This is one of the most comedically idiotic things I've ever read. If you try to figure out this guy's definition of 'genius' from what he is saying, you get nothing but contradiction and vagueness. He says Dungy is a genius because he's "a nice man, a consistent winner, a best-selling author, and...knows not to take himself too seriously." If you're a nice man and a best-selling author then you are a genius?! This is the worst sort of empty-headed sanctimonious tripe.
That writer is an idiot - but if you click on the poll next to the article you will see that 44% of the people who took the poll think BB was most deserving of the "genius" tag. Second place? Shanahan, with 5%. So nobody is buying what the writer is selling.
I also find it interesting that he excluded Dungy from the poll. I guess by not including him, he can assure himself that no one can contradict his premise that "Dungy is the closest thing to a genius that you'll find in the NFL".
This is one of the most comedically idiotic things I've ever read. If you try to figure out this guy's definition of 'genius' from what he is saying, you get nothing but contradiction and vagueness. He says Dungy is a genius because he's "a nice man, a consistent winner, a best-selling author, and...knows not to take himself too seriously." If you're a nice man and a best-selling author then you are a genius?! This is the worst sort of empty-headed sanctimonious tripe.
The column was a mixed bag. His comments on Mangini were 100% on the money, and his overall point, the loose use of term was "genius" was accurate as well. He's also in the minority in correctly realizing that Brady and not Belichick is the main reason for the Pats success. The negatives were obviously his personal dislike of Belichick to make him look ******ed.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
