PatsFans.com Menu
PatsFans.com - The Hub For New England Patriots Fans

Patriots popular overseas?


Status
Not open for further replies.
This thread title scared me for a sec before I clicked.

I like that we're popular overseas. It's well-earned on Belichick's, Brady's and the Pats' part. If Brady ever gets sick of 200 million drooling redneck morons hating him, at least he knows there's other countries he can go to where he'll actually be widely respected.
 
This thread title scared me for a sec before I clicked.

I like that we're popular overseas. It's well-earned.

They respect champions. America, meanwhile, has a collective case of either short man syndrome or penis envy.
 
Yeah I expected this thread to be that we put Sheard or Hightower on IR or something.
 
cool...not really a surprise since we're the best team in the league. have been for the longest time.
its similar to all of the soccer fans here in america who like all of the great soccer teams like manchester united/real madrid..

dont mind the pats playing in london, as long as we're the " visiting " team. so we dont lose a home game.:)
 
Dude you scared the $h!t out of me thought it was something bad regarding our Pats.:mad:
I thought it was about this.........."Welcome Gregg Doyel, esteemed columnist for the Indianapolis Star, who joins Yahoo Sports' Grandstanding" ...... "esteemed columnist".... thats enough to make me sick.:mad:
 
Last edited:
Of course they are when the NFL sends **** shows like NY and Miami there way. I'm sorry they had to watch some of the teams they send over there.

It's like Goodell is trying to create an international incident.
 
They respect champions. America, meanwhile, has a collective case of either short man syndrome or penis envy.
Aren't those /really/ the same thing? ;)
 
So if you listen to all this broohah people say about team names being racist or insensitive to a certain portion of the population. How in the world do you suppose that a team named after actual people who rebelled against, fought a war against, and won their independence from the English, be the most liked team in England????

That's as odd as Syracuse being the Umpa Loompa's favorite team.

Seriously you could pretty much make a case that every team's name is an affront to someone. I'm sure Boeing isn't too thrilled with that pathetic team called the Jets.
 
No joke...I clicked on this thread fully expecting it to be about the Patriots working out Cortland Finnegan. I really couldn't stand him.

But he is a veteran CB, and he has a pulse......so I'm open to it.
 
Dude you scared the $h!t out of me thought it was something bad regarding our Pats.:mad:

Yeah the title isn't quite justified. It's like

"DEAR GOD NO, PLEASE NO F'IN HELL NO!

Belichick smiled yesterday."
 
adchchsw.gif
 
I thought it was about this.........."Welcome Gregg Doyel, esteemed columnist for the Indianapolis Star, who joins Yahoo Sports' Grandstanding" ...... "esteemed columnist" thats enough to make me sick.:mad:

I heard that. It was disappointing. Not for the reasons they think I'd be disappointed as a Patriots fan. I was disappointed for the reasons of a regular human being.

Gregg Doyel is nuts. Not an insulting nuts, real bonkers.

The guy screaming that the CIA is covering up the Alien conspiracy that killed JFK because he knew about the contrails is just as entertaining.

What kind of human being laughs at him? What kind of human puts a microphone on him for my entertainment?

(Edit: yes, he's nuts. He claimed a Patriots fan slashed his tire. 1. Anyone knows there is a spare tire and slasher would do at least two - if not all four. 2. Would I recognize him even if he came up to me and said "I'm a writer for the Indy Star." Even if I did would I know his car? The self important delusion of persecution is common in crazy people, usually focused on the CIA or KGB, but Patriot fans in this case...)
 
Last edited:
So if you listen to all this broohah people say about team names being racist or insensitive to a certain portion of the population. How in the world do you suppose that a team named after actual people who rebelled against, fought a war against, and won their independence from the English, be the most liked team in England????

It's because we really don't care. The American Revolution isn't an important part of our history. It's not taught in schools and I doubt the vast majority of Brits could come up with any facts other than George Washington and the Boston Tea Party.

(sorry to break it to you guys)

I'm from Chelmsford (the English one, about 30 miles from London) and first started supporting the Pats during the 2007 16-0 run.

I'd watched the NFL during the 02 & 03 seasons but never really got behind a team. I fell in love with the Patriots mid-season after they beat the Colts and even the sports sections caught onto the quest for an undefeated season. SkySports started showing every Patriots game rather than having various NFL teams on rotation like usual, and the nailbiters against the Eagles and Ravens still stand out for me now.

I moved to London at the start of 2008 as the playoffs got started, and one of my housemates was a woman from Plymouth MA who was obviously a diehard Pats fan as well. The Super Bowl was a heartbreaker. By then I started reading everything on the internet about the Patriots - especially Mike Reiss and his Globe blog.

Like many people, I came for Brady - and stayed for Belichick. I think he's the greatest coach in all of sports. These days I'm as addicted to the NFL as most of you guys are - though thankfully I get to escape Boston sports radio and Sports Center!
 
It's because we really don't care. The American Revolution isn't an important part of our history. It's not taught in schools and I doubt the vast majority of Brits could come up with any facts other than George Washington and the Boston Tea Party.

(sorry to break it to you guys)

I'm from Chelmsford (the English one, about 30 miles from London) and first started supporting the Pats during the 2007 16-0 run.

I'd watched the NFL during the 02 & 03 seasons but never really got behind a team. I fell in love with the Patriots mid-season after they beat the Colts and even the sports sections caught onto the quest for an undefeated season. SkySports started showing every Patriots game rather than having various NFL teams on rotation like usual, and the nailbiters against the Eagles and Ravens still stand out for me now.

I moved to London at the start of 2008 as the playoffs got started, and one of my housemates was a woman from Plymouth MA who was obviously a diehard Pats fan as well. The Super Bowl was a heartbreaker. By then I started reading everything on the internet about the Patriots - especially Mike Reiss and his Globe blog.

Like many people, I came for Brady - and stayed for Belichick. I think he's the greatest coach in all of sports. These days I'm as addicted to the NFL as most of you guys are - though thankfully I get to escape Boston sports radio and Sports Center!
It's interesting to hear you say that the American Revolution wasn't an important part of British history. Certainly the colonization of North America with the resulting trade in tobacco, sugar, slaves, and later cotton, was extremely important to the growth of the British economy. And in the 20th century, the common culture and language was an important reason for American involvement in WWI and WWII. And Britain benefits from the growing international hegemony of the English language, which is largely the result of post WWII American political, economic, military, and scientific dominance.
 
@NormZauchin

In terms of global knock-on effects, the American Revolution is undoubtedly huge - especially from the present-day perspective. The colossal size of the American industrial base, plus the USA's population advantages over most other countries, were huge in determining the outcomes of both World Wars. Globalisation during the last 40 years has been based around American hegemony and the end of the Cold War, which has created many advantages for British 'soft power' in alliance with American economic dominance.

So no arguments from me there, I can promise you that.

But the American Revolution itself is actually a fairly minor part of our history. Bear in mind that it was the United States' growth (both territorially and industrially) during the 19th and 20th centuries, as an independent nation, that has made America what it is today - not the 13 colonies that broke off from Britain in the late 18th century.

From a European perspective, Britain was at war with France on and off for several centuries. We were a minor European power until the late 17th century, when we began to develop into an important mercantile trading nation, and we adopted a diplomatic position which saw us maintain the balance of power in Europe (which is code for us joining whichever side suited us). In the mid-18th century, we fought the Seven Years' War with France, including in the North American theatre (the French and Indian Wars) where George Washington fought on behalf of Britain. We won, crippling the French navy in the process, and France gave us modern-day Quebec. This was effectively the start of the rise of the British Empire to world domination.

Obviously the American colonies broke off soon after, and Britain turned its attention to Africa and Asia. But the loss of the American colonies did lead to the fall of the government of the time.

During the same period, India was 'the jewel in the crown' of British colonies, producing huge incomes for Britain, and in the 19th century we were a leading part of the race to colonise Africa - discovering huge mineral deposits. India and Africa played huge roles in subsidising our naval dominance over the other European powers.

The early 19th century was dominated by the Napoleonic Wars, during which it was genuinely feared that Britain would be invaded by French forces. Eventually Napoleon was defeated at Trafalgar (at sea), and on land at Waterloo. This led to a century-long period of British hegemony (1815-1914), during which Britain and its global possessions (India, Canada, Egypt, South Africa, Australia, New Zealand, various Caribbean colonies) cemented our role as the world superpower of the 19th century. During this period we controlled all sea-based trade through the Royal Navy, there were no global conflicts (Pax Britannica) and the few regional conflicts were land-based only.

This all came to an end with World War One breaking out in 1914, which absolutely crippled the European empires (World War Two was the metaphorical coup de grace) and created a vacuum that the United States filled, over a period of roughly 30 years. By the end, America was transformed from an isolationist industrial power and became the military & economic leader of the Western world - which links back to my first paragraph.


