Peter King - "New England fans have an inferiority complex"

[RobertWeathers]

What King exhibited what what I'm starting to hear a lot locally. Which is, if you agree with anything the Pats do you are nothing but a ballwashing homer. This is a Felger ploy that he uses a lot, especially when he has Shank and Borges on. I hate it because they try to come off as WE are the voice of reason and the truth. While everyone else are just fan boys. They are so wrapped up in their own over inflated egos, they don't even realize that are insulting the greater part of their audience.

The fact is that King is a ****. His comments on WEEI only show that after a full year of information to the contrary, he STILL doesn't have the facts straight. And as for ****erson, the name says it all. He's just another local blowhard who doesn't do his homework, or doesn't want to come off as a "ballwashing homer". Either way its not a good look.

You know there are times I wonder if we all aren't overly sensative about the many slights that happen. Then we get crap like the Miami story "leaking" out just at the time the Manning story is starting to get some traction, and I become convinced AGAIN that it ain't paranoia if they are coming to get you. I'm proud that we as a fan base, generally won't tolerate unfair unjust and misinformed negative comments about our players and staff.

Let it be known, that you can't just flippantly make uninformed comments about our team and NOT be called out for it. Clearly you media brothers are man enough to do it, so the fans HAVE to pick up the slack. We want you to know, Peter, that if you want to avoid our "oversensativity" all you have to do is do your homework and tell the truth. I don't think that is an unreasonable expectation. I guess Peter and his ilk are hoping for a more docile readership. Well if he wants that, he's going to have to move to Indy.

What I can't understand is why they think a Pats fan is incapable of being critical of the team.

I see it every day. Radio. This board, etc.

These arrogant, uninformed, pompous jackasses are drunk on power which comes with the ability of their thoughts and words to reach thousands of people. Furthermore they almost come accross like they are doing us a favor by offering a national perspective or a polar opposite perspective.

Spare me. I like to think for myself.

 

[RobertWeathers]

King was one of the first "big guys" that came out early on and questioned the Well's report. He was one of the first ones that thought it was way overblown.

King didn't come right out and support Brady but he did criticized the NFL and the Well's report.

Yes

From January to whenever, King maintained that "something" happened when a "nothing has been proven" position more appropriate and realistic to take that in fairness to him, no one in the national or local media room b/c the NFL controlled the information flow.

 

[aluminum seats]

There is no inferiority complex. You could argue that we're overly sensitive, but that's b.s. too as the Deflategate matter isn't over. We are pissed and we have a right to be. We are still out a first round draft pick. The NFL is still going to court in March trying to get Brady suspended. The NFL even doubled down about cheating with stronger language. This despite more and more scientific explanations from professors stating the balls were inflated as expected.

Has Peter King pointed out Goodell's stronger language saying it's a fact that science backs up the cheating allegations while every scientist not paid by the NFL disagrees with that? That new language came out just after an MIT professor posted a 15 minute explanation refuting it. So Goodell knows more about science than this professor? That is absolutely insane. What about the amicus curiae brief filed by Robert Blecker? A well respected attorney and NYU law professor who writes and gives speeches about cheating in sports filing a brief accusing the NFL of fraud is a major story for a journalist who writes exclusively about the NFL, no? Where was King's story about that? King has tried to appear fair on this issue, but his writing on the subject still lacks integrity and Pats fans who are knowledgeable about the subject know this and are right to give him a hard time. We still remember his initial take on the subject which starkly contrasts his take on Manning. We are pissed and we should be.

Excellent post.

You know, away from King for a minute and on the substance of Manning using HGH or whatever. I was watching something recently where they mentioned Barry Bonds' numbers and the similarly crazy numbers of McGuire, Sosa, etc. during the peak of the steroid age in baseball and someone said something along the lines of, "it's crazy how naive we were....just look at the numbers. That's all the evidence you need."

It made me realize, what is even the question here? OF COURSE Manning was using something he wasn't supposed to. He's out with this incredibly serious injury, and the comes roaring back the following year. Wow, that's amazing, huh. Then the next year, he:

--Passed for 5477 yards, nearly 800 more than his career high, almost 20% more.

--Threw for nearly 350 yards per game, when he had never thrown for 300 before.

--Threw 55 touchdown passes, shattering his career high.

Um. It's crazy how naive we were...just look at the numbers.

 

[Galeb]

Excellent post.

You know, away from King for a minute and on the substance of Manning using HGH or whatever. I was watching something recently where they mentioned Barry Bonds' numbers and the similarly crazy numbers of McGuire, Sosa, etc. during the peak of the steroid age in baseball and someone said something along the lines of, "it's crazy how naive we were....just look at the numbers. That's all the evidence you need."

It made me realize, what is even the question here? OF COURSE Manning was using something he wasn't supposed to. He's out with this incredibly serious injury, and the comes roaring back the following year. Wow, that's amazing, huh. Then the next year, he:

--Passed for 5477 yards, nearly 800 more than his career high, almost 20% more.

--Threw for nearly 350 yards per game, when he had never thrown for 300 before.

--Threw 55 touchdown passes, shattering his career high.

Um. It's crazy how naive we were...just look at the numbers.

HGH may have helped manning recover, but he never recovered completely. He never had great zip, but during his record breaking year, his zip was less than it was pre injury. The crazy numbers were more the result of having a great OL, unreal receiving corps, excellent defense and the, hands down, best home field advantage the NFL has ever seen. Considering how gassed defenses are in the 4th quarter in Denver, it would be interesting to see the difference in those offensive stats vs other quarters.

HGH isn't a big deal and should be routinely used to recover from injury in professional sports.

 

[aluminum seats]

HGH may have helped manning recover, but he never recovered completely. He never had great zip, but during his record breaking year, his zip was less than it was pre injury. The crazy numbers were more the result of having a great OL, unreal receiving corps, excellent defense and the, hands down, best home field advantage the NFL has ever seen. Considering how gassed defenses are in the 4th quarter in Denver, it would be interesting to see the difference in those offensive stats vs other quarters.

HGH isn't a big deal and should be routinely used to recover from injury in professional sports.

On the last, I'm not really debating the merits of HGH. Bottom line, it's a banned substance in the NFL.

The Broncos had a good offense then, for sure, and Denver has always been a good homefield advantage. But Manning had excellent offenses for years with the Colts, too, and there he played in a dome.

Hard to measure "zip," but OK. All that being said, for a guy to come back from that kind of injury, in his late thirties, and post numbers annihilating all of his past numbers? Hmmm. Just a really good offense, I guess.

 

[Galeb]

On the last, I'm not really debating the merits of HGH. Bottom line, it's a banned substance in the NFL.

The Broncos had a good offense then, for sure, and Denver has always been a good homefield advantage. But Manning had excellent offenses for years with the Colts, too, and there he played in a dome.

Hard to measure "zip," but OK. All that being said, for a guy to come back from that kind of injury, in his late thirties, and post numbers annihilating all of his past numbers? Hmmm. Just a really good offense, I guess.

HGH is not steroids, but if Manning did it, he should absolutely be held responsible and punished as defined in the CBA. It certainly shouldn't be a huge, permanent stain on his enduring reputation.

A dome is not HFA. If you've ever tried to compete at 5K above see level, when not acclimated, you'd understand the nature and advantage.

Zip is probably not hard to measure, but it's easy to see to a knowledgeable observer. Regardless of how you wanna spin it, Peyton wasn't tearing it up with athleticism. He was tearing it up with skill, a great team, superior HFA and a supreme drive to push his own stats to the limit. That said, HGH probably played a huge role in coming back from that neck injury.

The real story here is the dramatic difference in how the media covered this story vs. a bs, minor equipment violation for TB.

 

[Tony2046]

Excellent post.

You know, away from King for a minute and on the substance of Manning using HGH or whatever. I was watching something recently where they mentioned Barry Bonds' numbers and the similarly crazy numbers of McGuire, Sosa, etc. during the peak of the steroid age in baseball and someone said something along the lines of, "it's crazy how naive we were....just look at the numbers. That's all the evidence you need."

It made me realize, what is even the question here? OF COURSE Manning was using something he wasn't supposed to. He's out with this incredibly serious injury, and the comes roaring back the following year. Wow, that's amazing, huh. Then the next year, he:

--Passed for 5477 yards, nearly 800 more than his career high, almost 20% more.

--Threw for nearly 350 yards per game, when he had never thrown for 300 before.

--Threw 55 touchdown passes, shattering his career high.

Um. It's crazy how naive we were...just look at the numbers.

Case 1.

1. Peyton and his wife go to a anti-aging clinic after hours. Hmmm
2. Clinic is known to distribute HGH. Hmmm
3. Al Jazeera documentary records Pharmacy intern discussing sending HGH to Peyton's house. Hmmm
4. No one has denied the shipment of HGH to Peyton's house. Hmmmm
5. "They" say it could have been for fertility purposes. OK
5b. Now we learn prescribing HGH for fertility purposes is illegal. Hmmmmm
6. "They" say that the intern did not work there in 2011 but Al Jazeera recorded the clinic verifying he did. Hmmmmmmm
7. Peyton comes back from injury and sets a bunch of records. Hmmmmm
8. Peyton denies any allegations. Media believes him because of how he denied them.

Media response: Lets take Peyton for his word.

Case 2.

1. Brady cheated. No evidence needed. Bathroom trip. Denials weren't strong enough. Screw the IGL theory (ask Roger why a law is a theory). MIT physicists? A bunch of dumb asses. Think about the phone not the science.

Media Response: Brady cheated. He may be still cheating now. How else is he having a better year?

Sorry Pete. You can call me what you want but I call this BS.

 

[aluminum seats]

HGH probably played a huge role in coming back from that neck injury.

Agreed.

 

[h0c2000]

Peter King comes across as a thin-skinned man who can conclude tone from reading tweets. He's obviously not too bright either. Twitter and social media is a vast cesspool of humanity. The fact that he gets upset about tweets is laughable, not in his words, the comparison about the media coverage between Brady and Manning.

The guy's the cranky old Archie Bunker hipster wannabe of the NFL media. His stories are the People magazine of NFL coverage. To me, he's a useless source on NFL stories who unfortunately seems to have an inflated influence on NFL stories.

If he wanted to be fair he could have easily used talking points like these:

• I've seen the tweets about the difference in coverage and I can understand the anger of Patriots fans
• I jumped to conclusions during deflategate and I got burnt, I'm not making the same mistake twice
• Deflategate happened during the empty time before the super bowl. It was a feeding frenzy which I contributed to for which again I'm sorry
• Ashley Manning isn't known to have any of the conditions listed as indicated for HGH. That's not a good sign
• Who goes to an anti-aging clinic for fertility advice? Another bad sign
• Stories take time and I don't do hard journalism any more, so don't look to me to break anything.
• Many players get injured every year and I'm not giving Peyton the out that it was justifiable use.