Anyone else done with Bill Simmons?

[Crapshoot]

Originally Posted by cthomer5000

This is my major issue with the Manning bashers. They provide a million excuses for the big games he has won, and dismiss any of his playoff losses as his inability to win the big one.

I'm also of the mind that Manning would be every bit as successful (if not more), if he was the Patriots QB during this run.

I'll second this one.

[NoMyths]

I'm generally a fan of Simmons, but my growing concern for his articles is more his immobility than his homerism. Almost every piece anymore is about something he's watching on TV. Ever since the back problem I don't know if he's gotten off his couch.

"Nah, not this one. I'm watching this one alone."
"Here on ESPN.com, nine of our ten "experts" picked the Colts to win. I picked the Patriots. And not because they're my team. See, I think differently as a sports fan. I don't care about numbers that much."

Yeah, you and a million other people on Sunday, many drunk. But this is a Big Deal to Simmons. He's playing the Clint Eastwood role in his version of fan participation: if he is serious enough about the implications, it will Make Them Win. Retroactively, you see; otherwise you're just a sweaty, angry loner on a bad couch.

But then things grow more ominous. It becomes an earnest pep rally. "And that's why I watched the game alone. [...] This was about a great team taking care of business at home, because that's what great teams do." Look everybody, a telegraph from Dr. Freud, preserved in its entirety! Yes, Bill, it's fun to lay on your couch and watch VH1 all weekend when you're in college. But if your personal vision of "taking care of business at home" involves you trying to make two columns a week out of living that experience...

Because for God's sake, man, if you "care about sports that much," and are such a vocal Patriots fan, then why is your buddy Bug calling you from the game, instead of sitting next to you at it? I can only get so fired up about one fan on his couch screaming in empathetic absolution with his favorite football team. The plain fact is that we instinctively distrust your intensity because you weren't at the game. We know that when you're done watching the game, you're going to flip back to TNT or VH1 and think about how profound bad pop culture is and yay irony and all that noise. Now that your entire imagistic vocabulary revolves around bad late-night cable movies, every article's the same article. And I'm all for the odd Steven Seagal reference as a spice, but not a stew.

Whew. The writer is good, but he's hitting a boring (but still kind of funny) patch. I expect things will swing up again some day. The end.

[Draft Dodger]

I've been finding him repetitive and a bit name-droppish lately, but, overall, I still enjoy his column.

[ISiddiqui]

I also want to echo cthomer's points. Manning's critics are getting insufferable, and since many of them seem to be Pats fans, so are they . The big game is not always ones in which he loses. Winning a Divisional Playoff game is a BIG game as well.

[Draft Dodger]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

I also want to echo cthomer's points. Manning's critics are getting insufferable, and since many of them seem to be Pats fans, so are they . The big game is not always ones in which he loses. Winning a Divisional Playoff game is a BIG game as well.

I'm a Pats fan, and I think Manning is awesome.

[RendeR]

I have issues with people saying he blamed everyone but himself, quite frankly Peyton was the ONLY colt that showed up and played his ass off on sunday. The rest of the team ought to be kicking themselves in the ass for not steeping up and playing like they know they can.

Peyton bashers be damned, he's still the best QB in the NFL currently. And while brady is consistant, he's not a star QB nor is he (as laughable as that other thread is) HOF material.

[MikeVick7]

Originally Posted by RendeR

I have issues with people saying he blamed everyone but himself, quite frankly Peyton was the ONLY colt that showed up and played his ass off on sunday. The rest of the team ought to be kicking themselves in the ass for not steeping up and playing like they know they can.

Peyton bashers be damned, he's still the best QB in the NFL currently. And while brady is consistant, he's not a star QB nor is he (as laughable as that other thread is) HOF material.

Laughable because it's too early to tell or laughable because you just don't think he ever get in?

[Daimyo]

Instead of talking about Manning's "inability to win big games" maybe we should be talking about how amazing it is that he's averaged just under 10 wins a season (that includes his 3-13 rookie year) with defenses that averaged ranks of 20th each in both scoring and yards allowed. Maybe even talk a little bit about how the Colt's average wins/season under Manning is higher than any single season win total pre-Manning since they moved to Indy. Might even mention how they made the playoffs 5 times in Manning's 7 seasons after only three visits in the 14 previous years in Indy.

[Ragone]

To be honest.. he's more of a regional columnist then a national level.. since most of the stuff he writes about is northeastern sports..

Nothing wrong with that.. it was kinda cute when new england area fans were considered long suffering.. now that they got 5 championships in like 7 years.. its starting to get a touch swarmy and his act really hasn't changed.. And him making it seem like he was some kinda messiah from coming back from writing for jimmy kimmels joke of a talk show to do his column again was a joke

[CamEdwards]

i can't figure out why they have him commenting on the VH-1 thing. They don't even let him get a good line off.

And yes, I'm still a fan... although I won't be watching any of those cartoons. those were pure crap.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by RendeR

I have issues with people saying he blamed everyone but himself, quite frankly Peyton was the ONLY colt that showed up and played his ass off on sunday. The rest of the team ought to be kicking themselves in the ass for not steeping up and playing like they know they can.

Dwight Freeney will probably find that surprising, considering how much he was in Brady's face. Maybe you can complain about his run d, but I can't recall seeing any Colt LB make a play the entire game (I'm sure they did make some tackles, but I just don't remember them.)

As someone who thinks BSG is possibly the best writer out there right now, I've enjoyed his Patriots and Red Sox articles less and less the past year or so. His mailbags are still amazing and his articles on the NBA are good too. He's said he'll start doing more mailbags soon, which should be good.

[judicial clerk]

I absolutely agree BishopMVP. There is no shame in Dwight Freeney's game. i am so impressed with him.

[Desnudo]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

Dwight Freeney will probably find that surprising, considering how much he was in Brady's face. Maybe you can complain about his run d, but I can't recall seeing any Colt LB make a play the entire game (I'm sure they did make some tackles, but I just don't remember them.)

As someone who thinks BSG is possibly the best writer out there right now, I've enjoyed his Patriots and Red Sox articles less and less the past year or so. His mailbags are still amazing and his articles on the NBA are good too. He's said he'll start doing more mailbags soon, which should be good.

I think he's smart enough to figure out that Pats and Red Sox articles are not the way forward now. You actually didn't see many Patriots-only articles this season. It may take a little longer with the Red Sox, but he'll figure out you can only beat the same drum for so long. I'm sure he's increasingly getting emails that say the same thing. I just hope it doesn't get replaced with all Clippers-all the time.

I'd like to see more of the top sports movies of all time. Whatever happened to that anyway?

[Bomber]

Its sad that he doesn't even understand a single sport at the level of an avergae fan.

[SirFozzie]

Originally Posted by Bomber

Its sad that he's a Boston homer and doesn't have his nose firmly up New York's ass

Translated that for you.

[MikeVick7]

Thank you for that translation cause I was wondering where Bomber was going with his statement.

[SirFozzie]

yeah, I mean, come on, you may take umbrage at which players he likes, or who he dislikes.. or think that he focuses on the teams he grew up watching, but to say he doesn't have the knowledge of an "average fan" in any sport?

That's just BEGGING to be called out on.

[Bomber]

See his Hall of Fame article for more info on why he doesn't know jack shit about sports.

[Desnudo]

Originally Posted by Bomber

I am a bitter, resentful man.

Typo in there.

[SirFozzie]

See Bomber's posts for more info why he doesn't know jack shit about people's knowledge of sports

[Logan]

Honestly, if you don't like him, don't read him. It's not that hard. Everytime you click on a link that sends you to one of his articles, just so you can see how "stupid" he is this time, it helps him get more money out of ESPN. Hit him where it hurts.

Me...I'll just keep enjoying his articles.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by Bomber

Its sad that he doesn't even understand a single sport at the level of an avergae fan.

Dola...

Maybe it's because he's not an average fan. He's seriously devoted to his teams, to watching TV, and quoting movies.

I think he'd be the first one to come out and say that his opinion isn't above anyone else's. He knows he's a homer, but if you really think he's trying to write in an objective way, you're crazy. He's the kind of guy who could probably make a strong argument as to why Bird is actually better than Jordan. He might not even believe it himself, but "his guy" is "his guy." Personally, I'm the same way.

I mean, seriously, Simmons' name is "The Sports Guy" (Which used to be "The Boston Sports Guy" before he got hired by ESPN...so it's not like you couldn't tell where his allegiances would lie). That name, to me, makes him sound like a guy who's going to sit back and fire off the random, opinionated thoughts that he does.

[Logan]

For all you haters out there, you can now hear from people who feel like you do...

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2...ns/daily/email

[Easy Mac]

But his thoughts aren't random. His thoughts are "Peyton Manning is the anti-christ and anyone thinks he is an above-average QB is an idiot." I have no problem with him having a team and writing about them, but he acts as though people talking about a great season by Manning takes away from how well his team is doing. It took Jordan, what, like 6 or 7 years to get past Detroit/Boston to win? I'm not saying Manning is the best player in the sport, but Simmons continues to characterize him as a cry-baby who sucks at football. He's comes off as a bitter, arrogant fan when he talks football.

And I don't know who wrote his stuff on I Love the 90's, but he makes Flava Flav seem funny.

But, since your argument consists of "you're a hater" there's really nothing I can do to refute such a stout argument.

[Desnudo]

Originally Posted by Easy Mac

But his thoughts aren't random. His thoughts are "Peyton Manning is the anti-christ and anyone thinks he is an above-average QB is an idiot." I have no problem with him having a team and writing about them, but he acts as though people talking about a great season by Manning takes away from how well his team is doing. It took Jordan, what, like 6 or 7 years to get past Detroit/Boston to win? I'm not saying Manning is the best player in the sport, but Simmons continues to characterize him as a cry-baby who sucks at football. He's comes off as a bitter, arrogant fan when he talks football.

And I don't know who wrote his stuff on I Love the 90's, but he makes Flava Flav seem funny.

But, since your argument consists of "you're a hater" there's really nothing I can do to refute such a stout argument.

I agree with you that he does come off as whiny in both that recent article and, as another example, the one on Pedro leaving. There's no need to write "in your face" when the team you root for walked off unquestioned winners.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by Easy Mac

But his thoughts aren't random. His thoughts are "Peyton Manning is the anti-christ and anyone thinks he is an above-average QB is an idiot." I have no problem with him having a team and writing about them, but he acts as though people talking about a great season by Manning takes away from how well his team is doing. It took Jordan, what, like 6 or 7 years to get past Detroit/Boston to win? I'm not saying Manning is the best player in the sport, but Simmons continues to characterize him as a cry-baby who sucks at football. He's comes off as a bitter, arrogant fan when he talks football.

Simmons has never once said Peyton is a bad football player. He says he can't win a big game when it counts. Some seem to be of the opinion that some divisional playoff game a year or two back constitutes a big game. Feel free to think so, but unless that divisional win is against someone of the Patriots quality (who you haven't been able to beat), I don't consider that a very big game.

This was a must-win game for him...I really don't see it any other way. Good cornerbacks on the Pats have shut him down...back-up CBs on the Pats have shut him down. He needs to show that he can beat the system the Pats use.

If next season, their paths don't cross (let's say the Pats get knocked off by an upstart Jacksonville team and Indy cruises through San Diego and Pitt with home field advantage), sure I'll be impressed if Manning leads his team to the Super Bowl (not necessarily even a win), and yes I will consider that AFC Championship game against a great Steeler D a big win. But, in my eyes, he needs to beat the best at some point to join the ranks of great QBs, and that means taking care of NE.

[cthomer5000]

Originally Posted by Logan

Simmons has never once said Peyton is a bad football player. He says he can't win a big game when it counts. Some seem to be of the opinion that some divisional playoff game a year or two back constitutes a big game. Feel free to think so, but unless that divisional win is against someone of the Patriots quality (who you haven't been able to beat), I don't consider that a very big game.

This was a must-win game for him...I really don't see it any other way. Good cornerbacks on the Pats have shut him down...back-up CBs on the Pats have shut him down. He needs to show that he can beat the system the Pats use.

