Why Does the Media Hate Belichick?

[soxfan121]

Agendas and Innuendos: Why Does the Media Hate Bill Belichick So Much?
by David R. McCullough
 
A decade-plus of nearly unprecedented success. Wins in 72% of their games. Three Super Bowl victories. Five total Super Bowl appearances. Eight Conference Championship appearances. A share of every AFC East division title since 2000. And then in 2014, the New England Patriots and head coach Bill Belichick stumbled out of the gate.
 
The knives came out. The media, both nationally and locally, quickly rushed to commence dismemberment of the organization.
 
Shalise Manza Young, a Patriots beat reporter for 9 years, reported late last week that second-year receiver Aaron Dobson was deactivated (i.e. suspended) for the Patriots’ games in Weeks 3 and 4 because of a confrontation with offensive coordinator Josh McDaniels. Belichick and Dobson both have said that the report is completely false. Manza Young is standing by her story and others see validity in her report, with 98.5 The Sports Hub radio host Marc Bertrand saying, “[The organization] can deny it all they want; I don’t believe them.”
 
On Sunday morning, Chris Mortensen of ESPN, which has a long history of reporting incorrect, inflammatory information about the Patriots, claimed that:
 
“Sources say Brady is uncomfortable with the personnel and coaching changes, the consequences have led to tensions between Brady and the coaching staff, with Brady’s input into gameplans, personnel packages, formations, pre-snap adjustments being significantly diminished. Has the staff lost faith in Brady? Or is it simply the residue of shaky personnel decisions, including the undeniable fact that since 2002, the Patriots have used 11 draft picks on wide receivers and only two — Deion Branch and Julian Edelman — have made any impact.”
 
Ignoring the final sentence that proves Mortensen can’t count (David Givens?) and deliberately omits draft picks used in trades to acquire receivers (Randy Moss? Wes Welker?), the piece makes an incendiary statement that Tom Brady is being ignored by the coaching staff. An incredible claim, as it contradicts nearly fifteen seasons of reporting on the Brady-Belichick relationship including video tape of how they work together in meetings. When asked earlier in the week about their working relationship both Brady and Belichick, in their own inimitable styles, dismissed any dramatic subplots invented by the media and instead, as always, blamed their poor performances on themselves. When asked about the report following Sunday night’s emphatic 43-17 victory, both Belichick and Brady refuted a rift and reiterated their mutual respect and healthy working relationship.
 
Accountability ‒ it’s boring. And the sports media business cannot tolerate boring.
 
To continue reading, click here. 

 

[twibnotes]

Belichick makes zero effort to mask his disdain for the media and their dumb questions. This is his right, but if he played the game a little bit with the press, he'd be given a lot more love. Look no further than Brady who rarely says much of substance but who never embarrasses the press.

A part of me loves how BB makes no attempt to hide his contempt for dumb questions, but it would be really easy to suck it up for five minutes and put on a good face. He just doesn't care enough to bother.

 

[uncannymanny]

Well you have to assume he doesn't care about the "media consequences" either. He and Brady are laughing about this and moving on with prep for the next game.

 

[twibnotes]

Well you have to assume he doesn't care about the "media consequences" either. He and Brady are laughing about this and moving on with prep for the next game.

Totally agree...and as fans of the team, we care more about the wins and losses than the little nuggets of info.

 

[SawxSince67]

Belichick makes zero effort to mask his disdain for the media and their dumb questions.

Same with Bill Parcells. But, WHEN Tuna felt like being charming, he could run the entire room. Belichick won't bother or simply can't. Doesn't really matter as far as his product on the field is concerned.

 

[rodderick]

Just playing devil's advocate here, but why is Brady and Belichick refuting those reports taken as absolute proof that those incidents didn't happen? Why would they confirm something of this nature to the media? I'm not certain that those are to be included with the Borges shit in the "oh, these writers certainly dislike Belichick, that's why they're spouting off nonsense" category. Maybe I'm naive, but I don't believe they just made that shit up, though I certainly understand why it would be interesting for them to play up that angle given the situation the team found itself in.

 

[( . ) ( . ) and (_!_)]

Just playing devil's advocate here, but why is Brady and Belichick refuting those reports taken as absolute proof that those incidents didn't happen? Why would they confirm something of this nature to the media? I'm not certain that those are to be included with the Borges shit in the "oh, these writers certainly dislike Belichick, that's why they're spouting off nonsense" category. Maybe I'm naive, but I don't believe they just made that shit up, though I certainly understand why it would be interesting for them to play up that angle given the situation the team found itself in.

 
Well someone is lying then.  Either Bill and Tom or the media.  The choice is yours, but I am going to believe that the media is making it up or blowing something the size of an anthill into mount Everest.  This is the media who needs clicks and hot sportz takes to live has more motivation to lie and has lied to us before. 

 

[singaporesoxfan]

It would be awesome if Football Central got press credentials so that SoSHers could ask pure football questions at Belichick's press conferences.

 

[steveluck7]

What bothers me is that, ultimately, the media will win this "war". Bill won't be the coach forever and once he moves on, the knives will be back out and not be put away. Would anyone be surprised if one year after Bill leaves, there are still more stories about and references to him than whoever the next coach is?
 
edit: I shouldn't say win. Rather, they'll ultimately feel vindicated in the end and they'll be sure to let us know all about it

 

[garlan5]

I think he gets grief because he is mostly a dick to the media.  He goes out of his way to be one.  With that said I defend him most of the time because I love it.  He doesn't give the politically correct answers and he doesn't care. He seems to only care about being the best and his tunnel vision of perfection at his job gets in the way of media bullshit.  I have zero problem with it.  Like some have suggested he could lay off at times but usually he doesn't.  If I were a owner thats the kind of coach I'd want.  Jim Harbaugh seems to be just the same in that regard. 

 

[dcdrew10]

It would be awesome if Football Central got press credentials so that SoSHers could ask pure football questions at Belichick's press conferences.

It could be cool, but the level of scorn and BS heaped upon the SOSH person there by the Breers of the press corps would make Murray Chass look like a kindly grandmother

 

[8slim]

Eh, it's just the game that is played.  The media needs to build a narrative, one that has heroes and villains.  Bill was a hero in 2001 when our plucky upstart team toppled the monster that was the Rams.  Then we became a dynasty ourselves and the narrative changed.  He feeds it with his press conferences, and don't think for a second that SpyGate isn't a big driver here.  That made him easy to "hate", and he seems to have embraced it.
 
At the same time most of the national media types admit he's one of the greatest coaches ever.  So the respect is there.
 
It's really no big deal, though.  He's done TV before and I imagine that when he retires he certainly will again.  The media portrayal of him will soften over time, just like it did for Bobby Knight.

 

[PaulinMyrBch]

Just playing devil's advocate here, but why is Brady and Belichick refuting those reports taken as absolute proof that those incidents didn't happen? Why would they confirm something of this nature to the media? I'm not certain that those are to be included with the Borges shit in the "oh, these writers certainly dislike Belichick, that's why they're spouting off nonsense" category. Maybe I'm naive, but I don't believe they just made that shit up, though I certainly understand why it would be interesting for them to play up that angle given the situation the team found itself in.

Belichick confirmed he put out the statement on Dobson because it wasn't true and the story portrayed AD in a bad light. So he felt the need to speak up to protect his player. 
 
As for the other stuff regarding his press conferences. For a guy who preaches "ignore the noise", he just doesn't get caught up in the side stories and BS that drives internet clicks. He's not on this earth so that ESPN, NESN, Boston.com, the newspapers, etc. can make money. He's on this earth to coach football. So when you ask him on a Wednesday press conference if Tom Brady is still his quarterback, you're getting "We're on Cincinnati", not because he's being a dick, but because that is all that is relevant in his world. If you want to ask those kinds of questions and get answers, cover the Jets, or the Miami Heat, or the Kentucky Wildcat basketball team. But don't expect a long narrative about how the Brady to Garrapolo transition is going to go down one day.
 
When the Bledsoe to Brady transition happened, all they got was "Tom's the QB" in response to questions when Drew was activated. He's just not going there with the media. 
 
Having said that, they all love him those 2-3 times a year in the offseason where he takes them behind the curtain and gives them the x's and o's of key plays of the season, etc. Those stories are always ball washing at their best and I guarantee you when those reporters write them, they sit there and say, I can't believe I'm typing this as they pen "BB was charming today."  
 
It is what it is. As a fan if you have an ability to realize what is noise and what isn't, you'll be all set. Here's a clue, if a game clock isn't running, its likely noise.

 

[Super Nomario]

Belichick makes zero effort to mask his disdain for the media and their dumb questions. This is his right, but if he played the game a little bit with the press, he'd be given a lot more love. Look no further than Brady who rarely says much of substance but who never embarrasses the press.

A part of me loves how BB makes no attempt to hide his contempt for dumb questions, but it would be really easy to suck it up for five minutes and put on a good face. He just doesn't care enough to bother.

Brady's good at this stuff, and it comes naturally to him - and he still occasionally puts his foot in his mouth, like when he told tailgaters to "start drinking early" or what he said about not throwing to players he doesn't trust that SoSHers continue to quote out of context.
 
I think there's some disdain, but I also think Belichick never wants to say anything he's going to have to backtrack on or explain later. In one of the Holley books, they talk about the preparation he does for these press conferences. He wants to make sure he doesn't give any bulletin board material, doesn't throw any of his players under the bus, doesn't give away any info to opponents, etc. My impression is that the idea that he's emotionless is an act - he makes a deliberate effort to not show emotion (or at least, say anything emotional) at precisely the times he's most likely to say something stupid because he's angry / upset / whatever. "We're on to Cincinnati" looks to me like a defense mechanism so he doesn't say anything negative or critical about Brady, McDaniels, Chandler Jones, Patricia, or any of the dozens of other players and coaches who sucked out loud against KC. After a win, or after a couple days of cooling off, he'll say more. Avoid reference to a specific player or team, he'll say more. Ask him an abstract football question on a Friday after a good week of practice, and he'll fill up a notebook with an answer.

