Friday 2/7/25
Josh Allen won the NFL MVP yesterday--that's fine, but he's over-hyped--and I saw complaints that he received third place votes, which isn't unreasonable. You could have had Allen third without trying to be contrarian. Enjoy your MVP, choker. No, I'm only kidding. Mercurial player. Still: He can't get it done when it matters. Or not to date.
I'm seeing these photos--and an awkward video--from that NFL Honors event of Bill Belichick, seventy-two, and his girlfriend, who is twenty-four. There are a number of reasons why no NFL team wanted Bill Belichick--and why Pete Carroll got a job instead--but whatever he is doing here would have been reason enough and I think it makes UNC look ridiculous.
Here we have a gross man who has lost his way. What are you doing? What is she doing? I know the answers, but we're that disgusting that we have to be ruled by the dick and avarice?
Does this woman not have friends or family in her life who care about her? This isn't like some brilliant artist and someone with an amazing mind who have come together on a different level.
The body language is so telling. She recoils at his touch, and when there are photos taken, she looks like some broken, narcissistic woman-child on Instagram who posts nothing but selfies of her self--you know, that facial expression of someone looking at themselves in the mirror. Like it's burned into the screen, so to speak.
Meanwhile, he's leaning back even while he's standing, as if saying, "Behold my trophy made of flesh."
It's nasty. And it makes him--this person who wanted to be the face of an organization--look like a nasty clown. Nasty in the gross sense. Someone you can't take seriously. Not anymore, man. You can't have this guy representing your organization. And these days? No can do. And I'm not some age person. I'm not someone who cares about gaps in and of themselves. I know there was a lot wrong with Picasso--to say the least, and which I got into in an opinion piece once--but read Life with Picasso. Age didn't matter in that relationship. But that was Picasso and Francoise Gilot. Not Sleeveless Shrivel Dick in Lost the Plot Mode and Ms. I'll Open My Legs Up for You If You Open Your Wallet Up for Me and I Can Also Fill the Gaping Holes Within with Attention While You Do Some Gross, Gross Hole Filling Yourself.
Hmmm. Those are long titles. Still, when the title fits, the title fits.
People almost always think that the motivation for what a woman like this is doing is money, but even bigger motivations for humans--on account of how much we've devolved--is the starving need for attention and to fill those voids within which never get filled with any the shit that people try to fill them with. That person on Threads posting first thing in the morning and then all day long, so that you can scroll through the entire day, and there they are thirty times from one end of the day to the other, is trying to fill the void within. That's exactly what they're doing.
They're only deepening the void, which is what most people do, and none of them can see that in a world where this is what so many are doing, and it's the norm. The norm blends in; it doesn't help us see things for what they are, or how deleterious they are. Then, as with this Threads example, people like that person, doing the same thing, follow that person, interact with them, "like" what they say, because to do so is to endorse themselves. See? There is it. I've just explained the whole of social media. That's how it works. This is how we work, too, as people now, because whether we're online or not, this is what we've gotten ourselves to become regardless of medium.
Pay attention. They are only deepening the void, but they are rewarded with compliments and attention and followers, and in our society, these things mean you are good. That's what people believe. So the void deepening begets void deepening. And no fucker out there, it seems, can see that this is what is so obviously happening and where we're at. By and large.
But I can't get over how the friends and family of this woman--her best friend, her mother, her father--aren't saying anything to her. You might say, "They probably did, out of great love and concern." I don't buy that. People can't stand up to a light breeze and do their own thing. If their friends and family are saying something, they'll almost always do what that is. It's not like she's a person of formidable depth with the conviction of her love.
And she's wearing one of his Super Bowl rings as he wears the other five? What are you doing, brother? Does this guy have friends? Because this is intervention shit. I get the sense there's no one in the lives of either of these people who truly care about them enough to speak honestly to them.
The new members of the football Hall of Fame were announced. Whatever. Can't really have any problems with those four. What I take issue with, as always, is Stanley Morgan not being in the Hall of Fame. Rodney Harrison's time will come, but it's been far too long with Morgan. He was an exciting, dynamic, modern NFL receiver at a time when passing numbers weren't what they are now, on a team that was run first, defense second, and passing somewhere back in the distance.
His quarterback for a long time was Steve Grogan. I get it, Grogan was a gamer, and he once led the league in TD passes--thanks to Morgan (who caught 12 of those 28 TD passes)--but he was no downfield bomber. Morgan was electric. To be an electric receiver playing in Foxborough in the 1970s--and he then excelled in the next decade, and aged well--really took something extra.
Patriots fans have nothing to talk about save the new coach and the second-year QB--I'm unconvinced about both; Drake Maye is certainly not some slam dunk to me, and Vrabel has not been nearly as successful as he's made out to be, but he has a forceful personality, which has gotten others who don't think for themselves, because no one does, to say highly favorable things about him--so what they're doing now is comparing what the Chiefs' are doing with what the Patriots did.
For instance: They will debate who is the better tight end, Travis Kelce or Rob Gronkowski.
Before getting into that, I would say that both of the Kelce's are supremely annoying. The retired lout/clod Kelce that one has to endure on television is a classic, "Only in America" person, where you can have no talent for what you do, and so long as you are mediocre and believed to be achievable--which in this instance means that you make men with man breasts think, "I'm also a guy with a head of meat who can get drunk and take off my shirt in the cold"--the masses will embrace you and make stardom happen for you. What kind of stardom are we talking here? America's fucking guest stardom. The guy who pops just because he's that idiot guy.
You need not worry about your act--which is already so thin--wearing too thin, because Americans are so stupid that you can give them the same exact stupid thing again, and again, and again--without end--and they will never be bored, because they are too stupid to be bored.
They are also too stupid to have anything to do with anything intelligent, but if it's stupid, they'll recognize it as familiar, like some old friend, and then embrace that stupidity as easily as they embrace themselves, despite actually hating themselves, but life is a matter for them of trying to drown out that knowledge--which is best kept in the back of the brain--with volume, mindless repetition, and, of course, more stupidity.
As for the tight ends: I think Gronkowski was better because he was the more complete player, and he could be a blocking beast. His blocking was crucial to the Patriots' final Super Bowl championship. There were also these points in games where, if needed--if the Patriots were in a bind--it could become the Gronkowski show for a quick four or five receptions in a row.
Having said that: I don't think he'd be better than Kelce in that Kansas City offense. Both guys were the perfect tight ends for their respective teams. I'm sure Kansas City wouldn't rather have Gronkowski than Kelce. It's tough to do any better than Kansas City has done, and he's a big part of that. The defense is the biggest part now, but this has been going on for a while, and when we assess a dynasty, we must do so in the aggregate.
Patriots fans are all upset about what the Chiefs may do--and what I think they'll do--but this doesn't bother me in the slightest. First of all, it's sports. These are games. Get some perspective. If they affect you to any real degree, you are not doing enough with your life. That should be your focus. Secondly, it's not every day you see history--even sports history--made. I am curious. Thirdly, I still don't think they catch them. Mahomes is already slipping, as I've written, and it wasn't just that the Patriots won six times, it's that they were on the threshold of winning it all just about every year for two decades. When they didn't win, they lost the Super Bowl or bowed out in the conference championship game. As I said, you have to look at this in the aggregate.
Comments