If next season, their paths don't cross (let's say the Pats get knocked off by an upstart Jacksonville team and Indy cruises through San Diego and Pitt with home field advantage), sure I'll be impressed if Manning leads his team to the Super Bowl (not necessarily even a win), and yes I will consider that AFC Championship game against a great Steeler D a big win. But, in my eyes, he needs to beat the best at some point to join the ranks of great QBs, and that means taking care of NE.

So you're saying that even if New England got knocked out of the playoffs, they would still be the best?

[Desnudo]

Originally Posted by Logan

Simmons has never once said Peyton is a bad football player. He says he can't win a big game when it counts. Some seem to be of the opinion that some divisional playoff game a year or two back constitutes a big game. Feel free to think so, but unless that divisional win is against someone of the Patriots quality (who you haven't been able to beat), I don't consider that a very big game.

This was a must-win game for him...I really don't see it any other way. Good cornerbacks on the Pats have shut him down...back-up CBs on the Pats have shut him down. He needs to show that he can beat the system the Pats use.

If next season, their paths don't cross (let's say the Pats get knocked off by an upstart Jacksonville team and Indy cruises through San Diego and Pitt with home field advantage), sure I'll be impressed if Manning leads his team to the Super Bowl (not necessarily even a win), and yes I will consider that AFC Championship game against a great Steeler D a big win. But, in my eyes, he needs to beat the best at some point to join the ranks of great QBs, and that means taking care of NE.

The thing that needs consideration is that all QBs play badly versus the Patriots. I'm not going to defend Manning's leadership ability in big games, but when you go 28-4 in two seasons, not many teams are having great offensive games against you. Personally I don't think Manning is a guy you want on the field in a do-or-die situation, but at the same time, QBs always seem to struggle against the Pats. That's just how their defense is.

[Leonidas]

I find the Peyton bashing kind of humorous. Many people seem to forget that John Elway once was ripped just like this on a regular basis, maybe even worse. The talk was always about how great he looked in the regular season but always choked in the big games. Then he finally gets a good running game behind him at the end of his career, wins a Super Bowl, and then it's John Elway, All-Time Great of the Game. Manning has a long road ahead of him and it's way too early to write the book on his legacy to the game.

[judicial clerk]

The thing that needs consideration is that all QBs play badly versus the Patriots. I'm not going to defend Manning's leadership ability in big games, but when you go 28-4 in two seasons, not many teams are having great offensive games against you. Personally I don't think Manning is a guy you want on the field in a do-or-die situation, but at the same time, QBs always seem to struggle against the Pats. That's just how their defense is.

I agree with this and that is why the Pittsburg matchup is so intriguing. The steelers don't need good QB play to win. They can win by handing off to good runningbacks running behind a good line, and stopping the other team with their good defense. Not that I am picking the steelers, mind you, because I can't remember watching a team that is so well prepared and ready to play like this patriots team. Other teams were more talented (49ers, Cowboys, Steelers) but none were more prepared to give 100% and win.

[Honolulu_Blue]

The letters in response to his columns were good and right. He is whining and Boston fans, in general, are pretty insufferable. I can't rout against the Pats though. I just can't. I love seeing fellow alumn Tom Brady win. I loved watching him in college and it's great to see him succeed like he's doing. It'd be nice if he kept this up his entire career and goes down as one of the best QBs ever.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by cthomer5000

So you're saying that even if New England got knocked out of the playoffs, they would still be the best?

Probably. Many people automatically consider a sport's champion as the "best" team. And surely, in a great majority of the situations, that's true. But since games aren't played on paper, upsets happen, teams get hot, etc., while team A will most likely beat team B 99 times out of 100, they can still lose that one time. That's why I will always recognize a team as the champion, but not necessarily the best team.

My main point stays the same though. At some point, Manning has to defeat the Pats to prove his "greatness" to me. I look at it similarly to Steve Young. Absolutely a great QB, but until he was finally able to knock off Dallas, which got him to the Super Bowl, that's when his legacy was made.

[Desnudo]

Originally Posted by Logan

Probably. Many people automatically consider a sport's champion as the "best" team. And surely, in a great majority of the situations, that's true. But since games aren't played on paper, upsets happen, teams get hot, etc., while team A will most likely beat team B 99 times out of 100, they can still lose that one time. That's why I will always recognize a team as the champion, but not necessarily the best team.

