NFL Coach of the Year

by nycsteeler on Jan 3, 2008 4:29 PM EST Comment 8 comments

So I just read that the AP sportswriters have named Bill Belichick the NFL Coach of the Year for this season. He got 29 out of 50 votes. Apparently those 29 people were living in a cave when HE GOT CAUGHT CHEATING!!!!! How can you choose as your coach of the year someone who intentionally broke the rules to gain a competitive advantage? Not to mention he spent the first half the season running up the score on opposing teams because he was mad that he got caught. I guess fair play and sportsmanship don't matter as long as you win every game. The media's love for the Patriots and their "super-genius" coach continues to amaze me.

0 recs | Comment 8 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

crazy

"The media's love for the Patriots and their "super-genius" coach continues to amaze me."

WOW!! That's new! The media hysteria over the rule violation was a DIRECT result of the media hating Belichick, remember? The guy has been absolutely skewered by dozens and dozens of media... and now they love him? Umm, ok. If you say so.

16-0, never been done before. There was no other choice.

by Patriot Nation on Jan 3, 2008 4:51 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

rule violation

Actually, the media hysteria over the rule violation was a direct result of the rule violation, not of them hating Belichick. You could even argue that there would not have been so much media hysteria if Belichick was not so universally respected as a coach. If a coach with a losing record had been caught doing the same thing, would there have been as much media hysteria?

In any case, I'll concede that I overstated things in the last sentence of my original post. However, I stand by the main point of the post, which is to say that a 16-0 record alone is not enough to deserve the coach of the year award. In addition to results on the field, fair play and sportsmanship should be considered. In my opinion, Belichick should not be the coach of the year. He certainly deserved to win in 2003, and perhaps one or two other times recently as well. But not this year.

by nycsteeler on Jan 3, 2008 6:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

get real

the 16-0 season is a hoax as is everything the patriots have ever done so they have already proven they are not legit. the patriots are just as legit as the wwe and belichick is vince mcmahon

fan in korea

by steel town76 on Jan 5, 2008 9:35 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Horse Shit

I usually find I agree with your posts, so take my subject with a grain of salt, but this opinion of yours just doesn't stand up. I don't care what the media says regarding Belichick - the LEAGUE labelled him a cheater this very year. It is offensive to give a cheater this LEAGUE honor, that is all. You (I) cannot take away the stunning success of the Patriots this season and this century. You (I) can't take away 16-0. You can't take away credit to Belichick for that record. There is still no way in hell he should have won the award, because he cheated. Sorry if you don't like that, but it is not idle naming calling - it is an acknowledged fact.

by rushthequarterback on Jan 6, 2008 12:38 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

An Interesting Question

Reminds me of last year when people were arguing whether Merriman deserved defensive player of the year even though he'd been caught using banned steroids. The general decision was no, that disqualified him. In this case it seems it was overlooked, and I can understand why since it was caught at halftime in the first game thus giving him no competitive advantage this season...

but... It does again seem like we're awarding a cheater. Tough line to walk.

by Chicago Steeler on Jan 4, 2008 10:31 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Merriman was the first thing I thought too

The argument then was, "well he paid his price for breaking the rules" and if that's the argument with Belichick then whatever.

I don't think there's anyone else you can truly make a case for but then again I think most of us could have coached the Pats to a 12-4 record or something like that. In the end, all these awards are overrated and the only prize that means anything is decided on the field in early February.

Time to take the training wheels off this offense.

by cgolden on Jan 4, 2008 10:37 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Interesting you bring up steroids

This season reminds me of the Sammy Sosa/Mark McGuire HR race. Just like MLB looked the other way because they new it created excitement, the NFL has looked the other way with regards to the Patriots' cheating because they new that a perfect season would create a buzz.

I know that Asterisk Nation here will say that they were punished for there crime, but let's remember how exactly this came down. Originally, there was talk of whether Belicheat would be suspended, and whether the NFL's full investigation would reveal that the Pats unfair advantage resulted in their first 3 SBs. Well, there was no investigation. The NFL punished Belicheat and the Pats, but then they just announced that all tape, etc. involved with the Pats' cheating since 2000 had been destroyed. The implication was that this completely removed whatever advantage that was created. However, what that advantage was, we don't know, because the NFL never said.

Of course, Asterisk Nation here has said that there was no competitive advantage because they could just record from the booth. Well, that really makes no sense. If there was no advantage, why do it that way? Also, we really have no clue what the extent of the cheating was because, as I stated above, the NFL never disclosed that information. But, given the fact that Belicheat was warned more than once and still chose to break a known rule, it's certainly reasonable to think that he would look for other ways to cheat.

Finally, I sure would like to see where this media hatred of Belicheat is. Sure, Emmitt Smith called him Bill Belicheat, after he was caught. Before that, I don't remember anyone who didn't say that he was the best coach in the league. Even in 2005, Jimmy Johnson picked the Pats to go to the Super Bowl. It wasn't because of their great record that year (10-6). It was because he thought Belichick would figure out a way to win. Boy that sure sounds like hatred to me.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Jan 4, 2008 10:56 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Amen

Amen to that. The NFL's decision to destroy the evidence without revealing the extent of the rule violation is highly suspicious. If there was nothing to hide, why wouldn't they be open about it? On the other hand, if there was some funny business going on during the previous seasons, it would be a PR nightmare for the NFL, so it would make sense for them to sweep it under the rug.

By the way, I feel the same way about Merriman last year as I do about Belichick this year. A player of the year award or a coach of the year award should be based on more than just performance on the field. Of course, I also agree that those awards mean nothing compared to a Super Bowl victory.

by nycsteeler on Jan 4, 2008 12:46 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs