- Joined
- Nov 14, 2006
- Messages
- 49,633
- Reaction score
- 28,352
Why is it so many homers lose respect for a guy thats a pretty good columnist like Peter King when he says something bad about the Patriots but when he says a negative thing like for instance against the Colts or Dolphins ect: than its interesting and informative?
As long as you talk good about the Patriots you are a good journalist,If you think something is bad with the organization and you print it , then at Patsfans.com you are lousy at your profession -
Come on guys stop being so pathetic and obnoxiously homeristic and agree that all sports columnists are not going to agree with everything your little Patriots mind thinks - Grow the fu(k up
I may not agree with some of what he has written but that does not mean he is now a horrible writer
Sometimes this forum goes beyond obnoxious ranting.....
And NO ONE in here could be more of a Patriots maniac than me when it comes to rooting for this team ,but I could care less what others think,In fact sometimes those negative articles are quite entertaining.
Actually, I had little respect for the guy long before Spygate even when he was a Patriots rump swab two years ago. King has usually been a good reporter, but his opinions tend got go from schoolgirl crush (his manlove of Brett Favre is even worse than Madden's manlove of Favre) to overly moralistic. Any football column where he gushes over his daughter in every weeks' column and talks about about his coffee experiences is not the most most hard hitting.
But I did think Peter King was intelligent. This column makes me wonder. Anyone with half a brain can see that Specter's involvement in all this is not pure and only looking out for the "integrity of the game". If he was, there would be at least one Senator in the entire Senate who would at least give him a lukewarm word of support in this.
I also wonder why he doesn't hold John Tomase to the same standard as he holds Belichick. He has blasted Belichick for eight months now. Now Tomase has been exposed as a cheater (yes, making rumors you hear as facts is cheating in journalism), his only real words about his opinion about Tomase he has made is to praise him for apologizing. Even when he touched on this subject, he has never given his opinion about Tomase. I am sorry, but it seems a bit hypocritial in my book.
Personally, even if it wasn't about the Patriots, I would lose all respect for King (not that I had a lot) for not going after Tomase as he did Belichick or any other player or coach he has chastized in his column. I guess he is afraid to attack another writer in his column, but he holds himself up as a moralistic personal and looks down on people who cheat.
I am a person who has always dismissed King even back in the day when people held his articles up on this and other boards because they overly praised the Patriots because he was as I stated a Patriots rump swab at one point in time. I have always been a person who does not like people who are overly critical or overly praising of the Patriots. I find people who don't look at the Patriots objectively even when they are overly praising them less than credible. That is why I am not a fan of guys like Pete Sheppard and Fred Smerlas. I find them about as useful as Gregg Easterbrook. I am just not going to slam them since they are Pats fans. And yes, I think I am being hypocritical myself on that.
Last edited: