Patriots - NFL's Second Most Hated?

[jmt57]

Who gives a shyt? The Patriots aren't out to be the most liked, they're out to win the most championships. So far this decade, they've done that more than anyone else.

As for the Colts? Manning garnered a lot of sympathy for being Bill Belichick's bytch for the first half of this decade. His recent success since isn't enough to swing the tide the other way. As for why Peyton Manning is more popular than Brady or any Patriot? Probably b/c our country is full of redneck goobers who'd rather root for a fellow douchebag goober who was accused of sexual harassment in college than some cleancut guy with the supermodel wife like Brady. They can relate to it more, I guess.

"His recent success isn't enough to turn the tide the other way" lol?

What tide? What are you even talking about? The fact that he's beaten the Pats 4 out the last 5, won a SB, is 3 time MVP, considered one of the greatest of all time isn't enough to turn what "tide"? Your hate of him? Obviously your a bitter Pats fan and of course you'll always hate Manning no matter what but what "tide" are you talking about?

BTCF, you're so focused on ripping the Pats and defending the Colts I don't think you even bothered to try to comprehend the comment. BradyManny comments about how Manning had a lot of sympathy early in the decade due to losses to Belichick. The tide he was referring to was about the tide of public opinion: i.e., sympathy going away, and becoming hatred (you know, the topic of this thread) that comes about from the envy of another team's winning ways.

 

[BigtimeColtsfans]

BTCF, you're so focused on ripping the Pats and defending the Colts I don't think you even bothered to try to comprehend the comment. BradyManny comments about how Manning had a lot of sympathy early in the decade due to losses to Belichick. The tide he was referring to was about the tide of public opinion: i.e., sympathy going away, and becoming hatred (you know, the topic of this thread) that comes about from the envy of another team's winning ways.

Manning got a lot of "sympathy" because of losing to the Pats, lol? Ok. Whatever you need to tell yourself man. That doesn't make sense on so many levels. You do realize Manning came into the league in 1998 and was popular when the Pats were stinking right? I mean, in 1999 and 2000 they split with the Pats and the Pats stunk yet Manning was popular. How's that work? I mean, how does your "sympathy" theory factor in the fact that Manning has been one of the most popular NFL QB's since he came into the league as a hyped number one pick?

Some of you Pats fans have to make everything about the Pats and it's ridiculous.

And I'm not ripping the Pats, for the love of Pete, someone disagreeing with you isn't "ripping" your team.

But when someone starts talking crap about my team's QB based on his looks, I'm going to call that petty hater out. Because thats all that is, petty hating.

I respect the Pats, Brady is an all time great QB, BB is an all time great coach. You can quote me on that. I've said it before on these boards so don't try to make me out as some kind of troll but I also don't drink the same kool aid as you guys around here.

Around here (and I know you're all Pats homers so it's no surprise) you all think the sun rises and sets on the Pats and it doesn't.

 

[nashvillepatsfan]

Manning got a lot of "sympathy" because of losing to the Pats, lol? Ok. Whatever you need to tell yourself man. That doesn't make sense on so many levels. You do realize Manning came into the league in 1998 and was popular when the Pats were stinking right? I mean, in 1999 and 2000 they split with the Pats and the Pats stunk yet Manning was popular. How's that work? I mean, how does your "sympathy" theory factor in the fact that Manning has been one of the most popular NFL QB's since he came into the league as a hyped number one pick?

I think its fair to say that alot of people were showing sympathy towards Manning. Here you have a great QB (yes i said that), leading a highpowered offense, and Manning just couldnt get past BB. Obviously thats changed, but the post you were quoting was talking about a specific time frame. Not the late 90s, or late 2000s. Lets face it, the world was freaking out that Manning finally got the ring he so richly deserved. Why? Oh, because they faced such a worthy opponent in da bears. lmao. Manning has always been a media favorite, and when the Colts had trouble during those years, many people were showing him sympathy. Im not saying that because im a Pats fan, its merely my opinion as a football fan.

 

[BigtimeColtsfans]

I think its fair to say that alot of people were showing sympathy towards Manning. Here you have a great QB (yes i said that), leading a highpowered offense, and Manning just couldnt get past BB. Obviously thats changed, but the post you were quoting was talking about a specific time frame. Not the late 90s, or late 2000s. Lets face it, the world was freaking out that Manning finally got the ring he so richly deserved. Why? Oh, because they faced such a worthy opponent in da bears. lmao. Manning has always been a media favorite, and when the Colts had trouble during those years, many people were showing him sympathy. Im not saying that because im a Pats fan, its merely my opinion as a football fan.

Sure pal your opinion isn't that of a Pats fan (although you are a Pats fan posting on Pats board), I really believe you're totally impartial especially after that "lmao" about the Bears crack.

The reason Manning is popular is because people felt sympathy for him, because of 2 playoff losses to the Pats 5 years ago. Sure. Like I said, that makes total sense.

But seriously, you guys are just out of your minds sometimes with the Manning crap. First he could never beat BB. He beats BB, in fact now he owns BB (4--1 remember?), then he could never win the big one. Well, he's won the big one. Now, he's poplular because people felt sorry for him for losing to the Pats and the SB the Colts won doesn't count for much....because.....you "lmfao" about the Bears.

Manning has always been a popular QB, way before playing the Pats in the PO's in 2003. He was in the league five seasons before that. He was a Pro Bowler before that. He was in tons of national TV ads before that. He was one fo the leagues most popular players before that. But of course you're going to disregard all that and say he's popular because he lost to the Pats. Everything comes back to the Pats for you guys.

Seriously, it's not even just the Colts, I can't tell you how many times I've seen "the Steelers just won those 2 SB's because the Pats were having a down year". What kind of sense does that make? None, unless you're a Pats fan. The Steelers won those SB's because they beat every team they faced in the PO's, just like every other team that's ever won a SB. Apparently to Pats fans, no SB is legit unless the Pats win it.

As far as whether the Bears were a worthy opponent or not, they won the NFC didn't they? They had the best regular season record in the NFC. On top of that the Colts beat the Ravens, who had a great defense, and they beat the Pats. In fact the Colts beat the Pats twice that year. Once on the road. But you keep "lmfao" about the Colts winning the SB.

 

[nashvillepatsfan]

Sure pal your opinion isn't that of a Pats fan (although you are a Pats fan posting on Pats board), I really believe you're totally impartial especially after that "lmao" about the Bears crack.

You seem to have issues with reading. By any chance are you the recently banned "feldspar" ? Either way, it is actually possible for someone to be a fan of football, be objective, AND post on their favorite teams' message board. Try it sometime, its fun

 

[BigtimeColtsfans]

You seem to have issues with reading. By any chance are you the recently banned "feldspar" ? Either way, it is actually possible for someone to be a fan of football, be objective, AND post on their favorite teams' message board. Try it sometime, its fun

You really think you're objective after that "lmfao"? Or did I read that wrong?

Believe me, I understand what you wrote, I just think it's a crock. And I also understand sarcasm. Don't try to pretend you're being objetive because you aren't.

 

[nashvillepatsfan]

You really think you're objective after that "lmfao"? Or did I read that wrong?

Believe me, I understand what you wrote, I just think it's a crock. And I also understand sarcasm. Don't try to pretend you're being objetive because you aren't.

Time to go to reading 101.
If you truly think that the Bears were worthy of a fight, you're nuts. EVERYONE knew the Colts would win. Are you trying to tell me you thought the Colts would lose? Didnt think so. Also, try to get to know the posters on this board before you make stupid remarks about them. :banned:

 

[BigtimeColtsfans]

Time to go to reading 101.
If you truly think that the Bears were worthy of a fight, you're nuts. EVERYONE knew the Colts would win. Are you trying to tell me you thought the Colts would lose? Didnt think so. Also, try to get to know the posters on this board before you make stupid remarks about them. :banned:

Everyone knew the Colts would win? Kind of like the everyone knew the Pats would win in 2007? Kind of like that? They shouldn't even play the games right? Because everyone knows who is going to win anyway. You're a logical fellow, I can tell.

Or do you mean because the Colts were obviously the better team (which would make sense since they were the Champs that year after all) the Colts SB doesn't count?

And seriously, I'm really curious, in your opinion, who exactly should the Colts have played then? The NFC Pro Bowl team? Should they have had to beat the Pats a 3rd time, to truly prove they were better?

I mean, God knows the 13-3 NFC champ Bears weren't the caliber of say the 2003 Carolina Panthers or the 10-6 6th seed Giants in 2007.

You should call the NFL and let them know they need to put an * next to the 2006 SB because you don't feel the Bears were up to snuff. Just be sure to explain your objective "non-Pats-fan" opinions to them like you did to me.

 

[nashvillepatsfan]

Everyone knew the Colts would win? Kind of like the everyone knew the Pats would win in 2007? Kind of like that? They shouldn't even play the games right? Because everyone knows who is going to win anyway. You're a logical fellow, I can tell.

Or do you mean because the Colts were obviously the better team (which would make sense since they were the Champs that year after all) the Colts SB doesn't count?

And seriously, I'm really curious, in your opinion, who exactly should the Colts have played then? The NFC Pro Bowl team? Should they have had to beat the Pats a 3rd time, to truly prove they were better?

I mean, God knows the 13-3 NFC champ Bears weren't the caliber of say the 2003 Carolina Panthers or the 10-6 6th seed Giants in 2007.

You should call the NFL and let them know they need to put an * next to the 2006 SB because you don't feel the Bears were up to snuff. Just be sure to explain your objective "non-Pats-fan" opinions to them like you did to me.

You need to stop making this argument more than it is. Clearly, i would have to translate what im saying so that a 10 year old could understand, being that you're acting like one.

 

[BradyManny]

This redneck finds your characterization of the Royalists worshipping at the feet of the Crown Prince of Manning as "rednecks" to be completely in error. Check your noble ESPN and mediot pundits and see the difference. We rednecks have better taste. :snob:

No offense meant towards rednecks then. :blush: Except the one, Mr. Peyton Manning...who I still don't understand gets a free pass for his indiscretions in his college days (imagine if Brady pulled such a stunt!). Whatever it is, there's something about Peyton that's more, shall we say, "red-blooded American" and allegedly easier to relate to for the average fan. And I don't think it's anything necessarily positive. Peyton has a long history of douche-baggery, throwing teammates under the bus & being a whiny *****, whereas Brady is respected & loved by his teammates.

 

[BradyManny]

"His recent success isn't enough to turn the tide the other way" lol?

What tide? What are you even talking about? The fact that he's beaten the Pats 4 out the last 5, won a SB, is 3 time MVP, considered one of the greatest of all time isn't enough to turn what "tide"? Your hate of him? Obviously your a bitter Pats fan and of course you'll always hate Manning no matter what but what "tide" are you talking about?

I respect Peyton Manning a great deal. I think he looks like an a**hole to play with, a crappy teammate, and have played [basketball] with a**holes such as him, so I can immediately recognize it. But I respect him and acknowledge he is one of the greatest players to ever play the game.

The "tide" I was referring to was the fact that Peyton will likely always be viewed as David to Belichick & the Pats Goliath, and thus, will always have the support of those who dislike the Patriots, and always be viewed as the underdog as such.

As for beating the Pats 4 out of 5 times, only one of those games really mattered, and it was a big one, yes, but the Pats still have 3 rings and a perfect season this decade, which blows away the Colts' accomplishments. Again, Peyton's popularity probably has more to do with his "common man" persona he's created - of course, he's a common man douchebag, but that's OK, people only care how funny you are on SNL, not how you treat your teammates or the school trainer.

 

[JaxPats]

I see at as being the most Feared. We just need to be a wee-bit more motovated this year to become no# 1. I want both teams and fans to say. " Sh*t, we HAVE to play the Pats this week! BUMMER! There's a loss right there." Yes, my friends, hate is a good thing. :singing:

 

[glm]

Everyone knew the Colts would win? Kind of like the everyone knew the Pats would win in 2007? Kind of like that? They shouldn't even play the games right? Because everyone knows who is going to win anyway. You're a logical fellow, I can tell.

Or do you mean because the Colts were obviously the better team (which would make sense since they were the Champs that year after all) the Colts SB doesn't count?

And seriously, I'm really curious, in your opinion, who exactly should the Colts have played then? The NFC Pro Bowl team? Should they have had to beat the Pats a 3rd time, to truly prove they were better?

I mean, God knows the 13-3 NFC champ Bears weren't the caliber of say the 2003 Carolina Panthers or the 10-6 6th seed Giants in 2007.