 

[Auger34]

Same with Bill Parcells. But, WHEN Tuna felt like being charming, he could run the entire room. Belichick won't bother or simply can't. Doesn't really matter as far as his product on the field is concerned.

Forgive the lead-in for this story, I know it reads a lot like the old Baskin Robbins friend of a friend story but in response to that post I thought I'd share this..
 
I live in Tampa, and I go to one bar a lot (probably too much). Over this time, I have become friends with the bartender/owner and he knows I am a Patriot fan. He told me that Pat Yasinkas (the ESPN.com Tampa Bay Bucs reporter, he has also covered the Panthers in the past) has started to come in a decent amount and he likes to talk football with him.
 
He told me that Pat said that the funniest coach and the best to have a regular conversation with, and his opinion it wasn't not even close, was.....Bill Belichick. I also know that there are multiple reports of how Belichick loves to talk football with the people who know what they are talking about within the media. (Sort of similar to Gregg Popovich with basketball honestly)
 
I just think that Belichick hates the phoniness of those media conferences and how stupid the questions are so he doesn't even pretend to dignify them with respect or answers. I know that this is part of his job and something he has to deal with but I am almost positive I couldn't do that either. You have to think that most of these writers are paid to cover and know the game of football and most of them have no idea what the hell they are talking about.
 
My sense is that the people who really don't like Belichick are the national media (or the local media blowhards too consumed with TV and radio appearences to actually cover the team) who haven't spent time with him to see this other side and not the beat writers and reporters who spend most of their time with the team.

 

[Leather]

You know, Belichick grew up the son of a Navy man (who served in the Pacific in WWII), and spent many of his formative years around military types due to his father being a coach at the Naval academy.   It's impossible for me to believe that this experience didn't leave him with a lack of patience for non-essential bullshit, and a dedication to focus.
 
The media dislike Belichick because he makes no effort to hide the fact that he considers them completely non-essential.  
 
It's sort of a tricky question as to whether or not it's the best protocol on his part, but as a supporter, I'd put forth the argument that his taking the slings and arrows of irritated reporters is the price he's willing to pay to let his players focus on football and not worry about talking to the press or their PR.  It might just look like a guy being a smarmy jerk, but he effectively cuts off an entire aspect of being a pro athlete (or coach) from the scope of players' responsibilities.  

 

[4 6 3 DP]

Not to derail it slightly, but on one of the NFL network specials, Belichick doing his press conference in 2001 being asked about Brady vs Bledsoe cracked jokes about polling people in the area to get their input. I forget the quote in particular but it wasn't just "Tom is our QB", though eventually that statement was made when Bledsoe came back from injury.
 
One thing I respect about Belichick is that he was the guy who as a young coach cut Bernie Kosar; he's never been afraid to do what he thought was right, and after being humbled as a head coach he went back and worked for Parcells again even though I imagine that was difficult for him. Bill is an obviously complicated guy, without getting deeply into his personal life he had his issues on the side which obviously suggests he did more than just eat drink and sleep football; he had the whole "HC of the NYJ" debacle, which you just don't ever see....if anything I think the press doesn't go after him hard because they can't source the stuff and because they'll get shut out completely if they piss Bill off.
 
Bill Belichick is one of the most fascinating characters in the history of this sports city, and much like Larry Bird, we know very little about the man. I don't think anyone really hates Belichick. They don't know him very well.

 

[wutang112878]

 
In one of the Holley books, they talk about the preparation he does for these press conferences. He wants to make sure he doesn't give any bulletin board material, doesn't throw any of his players under the bus, doesn't give away any info to opponents, etc. My impression is that the idea that he's emotionless is an act - he makes a deliberate effort to not show emotion (or at least, say anything emotional) at precisely the times he's most likely to say something stupid because he's angry / upset / whatever. "We're on to Cincinnati" looks to me like a defense mechanism so he doesn't say anything negative or critical about Brady, McDaniels, Chandler Jones, Patricia, or any of the dozens of other players and coaches who sucked out loud against KC. After a win, or after a couple days of cooling off, he'll say more. Avoid reference to a specific player or team, he'll say more. Ask him an abstract football question on a Friday after a good week of practice, and he'll fill up a notebook with an answer.

 
I remember reading this section in Holley's book and this is a perfect synopsis, Bill's goal is to be boring for his opponent.  The underlined is something I never understand about the media.  They hound him with questions they know he wont answer, but they dont ask him questions that could give them great, insightful stories.  'Bill could you talk about the various strategies that could be employed to reduce the impact of a great wide receiver?' 
 
This is a great story that illustrates the point by Greg Garber :
 

 
"Hey," said Bill Belichick, beckoning from a corner of the Giants' vacated locker room, "I want to show you something."

It was December 1986, and in his film preparation for a Monday night game in San Francisco, the Giants' defensive coordinator had unearthed a small gem. Belichick, then 34, was in a mood to share, even if it was with a Morristown (N.J.) Daily Record reporter five years his junior.

Glancing down the hallway -- head coach Bill Parcells would not have approved -- Belichick ushered me into the linebackers meeting room and switched on the tape. It was a 49ers play from a few weeks previous and, to me, it looked fairly ordinary: Joe Montana to Jerry Rice for a dozen yards. How many times had that happened?

"No," Belichick said, frowning and pointing, "look over there, away from the ball."

Someone -- I can't remember whether it was Dwight Clark or Russ Francis -- ran a short crossing route underneath and, almost imperceptibly, took the safety out of the play. I do recall the effortless, almost unconscious way Belichick worked the remote: click -- forward ... click -- backward. Click. Click. Click. He broke down an ingenious wrinkle installed by 49ers head coach Bill Walsh, a nuance Belichick said he had never seen.

"Great play," said Belichick, admiration in his usually monotone voice. "That's why he's Bill Walsh."
 

 
Bill's a football junkie, he got off showing Garber how a crossing route takes the safety out of a play which allows it to succeed.  Bill's 'educational' press conferences are amazing and I learn more about football in 15 minutes than I learn in a year elsewhere.  Every time these media critiques come up, I'm astounded that the media isnt looking at themselves and wondering if they could do something different to fill their notebooks.

 

[wutang112878]

I don't think anyone really hates Belichick. They don't know him very well.

 
One small tweak, everyone knows the 'press conference Bill' really well and thats what they hate. 
 
Former and current players constantly come out and say that the Bill they see is a complete 180 from the press conferences and he can be a comedian.  The way he talks and teaches is highly entertaining.  I remember in either Football Life or the NFL Networks 'Mic'd up' thing but there is footage of him talking to a JAG safety and he is telling him how he should cover and Bill says 'dont turn it into a speed game because you arent very fast'.  In the same program he goes up to Rosevelt Colvin while he is stretching before practice who apparently had a very bad habit of rushing too far upfield and taking himself out of plays.  So Bill tells him that (paraphrasing) 'this week we decided to put it into the game plan that you will rush too far up field since you do it all the time anyway'.  The guy is highly entertaining, the media just nevers sees that guy.

 

[ifmanis5]

The media is lazy. People who fill notebooks are the heroes and the people who don't are the enemy. Bonus points for brown-nosing. BB fails both those tests. Ergo, they hate him.

 

[twothousandone]

It would be awesome if Football Central got press credentials so that SoSHers could ask pure football questions at Belichick's press conferences.

I'm confident he wouldn't answer those questions, either.
 

What bothers me is that, ultimately, the media will win this "war". 

No, they won't. Ted Williams is remembered as a great hitter -- a hitting genius -- who had some difficulties with "the press." There's probably not a single reporter anyone other than JackLamabee can name who gave Ted a hard time. The most famous article about Ted was written by John Updike. 
 
Belichick will be remembered for three or more super bowl victories. 
 
And, when he was with the Giants, I asked him if the vaunted LB depth (I believe the idea was that after Taylor, Reasons, Carson, Banks, there was Andy Headen and Pepper Johnson) really meant they had six NFL starters. He explained that it is one thing to play well for 10-15 plays. It is another thing completely to have Mark Bavaro leaning on you for 60 snaps a game. 

 

[pedro1918]

 
There's probably not a single reporter anyone other than JackLamabee can name who gave Ted a hard time.

 
Dave "The Colonel" Egan

 

[Ed Hillel]

I think this is simple. Controversy sells, and the media is out to get the big story in that regard. Bill is extremely smart and has learned throughout the years what to say and not to say in order to avoid any sort of controversy so that there is less distraction for his team and coaching staff to deal with each and every week. His act also distracts the media away from his players and towards him. I'm sure it's frustrating for the media, who is trying to do its job, but the problem is just that Bill is really, really good at his job.. Maybe it's unfair to some media who are basically forced to ask these questions, but there are plenty of interesting football-related questions one could ask Belichick if there was actually any interest on the football part of football six of the seven days of the week. If Bill does decide to work as an analyst or in any media forum after his coaching career, I think a lot of people are going to be very surprised.

 

[MentalDisabldLst]

It would be awesome if Football Central got press credentials so that SoSHers could ask pure football questions at Belichick's press conferences.

 
 

It could be cool, but the level of scorn and BS heaped upon the SOSH person there by the Breers of the press corps would make Murray Chass look like a kindly grandmother

 
We wouldn't be there to get respect from Mort and Reiss, we'd be there to take the opportunity to get a football masterclass from Bill fuckin' Belichick.  And maybe ask him some temporally relevant questions that he'd actually be willing to answer, because apparently nobody in that room has learned what those are.
 
I've thought for a while that there ought to be a sign above BB in the press room...
 
QUESTIONS THAT COACH BELICHICK WILL NOT (REALLY) ANSWER:
 
1. Status of injuries
2. Anything about interpersonal drama
3. Prep or tactics for our next opponent
4. Status of internal depth chart, roster moves or fit for a role
5. Anything about our next opponent's abilities, personnel, or Stuff They're Saying
 
So the next time someone asks him if Brady's a hermaphrodite, he just replies "Number 2."  Bill, when will Gronk be 100%?  "Number 1."  Coach, how do you prepare to play against a running back like Adrian Petersen?  "You plant evidence to create police reports that he... uh... number 5."
 
There might be a few other categories, but I think those are the big ones, and yet that's like 99% of what he gets asked about in press conferences.  What he's like outside of press conferences has absolutely no relation to Press Conference Bill.

 

[ypioca]

I'm confident he wouldn't answer those questions, either.
 

 
You're wrong. This has happened multiple times in the past. BB is thrilled whenever a football question is thrown at him, and answers in great detail.
 
I really want this to happen now.

 

[DanoooME]

 
 
 
We wouldn't be there to get respect from Mort and Reiss, we'd be there to take the opportunity to get a football masterclass from Bill fuckin' Belichick.  And maybe ask him some temporally relevant questions that he'd actually be willing to answer, because apparently nobody in that room has learned what those are.
 
I've thought for a while that there ought to be a sign above BB in the press room...
 
QUESTIONS THAT COACH BELICHICK WILL NOT (REALLY) ANSWER:
 
1. Status of injuries
2. Anything about interpersonal drama
3. Prep or tactics for our next opponent
4. Status of internal depth chart, roster moves or fit for a role
5. Anything about our next opponent's abilities, personnel, or Stuff They're Saying
 
So the next time someone asks him if Brady's a hermaphrodite, he just replies "Number 2."  Bill, when will Gronk be 100%?  "Number 1."  Coach, how do you prepare to play against a running back like Adrian Petersen?  "You plant evidence to create police reports that he... uh... number 5."
 
There might be a few other categories, but I think those are the big ones, and yet that's like 99% of what he gets asked about in press conferences.  What he's like outside of press conferences has absolutely no relation to Press Conference Bill.

 
So what would he answer then?  I mean, I get not wanting to divulge injuries or the game plan, but what would you ask at that point?  Why even bother to have a press conference?

 

[mascho]

Having spent the better part of the last 96 hours looking at Buffalo film, here are two questions I'd love to ask him if I were in the room tomorrow:
 
1. Buffalo's secondary does a great job of rolling their coverage just at the snap. What are your thoughts on 1: Rolling the coverage prior to the snap defensively and 2: working with the quarterback to identify the coverage pre-snap?
 
2. Buffalo's defensive front utilizes a wide 9 alignment along both defensive ends, making it difficult to run on the edges but requiring the linebackers to fill the off-tackle gap. Does this scheme force you alter pass protection or blocking assignments upfront?
 
Maybe gameplanish in a sense, but a chance for Professor Belichick to take us all to school.  

 

[( . ) ( . ) and (_!_)]

 
So what would he answer then?  I mean, I get not wanting to divulge injuries or the game plan, but what would you ask at that point?  Why even bother to have a press conference?

 
I think it's a reasonable approach to try to guide the answers from general to slightly more specific.
 
For example
Start asking questions about 2 TE offenses and how they are strong or weak against modern day defenses
Followup pulling something from his response and asking how it relates to Tim Wright
Write a piece about that
Profit
 
But that takes effort

 

[snowmanny]

The two most intersting guys for me to listen to in decades of following Boston sports are Theo and Belichick.  Yes if you ask an obvious question you aren't going to get much back.
They leave a lot between the lines, I think; Theo is just great at that, by the way...you have to sort out what he is really saying.  Belichick is obviously very careful but he is good at explaining plays and player eveluations when he feels comfortable doing so.  He can tell you what players do well, but you aren't going to get inflammatory stuff out of him...so what? When he gives something it is so much more interesting and detailed than 99% of the football crap out there.
 
 
 
I saw Borges on TV after the 2003-04 season.  At one point he was ranting about how the Patriots "barely" beat the Colts, were lucky to do so, they were lucky to win the two Super Bowls, complained about the refs, etc. (Anyone who actually watched the game, of course, knows that  that was a dominant beat-down not really reflected in the final score.) 
Then he started on about them missing the playoffs the year before.  Someone else pointed out that they had missed the playoffs on a tie-breaker and looked very good at the end of the year...He said something like "Doesn't matter how it happened; what matters is did you make the playoffs or not."
So that told me all I needed to know.  He had diametrically opposed criteria for assessing Belichick's failures and his succesess, even three minutes apart.

 

[Stitch01]

Having spent the better part of the last 96 hours looking at Buffalo film, here are two questions I'd love to ask him if I were in the room tomorrow:
 
1. Buffalo's secondary does a great job of rolling their coverage just at the snap. What are your thoughts on 1: Rolling the coverage prior to the snap defensively and 2: working with the quarterback to identify the coverage pre-snap?
 
2. Buffalo's defensive front utilizes a wide 9 alignment along both defensive ends, making it difficult to run on the edges but requiring the linebackers to fill the off-tackle gap. Does this scheme force you alter pass protection or blocking assignments upfront?
 
Maybe gameplanish in a sense, but a chance for Professor Belichick to take us all to school.  

He'd probably have you summarily executed before answering these.  Don't get me wrong, they're good questions, but I think there's no chance he's answering specific questions that include the word "Buffalo" with anything more than platitudes.

 

[Stitch01]

 
So what would he answer then?  I mean, I get not wanting to divulge injuries or the game plan, but what would you ask at that point?  Why even bother to have a press conference?

You got it.

 

[Tony C]

I think he gets grief because he is mostly a dick to the media.  He goes out of his way to be one.  With that said I defend him most of the time because I love it.  He doesn't give the politically correct answers and he doesn't care. He seems to only care about being the best and his tunnel vision of perfection at his job gets in the way of media bullshit.  I have zero problem with it.  Like some have suggested he could lay off at times but usually he doesn't.  If I were a owner thats the kind of coach I'd want.  Jim Harbaugh seems to be just the same in that regard. 

 
He is a dick and so they don't like him. I'm with others that I don't mind/don't care he doesn't answer stupid questions, but I don't think you can have it both ways. Everyone dislikes someone who is a dick to them. We know BB can be charming if he wants and the media would suck up to him if he sucked up to them a bit. If you enjoy the show of him (justifiably) being a dick to them, then don't sweat the hate tht results. It just is what it is.

Having spent the better part of the last 96 hours looking at Buffalo film, here are two questions I'd love to ask him if I were in the room tomorrow:
 
1. Buffalo's secondary does a great job of rolling their coverage just at the snap. What are your thoughts on 1: Rolling the coverage prior to the snap defensively and 2: working with the quarterback to identify the coverage pre-snap?
 
2. Buffalo's defensive front utilizes a wide 9 alignment along both defensive ends, making it difficult to run on the edges but requiring the linebackers to fill the off-tackle gap. Does this scheme force you alter pass protection or blocking assignments upfront?
 
Maybe gameplanish in a sense, but a chance for Professor Belichick to take us all to school.  

 
He wouldn't answer. But at least you'd get his respect.

 

[Ed Hillel]

 
He wouldn't answer. But at least you'd get his respect.

 
He answers those questions every week, provided it doesn't get into specific plays the Patriots are planning.

 

[jacklamabe65]

He doesn't suffer fools gladly, and most of them, well., are fools.

 

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

 
He is a dick and so they don't like him. I'm with others that I don't mind/don't care he doesn't answer stupid questions, but I don't think you can have it both ways. Everyone dislikes someone who is a dick to them. We know BB can be charming if he wants and the media would suck up to him if he sucked up to them a bit. If you enjoy the show of him (justifiably) being a dick to them, then don't sweat the hate tht results. It just is what it is.
 
 

 
Parcells was a dick  to the media as well, but they adored him. He gave them good quips. The media doesn't have to be treated well by a coach for them to like him, the coach just has to feed them red meat for their grist. Belichick won't give it to them.

 

[Tony C]

Yep. Parcells was a master of being a dickish rogue -- did it with humor. BB is just a flat-out dick. Just not sure why people are shocked. If it mattered to him, he'd change..wouldn't be hard. If he doesn't sweat media dislike, not sure anyone else should.

 

[Reverend]

What bothers me is that, ultimately, the media will win this "war". Bill won't be the coach forever and once he moves on, the knives will be back out and not be put away. Would anyone be surprised if one year after Bill leaves, there are still more stories about and references to him than whoever the next coach is?
 
edit: I shouldn't say win. Rather, they'll ultimately feel vindicated in the end and they'll be sure to let us know all about it

 
Cleveland says, "Hi!"
 
 

Eh, it's just the game that is played.  The media needs to build a narrative, one that has heroes and villains.  Bill was a hero in 2001 when our plucky upstart team toppled the monster that was the Rams.  Then we became a dynasty ourselves and the narrative changed.  He feeds it with his press conferences, and don't think for a second that SpyGate isn't a big driver here.  That made him easy to "hate", and he seems to have embraced it.
 
At the same time most of the national media types admit he's one of the greatest coaches ever.  So the respect is there.

 
At once wise and prescient, even given what we thought was a mountain of bs even then, this post must never be forgotten:

Cobra Eyes, on 17 Jan 2007 - 07:15 PM, said:
In the list of roadkill memes, the "Pats are boring" sits in number three behind "I love you Tom Spartacus" and "Belichick: Gruff Genius/Fashion Plate". 
 