My main point stays the same though. At some point, Manning has to defeat the Pats to prove his "greatness" to me. I look at it similarly to Steve Young. Absolutely a great QB, but until he was finally able to knock off Dallas, which got him to the Super Bowl, that's when his legacy was made.

I don't think he has to beat the Pats, but he does need to lead his team to a Superbowl win at some point to avoid the "yeah but" arguments. The odds that both the Pats and the Colts will both be this good this consistently for the rest of his career are pretty slim.

[Desnudo]

Originally Posted by judicial clerk

I agree with this and that is why the Pittsburg matchup is so intriguing. The steelers don't need good QB play to win. They can win by handing off to good runningbacks running behind a good line, and stopping the other team with their good defense. Not that I am picking the steelers, mind you, because I can't remember watching a team that is so well prepared and ready to play like this patriots team. Other teams were more talented (49ers, Cowboys, Steelers) but none were more prepared to give 100% and win.

I think you're right as long as they can avoid interceptions which to me is the big wildcard. That's the only aspect of good QB play I think they must have.

[rkmsuf]

Originally Posted by Desnudo

I think you're right as long as they can avoid interceptions which to me is the big wildcard. That's the only aspect of good QB play I think they must have.

No way Pitt wins without good QB play. That's the key in my mind. NE will test him probably with more guys up near the line to bottle up the run. If he hits some big plays to Burress or Randall El it will make it tough.

I seriously doubt they'll be able to just ram it down the Pats throat on the ground.

[jaygr]

Originally Posted by rkmsuf

No way Pitt wins without good QB play. That's the key in my mind. NE will test him probably with more guys up near the line to bottle up the run. If he hits some big plays to Burress or Randall El it will make it tough.

I seriously doubt they'll be able to just ram it down the Pats throat on the ground.

I don't see why they can't. They did in the last game, with all of the Pats' front 7 starters in there. I am not saying they can win with just the running game alone but seriously doubting that they will be able to run on the Pats sounds kind of funny to me.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by jaygr

I don't see why they can't. They did in the last game, with all of the Pats' front 7 starters in there. I am not saying they can win with just the running game alone but seriously doubting that they will be able to run on the Pats sounds kind of funny to me.

The Pats D has improved vs. the run the last 8 weeks or so (not sure why), Bettis is banged up and chances are the Steelers won't get the early 21-3 lead like last game. So chances are Roethlisberger will have to make plays at some point. Based on his performance last weekend, I think he'll make a mistake or two, and expect the Patriots to capitalize on it.

[jaygr]

The Pats run defense has improved but the Steelers are a very predictable team (you know they are going to run it) and they haven't been stopped yet. Also about Bettis, if he isn't 100%, Staley is, and if you don't recall, it was Staley who had 125 yards against the Pats. I don't think the Steelers will jump to that 21-3 lead either, but I still can't see them moving away totally from that running game, unless they are seriously gettting blown out. As I said before, I am not trying to say that the Steelers will run all over the Pats, I think I was just more surprised in the poster's confidence that the Steelers wouldn't run on the Pats.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by jaygr

The Pats run defense has improved but the Steelers are a very predictable team (you know they are going to run it) and they haven't been stopped yet. Also about Bettis, if he isn't 100%, Staley is, and if you don't recall, it was Staley who had 125 yards against the Pats. I don't think the Steelers will jump to that 21-3 lead either, but I still can't see them moving away totally from that running game, unless they are seriously gettting blown out. As I said before, I am not trying to say that the Steelers will run all over the Pats, I think I was just more surprised in the poster's confidence that the Steelers wouldn't run on the Pats.

I think ramming it down their throat has a different meaning than being able to run for 130-150 yards. I'm guessing the Steelers are around the latter mark. And I think the Pats offense will put up at least 28 points (if we could put up 20 with no running game whatsoever and a number of turnovers we should top that this game) so the Steelers will have to score more than that, and they won't do it without Roethlisberger stepping up, which I don't think he'll do.