Dungy/Belichick photo

Sports Journalists Forum – Media, Newsroom & Reporting Talk

Help Support Sports Journalists Forum:

IU90 said:
Boobie Miles said:
IU90 said:
Fenian_Bastard said:
Whoa.
First of all, as near as I can tell, the SB ring count is 3-1 in favor of The Miserable Dickhead over The Judgmental Christian Dickhead. Hard to make TJCD out the winner there. I don't care if Bill Belichick doesn't like sports journalists. Tony Dungy doesn't like people simply because of who (and how) they ****, and he brings god into the matter besides. Forgive me if I'm not impressed.
And the notion that preferring Belichick to Dungy means that someone is prima facie difficult to live with strikes me as a bit over the top.

FB, that's the first time I've seen anyone use the word dickhead in reference to Dungy, and it is completely out of line. Dungy treats those around him with a greater degree of graciousness and respect than any football coach I've ever seen. And anyone in the Colts organization will tell you that means EVERYONE from the lowest janitorial guy on up, and also pretty means always, even after the most devastatingly painful defeats and the most devastatingly painful personal tragedy. There's not a dickheaded bone in his body.

...Unless said janitor is gay, of course.
That anti-gay label that some of you have tried to hang on Dungy is completely unfair bull****. And I say that as a guy who's pro gay-marriage and certainly no conservative.

Boobie, please back that up by showing me a single anti-gay remark that Dungy has ever made in his entire life. I bet you can't do it because he's never done it. He accepted an invitation to speak at a function for some christian organization called the Family Institute that takes an anti-gay marriage political position. Big ****ing deal.

Yeah, Dungy is a Christian, and yeah elements of the christian right can be annoying and dangerous. But his religious beliefs alone shouldn't cause anyone to call him a dickhead, instead dickheadedness should be judged by how he personally treats others, at least IMO. Imagine calling a muslim coach a dickhead solely because he adhered to the tenets of his faith.

I get the impression that some writers pounced on this only because they were tired of Dungy acting all classy and nice for all these years and were looking for some chink in the armour. They heard about this speaking gig and figured there it is, we can spin this into a claim that he's anti-gay, nevermind the fact that he's never actually said a hateful word about gays in his entire life.

Would you like to back up that last statement with the same burden of proof you want me to provide?

Look I don't care if Dungy is a saint or a piece of ****. I just threw that line out because the truth is we don't what type of people these guys are. I just think it's useless to make judgment about a guy's morals based on what he says in public or how he treats the press.

This is professional sports. Winning is far and above everything else in importance. If you can be a good guy at the same time that's great, but I don't understand why everyone acts like that's so important nowadays.
 
sportschick said:
Stoney said:
Orange Hat Bobcat said:
PhilaYank36 said:
I know it's been asked a million times, but I don't care; I'm asking again: what in the bloody hell made Belichick such an angry, bitter *******?

Though I am unable to confirm all this at the moment, these might be a few reasons why Bill is who he is ...

-- I believe he is divorced.

-- His children, when I knew them years ago, were pains in the butt. I can imagine they haven't changed too much since.

-- His son was recently cited for pot possession (nothing major, but enough to frustrate any parent).

-- He works 18 or 20 hours per day.

-- He worked previously for Art Modell. Then he was booted out of Cleveland when the team moved to Baltimore.

Of course, those could more easily be the effects ofbeing such an angry bitter ******* rather than the cause, especially since he was already known as an angry bitter ******* years ago in Cleveland before most of the above **** happened.

Maybe it has something to do with winning three Super Bowls and becoming filthy rich.

Except he won the Super Bowls long after he became an angry, bitter *******.

I still think it was losing a fight to Bernie, perhaps the most unathletic QB, like ever.
Maybe he was taunted and poked at so much during his days at Wesleyan as a student, he developed the Napoleonic syndrome. Or, something really ****ed up happen early in his life for him to be like this (being somewhat serious).

Look, I don't care if Dungy is a Christian or not, but attempting to throw little political curveball bull**** into is childish at best.
 
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/colts/2007-03-21-dungy-remarks_N.htm

Dickhead.
QED.
 
IU90 said:
Boobie Miles said:
IU90 said:
Fenian_Bastard said:
Whoa.
First of all, as near as I can tell, the SB ring count is 3-1 in favor of The Miserable Dickhead over The Judgmental Christian Dickhead. Hard to make TJCD out the winner there. I don't care if Bill Belichick doesn't like sports journalists. Tony Dungy doesn't like people simply because of who (and how) they ****, and he brings god into the matter besides. Forgive me if I'm not impressed.
And the notion that preferring Belichick to Dungy means that someone is prima facie difficult to live with strikes me as a bit over the top.

FB, that's the first time I've seen anyone use the word dickhead in reference to Dungy, and it is completely out of line. Dungy treats those around him with a greater degree of graciousness and respect than any football coach I've ever seen. And anyone in the Colts organization will tell you that means EVERYONE from the lowest janitorial guy on up, and also pretty means always, even after the most devastatingly painful defeats and the most devastatingly painful personal tragedy. There's not a dickheaded bone in his body.

...Unless said janitor is gay, of course.
That anti-gay label that some of you have tried to hang on Dungy is completely unfair bull****. And I say that as a guy with IU in his screennamewho's pro gay-marriage and certainly no conservative.
 
Fenian_Bastard said:
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/colts/2007-03-21-dungy-remarks_N.htm

Dickhead.
QED.

I guess that makes 95 percent of black America a bunch of dickheads then.
 
Simon_Cowbell said:
Fenian_Bastard said:
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/colts/2007-03-21-dungy-remarks_N.htm

Dickhead.
QED.

I guess that makes 95 percent of black America a bunch of dickheads then.

If they act in such a way as to deny their fellow citizens equal protection of the secular law, you're damn right it does. And that what Dungy publicly and enthusiastically campaigned for. Compared to that, BB's transgressions don;t touch on anything remotely as serious.
 
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases. Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change.
If they act in such a way as to deny their fellow citizens equal protection of the secular law, you're damn right it does. And that what Dungy publicly and enthusiastically campaigned for. Compared to that, BB's transgressions don;t touch on anything remotely as serious.

I will not take the bait and call Dungy a homophobe. However, I am kind of disappointed he would step into a room of a thousand or so people and endorse their views on homosexuals. I'd be willing to bet at least half the people in that room would cringe, wail and gnash their teeth if an African-American family not named Dungy moved in next door to them.
Dungy allowed this crew to use him. I would think a guy smart enough to coach a Super Bowl champion would not have allowed that to happen.
As for BB...he wouldn't care if Tom Brady married Tedy Bruschi, long as they gave him 100 percent.
 
I enjoy the justification of things like this issue with Dungy and homosexuals. It's funny that just because our culture hasn't become completely enlightened to the fact that it's wrong to discriminate against any group based solely on something like sexual orientation, race, gender or whatever, that somehow it's OK to do so.

Maybe Dungy has never said he hates gays. But just substitute Belichick (or any white coach) for Dungy and substitute the word blacks for gays and think about how much differently the whole thing would be looked at. I can't imagine that even the biggest fanboys would be backing Belichick if he spoke at a meeting for a group with anti-black beliefs and said that he agreed with those beliefs.
 
terrier said:
If they act in such a way as to deny their fellow citizens equal protection of the secular law, you're damn right it does. And that what Dungy publicly and enthusiastically campaigned for. Compared to that, BB's transgressions don;t touch on anything remotely as serious.

I'd be willing to bet at least half the people in that room would cringe, wail and gnash their teeth if an African-American family not named Dungy moved in next door to them.

Actually, a significant base of that organization's support comes from the Indiana churches with mostly African-America congregations, so I don't know if that charge is accurate in this case.

And, Boobie, that's a good point, but I don't think simply holding a political position opposing extending legal marriage to same sex couples should be equated to homophobia. It's possible to believe the former without being the latter. There's an enormous difference between Dungy's comments and those of guys like John Rocker and Tim Hardaway.

But, again, that's not to say I agree with Dungy's view. I don't, but this debate began because he was called a dickhead for it. Nobody who's ever dealt with Dungy personally would ever call him that. And he doesn't deserve that label simply because he's adhering to the views of his church.
 
IU90 said:
terrier said:
If they act in such a way as to deny their fellow citizens equal protection of the secular law, you're damn right it does. And that what Dungy publicly and enthusiastically campaigned for. Compared to that, BB's transgressions don;t touch on anything remotely as serious.

I'd be willing to bet at least half the people in that room would cringe, wail and gnash their teeth if an African-American family not named Dungy moved in next door to them.

Actually, a significant base of that organization's support comes from the Indiana churches with mostly African-America congregations, so I don't know if that charge is accurate in this case.

And, Boobie, that's a good point, but I don't think simply holding a political position opposing extending legal marriage to same sex couples should be equated to homophobia. It's possible to believe the former without being the latter. There's an enormous difference between Dungy's comments and those of guys like John Rocker and Tim Hardaway.

But, again, that's not to say I agree with Dungy's view. I don't, but this debate began because he was called a dickhead for it. Nobody who's ever dealt with Dungy personally would ever call him that. And he doesn't deserve that label simply because he's adhering to the views of his church.

Well put. Not everyone who is against gay marriage is a hateful bigot.
 
Chef said:
Wait......what the hell was this thread about, again?

It was about Coach Hoodie being a douchebag. His defenders turned it into an assult on Dungy.
 
outofplace said:
Chef said:
Wait......what the hell was this thread about, again?

It was about Coach Hoodie being a douchebag. His defenders turned it into an assult on Dungy.

I can't speak for others, but I never defended Belichick or assaulted Dungy. I just said I don't care if Belichick is a douchebag and tried to point out that we don't necessarily need to refer to Tony as Saint Dungy.
 
I'd be willing to bet at least half the people in that room would cringe, wail and gnash their teeth if an African-American family not named Dungy moved in next door to them.


Actually, a significant base of that organization's support comes from the Indiana churches with mostly African-America congregations, so I don't know if that charge is accurate in this case.

Point well taken. Anti-gay white politicians do love to drag out black preachers when they make their case. Problem is, when those same preachers want something for their communities, they only see the back of the politicians' hands. They're being used.
 
terrier said:
I'd be willing to bet at least half the people in that room would cringe, wail and gnash their teeth if an African-American family not named Dungy moved in next door to them.


Actually, a significant base of that organization's support comes from the Indiana churches with mostly African-America congregations, so I don't know if that charge is accurate in this case.

Point well taken. Anti-gay white politicians do love to drag out black preachers when they make their case. Problem is, when those same preachers want something for their communities, they only see the back of the politicians' hands. They're being used.

You write that as if minority groups in this country actually tend to stand together. Unfortunately, that just isn't true.

Members of minority groups have their own biases and failings and they are capable of bigotry as well. Louis Farrakhan has said things about Jewish people that are far more divisive than Dungy standing with people who are against gay marriage. And in Farrakhan case, it wasn't just a man standing by the principles of his faith as Dungy did, it was finding an enemy to blame things on.

Don't even try to tell me there are no members of other minorities who really are prejudiced against gays. There are and if you are going to make the statements you have been making, you should know that.
 
I've said this before, but Belichick is far, far better in interviews than people who don't cover him realize.

Ask a good question, he'll answer thoughtfully and in great detail.

These are yesterday from his regular Friday presser

Q: In the Bills media notes they pointed out that John DiGiorgio is one of the starting middle or inside linebackers in the league who was undrafted. I’m just wondering if there’s something about playing middle linebacker in the NFL as opposed to college that makes it hard to transition. Why do so many of these guys fall through the cracks?