I've written way too much but hopefully it'll be interesting and the mods won't just delete it - I assume this thread is basically dead for all intents and purposes anyway. Erm...go Pats?!
 
@NormZauchin

In terms of global knock-on effects, the American Revolution is undoubtedly huge - especially from the present-day perspective. The colossal size of the American industrial base, plus the USA's population advantages over most other countries, were huge in determining the outcomes of both World Wars. Globalisation during the last 40 years has been based around American hegemony and the end of the Cold War, which has created many advantages for British 'soft power' in alliance with American economic dominance.

So no arguments from me there, I can promise you that.

But the American Revolution itself is actually a fairly minor part of our history. Bear in mind that it was the United States' growth (both territorially and industrially) during the 19th and 20th centuries, as an independent nation, that has made America what it is today - not the 13 colonies that broke off from Britain in the late 18th century.

From a European perspective, Britain was at war with France on and off for several centuries. We were a minor European power until the late 17th century, when we began to develop into an important mercantile trading nation, and we adopted a diplomatic position which saw us maintain the balance of power in Europe (which is code for us joining whichever side suited us). In the mid-18th century, we fought the Seven Years' War with France, including in the North American theatre (the French and Indian Wars) where George Washington fought on behalf of Britain. We won, crippling the French navy in the process, and France gave us modern-day Quebec. This was effectively the start of the rise of the British Empire to world domination.

Obviously the American colonies broke off soon after, and Britain turned its attention to Africa and Asia. But the loss of the American colonies did lead to the fall of the government of the time.

During the same period, India was 'the jewel in the crown' of British colonies, producing huge incomes for Britain, and in the 19th century we were a leading part of the race to colonise Africa - discovering huge mineral deposits. India and Africa played huge roles in subsidising our naval dominance over the other European powers.

The early 19th century was dominated by the Napoleonic Wars, during which it was genuinely feared that Britain would be invaded by French forces. Eventually Napoleon was defeated at Trafalgar (at sea), and on land at Waterloo. This led to a century-long period of British hegemony (1815-1914), during which Britain and its global possessions (India, Canada, Egypt, South Africa, Australia, New Zealand, various Caribbean colonies) cemented our role as the world superpower of the 19th century. During this period we controlled all sea-based trade through the Royal Navy, there were no global conflicts (Pax Britannica) and the few regional conflicts were land-based only.

This all came to an end with World War One breaking out in 1914, which absolutely crippled the European empires (World War Two was the metaphorical coup de grace) and created a vacuum that the United States filled, over a period of roughly 30 years. By the end, America was transformed from an isolationist industrial power and became the military & economic leader of the Western world - which links back to my first paragraph.


I've written way too much but hopefully it'll be interesting and the mods won't just delete it - I assume this thread is basically dead for all intents and purposes anyway. Erm...go Pats?!
Nice summary of British history, of which I was cognizant. (My wife was a history professor until her recent retirement.) But trade with North America and the Caribbean in the 18th century was very important to Britain's growth as a mercantile power and the loss of the colonies was not trivial in economic terms. Britain recovered quickly, but I can't help thinking that the ignoring of the American Revolution in British history books is, in part, a desire to overlook an embarrassing defeat to what was then a small, rural nation. Sort of like the Jets upsetting the Patriots.
 
Pats are popular here in China. NFL offers free streaming feed to Chinese video sites. They stream all 16 Pats game.

Probably because of all the Chinese students in Mass.
 
I suspect most foreigners look at BSgate like they viewed the whole Clinton BJ scandal, uterly ridiculous.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


MORSE: Patriots QB Drake Maye Analysis and What to Expect in Round 2 and 3
Five Patriots/NFL Thoughts Following Night One of the 2024 NFL Draft
Friday Patriots Notebook 4/26: News and Notes
TRANSCRIPT: Patriots QB Drake Maye Conference Call
Patriots Now Have to Get to Work After Taking Maye
TRANSCRIPT: Eliot Wolf and Jerod Mayo After Patriots Take Drake Maye
Thursday Patriots Notebook 4/25: News and Notes
Patriots Kraft ‘Involved’ In Decision Making?  Zolak Says That’s Not the Case
MORSE: Final First Round Patriots Mock Draft
Slow Starts: Stark Contrast as Patriots Ponder Which Top QB To Draft
Back
Top