Bill Belichick's Post Game Press Conference Transcript

[Bella*chick]

You apparently didn't actually read the thread. I didn't make any such implication.

Yes I did and yes you did. And even if it wasn't what you intended it is what I got out of it.

Please be clearer when you post.

 

[Deus Irae]

Yes I did and yes you did. And even if it wasn't what you intended it is what I got out of it.

Please be clearer when you post.

My post was clear, in context. Your inference had no basis, if you understand the context.

From Joker:

what bothers me is that immediately, the hack starts in, he doesn't care anything about the game ,the players, or anything related to what JUST HAPPENED.

My response was to that, and followed the earlier

If you're a reporter, "I'm not going to get into that" about AH is a much better Q/A than "I'll have to see the tape" about any game question.

 

[Bella*chick]

My post was clear, in context. Your inference had no basis, if you understand the context.

From Joker:



My response was to that, and followed the earlier

Thanks, that's about as clear as the mud I stepped in the other day.

So let's see, you say you think the reporters are asking about AH because it's a lot better for them to hear BB say "I have nothing to add to that" instead of listening to his non-answers about the game.

THE IMPLICATION BEING that if BB were effusive about the post-game questions, there would be no Rolling Stone queries.

Paging Dr. Naivete.

 

[Deus Irae]

Thanks, that's about as clear as the mud I stepped in the other day.

So let's see, you say you think the reporters are asking about AH because it's a lot better for them to hear BB say "I have nothing to add to that" instead of listening to his non-answers about the game.

THE IMPLICATION BEING that if BB were effusive about the post-game questions, there would be no Rolling Stone queries.

Paging Dr. Naivete.

No, Miss "Desperately looking for a gotcha"....

The response I made was to the idea of leading off with the AH question as opposed to leading off with a game question. It was not about BB not having to field any AH questions at all, or BB needing to spend hours breaking down every single play. Joker was pissed that the lead question was about AH instead of the game.

If you're a reporter and you can get a non-answer about AH there, or a non-answer about the game there, you ask about AH. It's a no-brainer. Others can follow up with the game questions. If you were going to get legitimate game answers, say, about the nationally popular Tim Tebow, you might ask about the game first and then get into the AH questions a bit later.

Or maybe you think it was a shock to the media to get an answer like this

On the fact they’ve kept two quarterbacks in recent years and what would have to go into keeping Tebow:

“Whatever we do will be whatever we think is in the best interest for this football team, the 2013 football team. Whatever that is at any position. We’ll do whatever we think is best for the team.”

Inaudible – but still related to keeping Tebow:

“Whoever we keep, it will be because of the value they bring to the team.”‘

Asking “specifically” about the things Tebow does that could help the team:

“The things that we feel like he can do that will help our team. What he’s been doing in training camp.”

to the Tebow question.

 

[Bella*chick]

No, Miss "Desperately looking for a gotcha"....

The response I made was to the idea of leading off with the AH question as opposed to leading off with a game question. It was not about BB not having to field any AH questions at all, or BB needing to spend hours breaking down every single play. Joker was pissed that the lead question was about AH instead of the game.

If you're a reporter and you can get a non-answer about AH there, or a non-answer about the game there, you ask about AH. It's a no-brainer. Others can follow up with the game questions. If you were going to get legitimate game answers, say, about the nationally popular Tim Tebow, you might ask about the game first and then get into the AH questions a bit later.

Or maybe you think it was a shock to the media to get an answer like this



to the Tebow question.

LOL, it's kind of adorable that you nicknamed me. Tell me then that I got under that cool exterior just a little. Pretty please.

AND YOU CLARIFIED! THANK YOU! Now I happen to be of the thought that no matter what kind of demeanor BB has, surly non-answers or effusive rambling, the lead-off question was going to be Rolling Stone no matter what. It's too much the hot topic and Jonathan Kraft gave an interview right before the game. I just don't think there was a way BB could have prevented this even if he detailed his every thought about Tim Tebow. Perhaps you do? I'm speaking specifically to the he-brought-this-on-himself portion of your earlier thoughts.

 

[captain stone]

I DID like his slapdown of Tom Curran. :rocker:

What was his question?

 

[Gwedd]

What was his question?

Here's the response.......

On the guys who played in the second half and if we should read into what it means for their roster status:

“I look at how they play. You can look at it however you want Tom [Curran], I don’t care. Look at it upside down or backwards if you want, I’m just trying to look at how they play.”

 

[AQPE]

You apparently didn't actually read the thread. I didn't make any such implication.

Counselor, after approximately 10,000 posts accusing others of not properly reading what you wrote, you may want to consider the following possibilities:

1. Either you need to improve the clarity and precision of your posts; or,

2. you need to change debating tactics, since given your tendency to employ it all too frequently, this one is rather ineffective for you at this point.

My good fellow, no one is that often misunderstood, especially someone as evidently intelligent as you. If you want to make a compelling case on this forum, as is suggested by how often you seek to do so here, you need to challenge yourself to do better. I'm confident you have the capability. I say this with true sincerity, I enjoy your posts more than this post perhaps implies.

 

[goheels22002]

Add Ashley Fox and Fred Toucher.

It's Fred Toettcher, not "Toucher."

It's bizarre that 98.5 named the show "Toucher and Rich." What is he touching that would merit naming the show "Toucher and....?"

Is Toettcher touching Rich? Is he touching himself?

 

[Deus Irae]

Counselor, after approximately 10,000 posts accusing others of not properly reading what you wrote, you may want to consider the following possibilities:

1. Either you need to improve the clarity and precision of your posts; or,

2. you need to change debating tactics, since given your tendency to employ it all too frequently, this one is rather ineffective for you at this point.

My good fellow, no one is that often misunderstood, especially someone as evidently intelligent as you. If you want to make a compelling case on this forum, as is suggested by how often you seek to do so here, you need to challenge yourself to do better. I'm confident you have the capability. I say this with true sincerity, I enjoy your posts more than this post perhaps implies.

People are generally lazy readers and writers. Those tendencies are made even worse on internet forums, where people don't worry about spelling or punctuation, don't read the whole thread before jumping in with posts, etc... It's the sort of thing that happens all the time on forums and, since I post frequently and often do so with specific meaning, misreads and misunderstandings will happen.

In this case, a poster whom I generally like quite a bit didn't look at the context of a post and, therefore, inferred something that was nowhere implied. The poster with whom I'd originally been having the discussion did, however, understand my meaning, and he responded in a manner that demonstrated such to be the case. That seems to have gone unnoticed by both yourself and the second poster.

 

[captain stone]

Here's the response.......

Sounds like Bill needed a glass of warm milk at that point.

 

[Gwedd]

Sounds like Bill needed a glass of warm milk at that point.

I think there was more than a little dig at Rex Ryan with Coach Belichick's comment too.......

 

[Bella*chick]

In this case, a poster whom I generally like quite a bit didn't look at the context of a post and, therefore, inferred something that was nowhere implied. The poster with whom I'd originally been having the discussion did, however, understand my meaning, and he responded in a manner that demonstrated such to be the case. That seems to have gone unnoticed by both yourself and the second poster.

Aw, I like you too.

I was just wondering about the specific line though "He brought much of this on himself by being so tight-lipped." To me, that still implies that things (like multiple Rolling Stone press conference questions right after a game) might be different if BB were in general a bit better about answering post-game questions. I don't think in this case it would. I think you feel differently.