You should call the NFL and let them know they need to put an * next to the 2006 SB because you don't feel the Bears were up to snuff. Just be sure to explain your objective "non-Pats-fan" opinions to them like you did to me.

 

[jmt57]

Manning got a lot of "sympathy" because of losing to the Pats, lol? Ok. Whatever you need to tell yourself man. That doesn't make sense on so many levels. You do realize Manning came into the league in 1998 and was popular when the Pats were stinking right? I mean, in 1999 and 2000 they split with the Pats and the Pats stunk yet Manning was popular. How's that work? I mean, how does your "sympathy" theory factor in the fact that Manning has been one of the most popular NFL QB's since he came into the league as a hyped number one pick?

Once again you are totally missing the point. The topic of this thread is fans "hating" other teams (and their fans.) One theory about that in regards to Brady-Manning and Pats-Colts is that fans love the underdog. Prior to the 2006 season Brady and the Pats had three Lombardis to none for Manning. At that point in time who are most NFL fans (non-Colt fans, non-Pats fans) going to root for? Some may side with Brady because they like being associated with a winner, but the majority rooted for Manning and the Colts due to the underdog factor.

That's it. Don't read any more in to it. Has nothing to do with the Pats going 9-7 while the Colts were 3-13 in '98, or the Colts record in '99.

Some of you Pats fans have to make everything about the Pats and it's ridiculous.

This is a Pats forum, did you expect the major topic of discussion to be about who will be the next quarterback in Minnesota or Tampa Bay?

And I'm not ripping the Pats, for the love of Pete, someone disagreeing with you isn't "ripping" your team.

Perhaps ripping is the wrong term. Going on to an opponents fan forum and saying "Just thought since someone said what have the Cowboys done lately the last time the Pats won the SB was in 2004" isn't ripping, but it is trollish.

But when someone starts talking crap about my team's QB based on his looks, I'm going to call that petty hater out. Because thats all that is, petty hating.

So that's what this is all about? You got upset because somebody made fun of Manning? I don't disagree with you, it is petty. But if you're that offended then you might be better off simply pointing out that the person who made those comments is being a homer and not being very objective. And you also might want to consider what fans of other teams say about their rivals on their fan forums. I can almost guarantee that there are a lot worse things said about Brady on Colts, Steelers, Jets, Dolphins and Bills fan sites.

I respect the Pats, Brady is an all time great QB, BB is an all time great coach. You can quote me on that. I've said it before on these boards so don't try to make me out as some kind of troll but I also don't drink the same kool aid as you guys around here.

Was that under another name before you were banned? Because I don't recall anything like that in your 58 posts since joining this site two months ago.

Around here (and I know you're all Pats homers so it's no surprise) you all think the sun rises and sets on the Pats and it doesn't.

I am sure it does appear that way to you since this is a Pats Fans site. People come here to talk about the Pats, so that's what you're going to see. If I went to a fan site of any of the other 31 teams I would probably have the same impression.

But the reality is that most people don't think that way. A few homers, sure. But to say "you all think" a certain way - regardless of who you are talking about, or what subject - well, you lose some credibility right there. Three or four people with similar opinions does not mean that the entire fanbase thinks alike. Anytime I see somebody say 'all (fill in the blank) think this' or 'all (fill in the blank) do that', it's highly unlikely that I will agree with what they're saying - because they are probably wrong.

 

[Dino 6 Rings]

"beats up"?

The 3 times the Colts have played Pitt in the PO's, two were extremely close, coming down to the last seconds. Losing games by a dropped pass and a missed FG aren't exactly getting "beat up".

But for the record I don't hate the Steelers either, their fans for the most part are pretty classy and I think by and large they have a classy organization.

What a fun thread to read.

Oh and for the record. Yes Beats Up.
2005 = 21-18 (close because Bettis fumbled otherwise we were beating the snot out of you guys)

1996 = 42-14 (pretty sure this is the game we busted Harboughs Mouth open and he bled all over the front of his shirt when we knocked his teeth out.)

1995 = 20-16 (yeah, that one was close hall mary knocked down at the end of the game in the endzone. Very close game. Wouldn't have been surprised actualy if Cowher found a way to lose that one too.)

1976 = 40-14 (of coarse historically speaking you were in Baltimore at the time)

1975 = 28-10 (Is 18 points a "big win"? Not sure. Historically speaking anway its another Playoff win.)

