I'd venture to guess that the majority of the fanbase is out of the loop on that, then. Since you put so much weight on what BB says in his postgame pressers, you should feel confident in defending the fact that some of BB's favorite expressions are "the offense could have made some better plays out there" and not "Randy Moss could have made some better plays out there".
I don't recall saying that Belichick's pressers were indicative of his persona with the players, with family, at the grocery store or at the dentist. Perhaps in your crazy mind I made some sort of connection there.
Nice job side-stepping the question. How about you just say "I'd rather not commit to an answer on this at all" and stop posting on the topic?
I side-stepped nothing. I answered the question directly.
And plagiarism is bad form. Is that how you tried to coast through your logic class as well, off of the work of others?
No it isn't, as I have already pointed out.
You did no such thing. In fact, your entire series of posts here have been a smorgasbord of confused, schizophrenic conflations, false dilemmas, strawmen and flat out false statements.
Of course he would say that Moss is one of his best players. This STILL doesn't confront the fact that he will (if he hasn't already) mentioned Moss' bad play, or the bad play in the passing game altogether, in the film room.
You're awfully sure of this for someone who hasn't been able to form a coherent position or rebuttal on this issue.
Do you guarantee it, Anthony Smith?
If you disagree with this, then perhaps you should go seek the information on what BB told Moss in Moss' first team meeting with the Patriots.
That was two years ago, this was two days ago. It seems you're not terribly good with timelines or temporal reasoning.
He isn't going to change what he does just because Randy is having a tough mental week and is being bombarded in the press.
That Belichick sure is stubborn for someone who's known to adapt to the situation in front of him.
So far, my main points that I have used to confront your so called "points" includes: Brady calling Moss out in practice then defending him with the media (which you, of course, dismissed because it was inconvenient to your argument)
I dismissed it because the events were one month apart, and supposedly Randy actually contacted Brady later to express hurt from the first incident. Since then, Brady has defended Moss to the media and been seen trying to give him a pep talk on the sideline. That doesn't really support anything you drooled onto your keyboard.
an example on how BB cursed the entire team out after the Colts game and didn't exclude anybody no matter how well one particular person played,
That was then, this is now.
and how Belichick dealed with Seymour after the death of his grandfather on top of bringing up BB's words to Moss about how each and every player on the team will be treated two years ago.
That was then, this is now. That was Seymour, this is Randy.
Now I'll ask this again: where are your examples? Where is your evidence?
Again with the attempt at a wild goose chase. You don't even qualify what you're looking for, you're just flailing. I mean, this is how I assume you look right now:
And this changes the fact that BB deactivated Seymour how? No matter if Seymour requested it, then ignored it or not, BB still deactivated him after the death of his grandfather.
Sucks to be Seymour, but he isn't Randy. Maybe he's made of sterner stuff, ego wise. Doesn't really change the fact that he isn't Randy. The comparison between the two is silly.
And you still seriously think that he isn't going to comment on Moss' play this weekend?
Oh, he might comment on it. But not with "equality" to the rest of the player's performances.
That was sarcasm. Not suprised you couldn't catch it. Regarless, sarcasm or not, you're coming pretty close to implying that they should.
Not even remotely.
By the way, I'm pleased you didn't again attempt to refute the point that you don't actually have a mastery of logic or rhetoric, and certainly not what does and does not constitute a logical fallacy. Though it would have been nice if you admitted as much instead of simply failing to respond after saying you wouldn't respond to any of this.