And, frankly, I don't think most sportspuff writers really care about the AFC this year. To a man they want the Saints to get to the Super Bowl, because the in-built storyline trumps pretty much every other sports related storyline of the aughts. 
 
As previously mentioned, the Pats are a better match precisely because of the easy villainous foil. The longtime loser, come from nowhere, castoff veteran leader and rookie sensational Saints vs. the emotionless panzertruppen Pats.
 
If the Pats go against the Saints, I'm guessing the Saints will come onto the field as one unit, in a Glinda the Good Witch pink bubble of hope and inspiration. The Pats will come down in black hangliders, and Belichick will be vearing a monocle. 
 

 

I know the guy hasn't showed up around here in five years, but I'd like to throw my voice in alongside DJBMH and SJH: Can we make him a member just on general principle?

 

[Pandemonium67]

We know BB can be charming if he wants and the media would suck up to him if he sucked up to them a bit.
 

 
Well, most of the media would suck up to a warm and fuzzy BB, but not all. Doesn't matter how sweet and cuddly BB might act, there will always be a few in the Boston media who would find or invent negativity to blow all out of proportion. BB knows that. He knows some of the media are snakes, so he gives them all a wide berth. 

 

[MyDaughterLovesTomGordon]

The way to get Bill to give you quotes for a decent story is to ask generic football questions and then use your knowledge of the situation to apply his quotes in the story. 
 
Instead of "what can you do to fix the offensive line," which he obviously won't answer, you ask something like, "when you're evaluating a guard/tackle/center, what are the key things you look for," then you go look to see who doesn't have those things and you've got your piece. 
 
Instead of "do you think Brady has enough talent around him," which I can't believe was actually asked, but I definitely heard, you ask something like, "in the salary cap era, how do you balance having elite players with roster depth 1 through 53," and then you take a look at the bottom of the roster and see if he's really applied that answer and how it might explain the lack of a Megatron on the offense. 
 
This shit doesn't seem like it would be that hard, but time after time you hear, "Bill, your thoughts on Tom's play?"; "Bill, what does this win mean for the team?"; "Bill, who scares you the most on the Bills?"
 
It's pathetic. 

 

[TomRicardo]

I mean another thing Belichick has going for him is his owner could give two shits if he he dances for the monkeys or not.  Robert Kraft bought the Patriots on super discount and has built them to a top three in value franchise and built a village in the middle of no where where they play.  Kraft realizes winning is far more important than winning headlines.
 
Kraft would never ask or conjole Belichick into playing nice.
 
Meanwhile in East Rutherford Rex Ryan still has a job solely because he runs a three ring circus.

 

[Jnai]

Also, I suppose if you have to write stories about sports to get paid for it, and there's someone very important for your job who preaches a kind of noncompliance with the media, natural resentment is going to grow there.
 
Claiming that the media "hates Bill Belichick" is somewhat silly, though. Unless I have a dramatic misperception of beat writers, most of them are probably annoyed by the schtick at this point, but I don't think they hate him by any stretch. It's just a job.

 

[Jnai]

Isn't it somewhat ironic that you've written -without an interview- a long piece critical of the media for insinuating animosity where there was none because they couldn't get a decent interview? Why not just call Shalise Manza Young and ask her what she actually thinks, rather than trying to infer her mental state?

 

[Chemistry Schmemistry]

This is just the state of the media right now. It would apply to any unfriendly football coach (and there are plenty out there). Newspapers and blogs are desperate, everyone is cutting staff, and opinion pieces are cheap and don't require research time any more.

 

[Morgan's Magic Snowplow]

He doesn't suffer fools gladly, and most of them, well., are fools.

 
I think this is a significant part of it.
 
Sure, some people in the media don't like him because he won't give them a good story or they use him as a foil because they're lazy.  But that doesn't really explain why guys like Chris Mortensen have it out for BB - Mort doesn't need to scratch up a story and he doesn't need to paint that kind of good/evil narrative in his work for ESPN.  Guys like Mort hate BB because BB doesn't give two shits about their standing within the profession of sports journalism, which is a profession (like many) that is full of massive egos and narcissists.  Belichick is going to give more respect to a pimply-faced intern who asks football-related questions and shows real inquisitiveness and knowledge about the game than to Mortensen or whatever other famous journalist who doesn't put in the work to really analyze the game but thinks that he should be able to live on his name alone.

 

[ifmanis5]

This is just the state of the media right now. It would apply to any unfriendly football coach (and there are plenty out there). Newspapers and blogs are desperate, everyone is cutting staff, and opinion pieces are cheap and don't require research time any more.

Sure, but they hated him well before any of that happened though.
 
Guys like Peter King like to hear 'Peter, thanks for that great question' every once in a while. Or a smile and a pat on the back at the practice field. Parcells could play that game when it suited his needs. Bill does none of that and never will. The media will take their revenge on Bill when they can; they're tired of not having their rings kissed and not having easy quotes all the time.