A: I think you see a fair amount of that at the middle linebacker position and also at the safety spot. You’ll see a lot of safeties in this league that are second day draft choices or maybe college free agent-type guys, similar to what you’re talking about with linebackers. And probably the big thing on that is just the instinctive part of it. You can time those players and do vertical jumps and bench press and all of that, but really, at that position a huge part of the game is the instinct, is being able to anticipate things, recognize little tips: where the quarterback’s looking, where their guard is pulling, whether to shoot the gap, whether to go over the top of the blocker, whether to undercut him, when to take him on, when to slip him, diagnosing screens and reverses and gadget plays like that. There’s so many of those plays that are about recognition and anticipation and instincts. A player may not test as well in some of those areas, but if he’s able to react quickly then he can make up for a lot of that or actually out-produce guys who are bigger, faster and maybe stronger but it doesn’t necessarily show up on the field because of the reactionary stuff that people at those positions have to do. And it’s sometimes hard to gauge. You can look at guys in college and know what type of offenses they’re seeing or the scheme they’re playing. They may be more or less instinctive at this level than what they were in college. Certainly at this level you see a lot more in the passing game. The passing game is a lot more, I would say sophisticated, as it relates especially to the linebacker position. A player that can excel in the passing game at this level has a lot of value. I’m not sure in the college game there’s as much of that. College is a lot more downfield throws, tear screens, plays to the perimeter. They don’t have as many inside combinations like you see in a drop-back passing game in the NFL, so a guy who maybe does that real well in college doesn’t get to do it a lot. You don’t get to see it a lot because he’s not defending it, whereas at this level that’s a big part of the game plan.

and this, on different nickel configurations ...

Q: That’s a package you guys have used a lot since camp. Is that something you’ve done traditionally or is it working with the personnel you have?

BB: I think that’s probably what you see most teams do that play six defensive backs. A lot of teams will play…I think the fifth defensive back is normally a corner, and that’s to match up on the third receiver. And then the next player is generally either a safety or a cover-linebacker that plays the tight end or whoever that fourth receiver is. Not the third wideout, but either the back or the tight end, whoever the fourth receiver is. So regardless of whether that’s a backer or a safety, a lot of times those players have similar skill-sets. They’re bigger guys, they’re maybe a little bit more physical. They can handle size and are more comfortable playing closer to the line of scrimmage. Now, you get a team that plays a lot of four wide receiver sets, then you might want to have a fourth corner to match up against the fourth receiver. There’s not a lot of teams that play four receivers on third down. There’s some, but not a lot. You see more three receivers and either a tight end and a back or two backs. The teams that play a lot of four, that spread the field and play with four open guys, a lot of times those tight ends are more like receivers – the [Antonio] Gates and the [Kellen] Winslows, the [Tony] Gonzalezes and guys like that, teams that have those types of players at tight end. Even [Chris] Cooley, to an extent. He’s not really a receiver, even though he’s a real good guy the passing game, he’s not really a true receiver. But the four corners, most of the time, the four corners shows up on teams that use a lot of four wide receivers. But, you know, if you feel like your four corners are your four best football players, maybe you put them out there. Some of it is based on who you feel like your best guy is. I mean, the bottom line is when you get a team in a passing situation, whoever you have on your roster, you probably want the 11 best pass players on the field as much as possible. Part of that is match-ups, but again, you want to get your best pass defenders out there – pass rushers, pass coverers, blitzers, whatever you’re doing with them.
 
outofplace said:
Chef said:
Wait......what the hell was this thread about, again?

It was about Coach Hoodie being a douchebag. His defenders turned it into an assult on Dungy.

I was defending neither man. I was just pointing out that the context within which Dungy has chosen to be a dickhead hurts far more people than the 50 or so sportswriters who have legitimate beefs against Belichick.
 
IU90 said:
And, Boobie, that's a good point, but I don't think simply holding a political position opposing extending legal marriage to same sex couples should be equated to homophobia. It's possible to believe the former without being the latter. There's an enormous difference between Dungy's comments and those of guys like John Rocker and Tim Hardaway.

No, it's not that much different. Discrimination ain't necessarily hatred, but it's in the same ballpark.

And "holding a political position opposing extending legal marriage to same-same couples" is discrimination. It's not "a political position." It's discrimination. Otherwise spelled I-L-L-E-G-A-L.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top