patriots? You bet he did - - just like he did to the NY Jets, Dallas Cowboys and Miami Dolphins for 4 years or less in each case - - leaving each franchise on downward spirals. It has been more than a quarter century since he created anything lasting and durable. He is the NFL version of a great lunch at a Chinese food restaurant.
In the meantime without Bob Kraft, the Patriots are playing in a dome in St Louis the past two decades. And without BB and Brady, the Patriots have no Super Bowls rings.
kraft is da man....no doubt.....
that said, BB has won zero SB's without the likes of bruschi, law. mcginest, and they were extremely meaningful contributors to the moment.
honestly, people who minimize the achievements of prior people sound spoiled
__________________ “ I think good coaches will coach with the personnel they have, and if you only have one (good) linebacker, you’re not going to play a 3–4. ”
—Hank Bullough, who installed one of the first 3–4 defenses with the New England Patriots.
Well, I'm a subscriber and here are a couple of sentences:
"Pay attention Patriots fans: As much as the Krafts would like to get credit for all the good things that have happened to the franchise in the last 20 years, it was Bill Parcells -- not Bob, Jonathan, Hoodie or Tom -- who changed the culture of the Patriots. ... The passage of time and the Krafts' insatiable hunger to be credited with everything good has dimmed fans' memories of Parcells' impact."
It's good to think of that twerp suffering as his innards are gnawed away by bitterness and resentment. Long may the Patriots' success feed it!
Wha? If Parcells changed the culture, and Kraft hired him, then Kraft didn't change the culture?
The guy who brought in the guy to change the culture didn't change the culture. Only the guy who was brought in by the guy who didn't change the culture, changed the culture.
Why ignorant? Because you don't agree. I agree with him about Patricia. I started a thread about it. The next time you hear a single player praise Patricia will be the first time. Same with the members of the media who follow this team regularly. We regularly hear how great Dante is. We often hear praise of Josh. Bill gets it all the time. Nothing ever about Matt and Curran has said that he's a poor communicator.
(1.) You don't know what Patricia's role with the defense is in relation to BB or in comparison to Crennel. (2.) The defense has improved with him over previous DC Pees. (3.) It's ridiculous to judge a coach by what you "don't hear" players saying in the media. (4.) Curran was referring to Patricia's communication with the media, not the team.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarrylStingley
It's not ignorant to want Romeo over Patricia.
Yes, it is. Crennel's tenure involved a completely different set of players and a different scheme NINE YEARS AGO. To believe he would swoop in and suddenly make this defense dominant is painfully naive. Coaches fire coordinators all the time. If Patricia was doing a poor job, don't you think BB would replace him?
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarrylStingley
But there's enough circumstantial evidence around Matt that raising the question or making an assertion is simply something you do not agree with. Calling it ignorant is itself ignorant.
Circumstantial evidence??? Your arguments have devolved from ignorant to just stupid.
__________________
Beware ... The Patriot Attack Parrot!
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
(1.) You don't know what Patricia's role with the defense is in relation to BB or in comparison to Crennel. (2.) The defense has improved with him over previous DC Pees. (3.) It's ridiculous to judge a coach by what you "don't hear" players saying in the media. (4.) Curran was referring to Patricia's communication with the media, not the team.
Yes, it is. Crennel's tenure involved a completely different set of players and a different scheme NINE YEARS AGO. To believe he would swoop in and suddenly make this defense dominant is painfully naive. Coaches fire coordinators all the time. If Patricia was doing a poor job, don't you think BB would replace him?
Circumstantial evidence??? Your arguments have devolved from ignorant to just stupid.
and yet this 'just stupid' draws you like a moth to a light
__________________ “ I think good coaches will coach with the personnel they have, and if you only have one (good) linebacker, you’re not going to play a 3–4. ”
—Hank Bullough, who installed one of the first 3–4 defenses with the New England Patriots.
81Likes
Re: Parcells on the Pats
Your arguments have devolved from ignorant to just stupid.
Linear Mode