 

[Chemistry Schmemistry]

This has been going on for 20 years. There was a brief time when online blogs/mags/etc. had some money, but it was only a brief time and quality was sporadic.

If there were quality in the media today, it wouldn't need ego-stroking. This is just stupid hatred of people who do interesting work for a living and get paid good money. Journalistic ethics have been dead for at least 20 years.

 

[lars10]

I think it's because:
1. The media as a horde like to have each other's backs
2. People in general like to point out anomalies of behavior.."Look he answers questions different!"
3. People don't enjoy other people pointing out how they're: making stuff up, being self important or just mailing if in. Has Reiss been rebuffed by Belichick? I doubt all that often..because he actually tries something other than the Callahan, Felger, Shaughnessy, Borges school of journalism... I feel like McDonough would have loved BB...or at least had a real reason to hate him.

For who in the world are the questions on the sidelines being asked for? Vapid questions with absolutely no potential for an interesting return... Or questions regarding handshakes etc etc... Our age of media has gone to a checklist of questions where they get a typical non answer or some @$&"controversial$!!!! Answer... That way they can make fun of when someone says nothing or when they say something.

 

[Reverend]

We wouldn't be there to get respect from Mort and Reiss, we'd be there to take the opportunity to get a football masterclass from Bill fuckin' Belichick. And maybe ask him some temporally relevant questions that he'd actually be willing to answer, because apparently nobody in that room has learned what those are.

I've thought for a while that there ought to be a sign above BB in the press room...

QUESTIONS THAT COACH BELICHICK WILL NOT (REALLY) ANSWER:

1. Status of injuries
2. Anything about interpersonal drama
3. Prep or tactics for our next opponent
4. Status of internal depth chart, roster moves or fit for a role
5. Anything about our next opponent's abilities, personnel, or Stuff They're Saying

So the next time someone asks him if Brady's a hermaphrodite, he just replies "Number 2." Bill, when will Gronk be 100%? "Number 1." Coach, how do you prepare to play against a running back like Adrian Petersen? "You plant evidence to create police reports that he... uh... number 5."

There might be a few other categories, but I think those are the big ones, and yet that's like 99% of what he gets asked about in press conferences. What he's like outside of press conferences has absolutely no relation to Press Conference Bill.

Basically, nothing with a proper name. Unless it's to ask who was the best linebacker he had ever coached out of the city of Indianapolis, Indiana.

Having spent the better part of the last 96 hours looking at Buffalo film, here are two questions I'd love to ask him if I were in the room tomorrow:

1. Buffalo's secondary does a great job of rolling their coverage just at the snap. What are your thoughts on 1: Rolling the coverage prior to the snap defensively and 2: working with the quarterback to identify the coverage pre-snap?

2. Buffalo's defensive front utilizes a wide 9 alignment along both defensive ends, making it difficult to run on the edges but requiring the linebackers to fill the off-tackle gap. Does this scheme force you alter pass protection or blocking assignments upfront?

Maybe gameplanish in a sense, but a chance for Professor Belichick to take us all to school.

He'd probably have you summarily executed before answering these. Don't get me wrong, they're good questions, but I think there's no chance he's answering specific questions that include the word "Buffalo" with anything more than platitudes.

Drop the Buffalo references and rework it so it's general enough that it wouldn't be a reveal of anything other head coaches don't know and you could get an amazing overview of the development of the game that could inform what the reporters should be writing about. E.g.:

1. Bill, could you tell us a bit about the shift in the league from using Cover-2 to more Cover-1 and Cover-3 and how teams think about the timing of rolling coverages to disguise what defensive concepts they are employing?
2. Bill, wide 9 alignment obviously helps take away outside runs but seems to make the interior very vulnerable; isn't this a risky gambit unless you have the perfect personnel, or are there schemes people can use to hedge against the risk?

But that takes effort

It does. But I'm starting to wonder of late just how little effort some of the "made guys" are putting in.

Isn't it somewhat ironic that you've written -without an interview- a long piece critical of the media for insinuating animosity where there was none because they couldn't get a decent interview? Why not just call Shalise Manza Young and ask her what she actually thinks, rather than trying to infer her mental state?

Hello? Ms. Manza? Hi, internet message board poster here--though I'm looking to expand. Yeah. Well, I have a question for you: Do you hate Bill Belichick and have an evil agenda to subvert his reign? What? Hello?

 

[Jnai]

Hello? Ms. Manza? Hi, internet message board poster here--though I'm looking to expand. Yeah. Well, I have a question for you: Do you hate Bill Belichick and have an evil agenda to subvert his reign? What? Hello?

 
I was under the impression Football Central was aiming to be more than an internet message board.

 

[Reverend]

 
I was under the impression Football Central was aiming to be more than an internet message board.

 
There's a joke about that in the part of my post that you quoted. 
 
I am not without humor about what we are trying to do.