I'd post the games the Colts actually won in the playoffs vs the Steelers but there aren't any.

So yes, I don't hate the Colts because we Beat Them Up in the Playoffs.

I still hate the Raiders and Cowboys.

 

[BigtimeColtsfans]

What a fun thread to read.

Oh and for the record. Yes Beats Up.
2005 = 21-18 (close because Bettis fumbled otherwise we were beating the snot out of you guys)

1996 = 42-14 (pretty sure this is the game we busted Harboughs Mouth open and he bled all over the front of his shirt when we knocked his teeth out.)

1995 = 20-16 (yeah, that one was close hall mary knocked down at the end of the game in the endzone. Very close game. Wouldn't have been surprised actualy if Cowher found a way to lose that one too.)

1976 = 40-14 (of coarse historically speaking you were in Baltimore at the time)

1975 = 28-10 (Is 18 points a "big win"? Not sure. Historically speaking anway its another Playoff win.)

I'd post the games the Colts actually won in the playoffs vs the Steelers but there aren't any.

So yes, I don't hate the Colts because we Beat Them Up in the Playoffs.

I still hate the Raiders and Cowboys.

I was never Baltimore thanks so who cares what the Baltimore Colts did? The Colts for me don't exist before 1984, the good or the bad.

And as far as 2005, the Steelers barely won the game. You can say "if it wasn't for the fumble" etc, but then others can say the Steelers wouldn't have won the SB if the refs hadn't blown so many calls. I could also say if Warner didn't throw an interception as the first half was running out, and if the refs didn't make a pretty obvious no call on the runback, the Steelers don't beat the Cardinals.

1996 is the only PO game the Steelers "beat up" the Colts. I mean, it doesn't matter, the Steelers won, but they were close games. And the Colts haven't done badly against the Steelers of late, they beat the hell out of them in the 2005 regular season and of course they beat them in their house last year.

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

I was never Baltimore thanks so who cares what the Baltimore Colts did? The Colts for me don't exist before 1984, the good or the bad.

And as far as 2005, the Steelers barely won the game. You can say "if it wasn't for the fumble" etc, but then others can say the Steelers wouldn't have won the SB if the refs hadn't blown so many calls. I could also say if Warner didn't throw an interception as the first half was running out, and if the refs didn't make a pretty obvious no call on the runback, the Steelers don't beat the Cardinals.

1996 is the only PO game the Steelers "beat up" the Colts. I mean, it doesn't matter, the Steelers won, but they were close games. And the Colts haven't done badly against the Steelers of late, they beat the hell out of them in the 2005 regular season and of course they beat them in their house last year.

Hey can someone find some Charger fans to get in on this conversation?:disagreement::disagreement:

 

[BigtimeColtsfans]

Hey can someone find some Charger fans to get in on this conversation?:disagreement::disagreement:

Yeah the Chargers have beat the Colts that last two times they've played. When is the last time the Steelers beat the Pats in the PO's? Remember 2001 and 2004?

How many times did the Steelers lose the AFC title game at home? Every team has playoff disapointments and teams that have their numbers. The Steelers have the Pats, the Pats have the Broncos, the Colts have the Chargers.

And the Colts have played the Chargers 3 times in the POs since moving to Indy, we won in 95, lost by 4 in 2007 and 6 in OT on the road last year. They were all close hard fought games. So by all means get a Chargers fan in here.

 

[BigtimeColtsfans]

I respect Peyton Manning a great deal. I think he looks like an a**hole to play with, a crappy teammate, and have played [basketball] with a**holes such as him, so I can immediately recognize it. But I respect him and acknowledge he is one of the greatest players to ever play the game.

The "tide" I was referring to was the fact that Peyton will likely always be viewed as David to Belichick & the Pats Goliath, and thus, will always have the support of those who dislike the Patriots, and always be viewed as the underdog as such.

As for beating the Pats 4 out of 5 times, only one of those games really mattered, and it was a big one, yes, but the Pats still have 3 rings and a perfect season this decade, which blows away the Colts' accomplishments. Again, Peyton's popularity probably has more to do with his "common man" persona he's created - of course, he's a common man douchebag, but that's OK, people only care how funny you are on SNL, not how you treat your teammates or the school trainer.

Blows away? First the Pats didn't have a perfect season, remember? 18-1. That 1 was kind of important.

And how can you say only one of those games mattered and then brag about a perfect regular season in the same post? Do you not see the irony in that?

Not to mention that in 2006 if the Pats beat the Colts at home early in the first game, the 2006 AFC title game is played in NE not Indy. That's kind of important isn't it? Last year that loss to the Colts kept the Pats out of the PO's. That's kind of important isn't it? IMO they were all important, the Colts and the Pats are usually fighting for the best record in football, not to mention bragging rights. Seems kind of like sour grapes when you lose and say "it doesn't really matter" because we both know anytime the Colts and Pats play it matters.

And seriously man, the Peyton hate is ridiculous. A "crappy teammate"? What are you basing it on? That clip of him and Saturday arguing? Him saying "we had some protection problems" after being asked the same question over and over? Wow. What a jerk.

And lord, the school trainer? Yeah, that was a high crime wasn't it? Imagine a college kid doing something like that. Since you're such a stickler for moral behavior BB and Moss must be on your crap list too right? They've both done some things that aren't exactly considered good sportsmanship.

If I was a petty as you I'd bring up Spygate. But I never have. I've never talked about anything non-football related about the Pats. I've never made a comment about Brady's looks. I've never said the Pats only won those SB's because they cheated. But for some reason Pats fans like you can't leave it at legit football, you have to make it personal.

 

[BigtimeColtsfans]

Once again you are totally missing the point. The topic of this thread is fans "hating" other teams (and their fans.) One theory about that in regards to Brady-Manning and Pats-Colts is that fans love the underdog. Prior to the 2006 season Brady and the Pats had three Lombardis to none for Manning. At that point in time who are most NFL fans (non-Colt fans, non-Pats fans) going to root for? Some may side with Brady because they like being associated with a winner, but the majority rooted for Manning and the Colts due to the underdog factor.

That's it. Don't read any more in to it. Has nothing to do with the Pats going 9-7 while the Colts were 3-13 in '98, or the Colts record in '99.


This is a Pats forum, did you expect the major topic of discussion to be about who will be the next quarterback in Minnesota or Tampa Bay?


Perhaps ripping is the wrong term. Going on to an opponents fan forum and saying "Just thought since someone said what have the Cowboys done lately the last time the Pats won the SB was in 2004" isn't ripping, but it is trollish.


So that's what this is all about? You got upset because somebody made fun of Manning? I don't disagree with you, it is petty. But if you're that offended then you might be better off simply pointing out that the person who made those comments is being a homer and not being very objective. And you also might want to consider what fans of other teams say about their rivals on their fan forums. I can almost guarantee that there are a lot worse things said about Brady on Colts, Steelers, Jets, Dolphins and Bills fan sites.


Was that under another name before you were banned? Because I don't recall anything like that in your 58 posts since joining this site two months ago.


I am sure it does appear that way to you since this is a Pats Fans site. People come here to talk about the Pats, so that's what you're going to see. If I went to a fan site of any of the other 31 teams I would probably have the same impression.

But the reality is that most people don't think that way. A few homers, sure. But to say "you all think" a certain way - regardless of who you are talking about, or what subject - well, you lose some credibility right there. Three or four people with similar opinions does not mean that the entire fanbase thinks alike. Anytime I see somebody say 'all (fill in the blank) think this' or 'all (fill in the blank) do that', it's highly unlikely that I will agree with what they're saying - because they are probably wrong.

I didn't read through your whole post, but you say you don't recall me saying I thought BB and Brady were great? Go look up the Brady VS Manning thread from a couple of weeks ago. It's in there. You may not recall it but that doesn't mean I didn't do it.

The Colts aren't hated for the same reason the 49ers weren't hated and the same reason he Steelers aren't hated. It's not just about success, the Pats have a very negative image. Remember "embrace the hate"? Their fans and the team seem to enjoy being the badguys. Pats fans love talking trash. That's why they are hated. Same reason the Cowboys and Raiders are hated. As has been pointed out, neither of those teams has won anything in years, yet they are still the most hated teams in football. It's not just success that makes teams hated, it's the way they respond to the success and act towards other teams and fans.

And as far as having credibility with you, I'll get over not having it. It's tough having a total stranger on the internet say I've lost credibility, (especially one who says he doesn't "recall" me saying something I did) but I'll soldier on.