This year's NFL Playoffs have reinforced the age old adage that, in the football game of life, the apple certainly does not fall far from the tree. Or, more specifically, a team's performance always reflects their coach's personality.
Always.
Listen, dear readers. I could go down the entire list of 2009 Playoff coaches and their respective team's on field play to help prove a point. But, I feel that would be a waste of time because the opening statement is self-evident. I'm simply trying to highlight the importance of coach's attitude and how it effects his team's play.
People say "coaches coach and players play," implying the two are mutually exclusive. They're not. NFL coaches and players personify the definition of a co-dependent relationship where each amplifies the weaknesses, and strengths, of the other.
You still want an example, don't you? Okay, I'll give in.
Let's look at our beloved New England Patriots. Coach Belichick projects a matter-of-fact attitude -- with a sprinkle of self entitlement -- and usually comes across as indifferent. And how did our team look against Baltimore last Sunday?
Exactly.
------------------
Quick Thinking
------------------
-- The only thing I really miss since the Patriots' season ended 10 days ago is the video web site segment Belichick Breakdown.
-- Well, that, and the fact that coach is referred to as "The Belestrator" while analyzing game film during the show.
-- Awesome nickname.
-- Helps humanize coach Belichick a little bit.
-- Blanket Memo of the Week: While we're talking about nicknames, I'd like to offer a sincere thank you to all the girls I've ever dated for never giving me the pet name "moopsie."
-- Question of the Week goes out to all the ladies in the crowd. Maybe I've been asleep at the wheel but when exactly did country music become the universal aphrodisiac?
-- Would someone please break Brett Favre's hip and put an end to the egomaniacal roller coaster that has becoming his football legacy.
-- The best golfer in the world, renowned for his mental toughness & focus, is going to therapy for sexual addiction implying he had no control over his transgressions and feels a bit disingenuous to me.
-- Wonder if Elin is buying it.
-- Would be more believable if you vanished in the Woods of Wisdom, Tiger.
-- Zen Question of the Week: If something you never really wanted in the first place decides to go away, did you still lose it?
-- The 2009 Jets remind me of the young, hungry team we were blessed with in 2001.
-- I hope you rediscover the hunger in 2010, boys.
-- Especially you, Mr. Bundchen.
-- Congratulations to Kerry Ceurvels Martin, my dear childhood friend's wife, who is being inducted into the Salve Regina Basketball Hall of Fame this weekend.
-- 1080 points and 1155 rebounds are incredible accomplishments, Worm. Enjoy the well-deserved recognition.
-- Oh, and thanks for letting me violate some of your friends during my college days.
-- Celebrity Look Alike Award of the Week goes to my cousin Joe for being the spitting image of Daddy Warbucks while wearing his tuxedo.
-- Beats looking like Punjab, brother.
-- Sage Advice of the Week goes to all my married friends out there. When you find yourself in a group of single guys engaged in "locker room talk" please don't try and contribute with stories of you and your wife's sexual escapades.
-- Ever.
-- Seriously. EV-ER.
-- It's gross.
4 comments:
The answer to the "zen question of the week" is: no. If you follow the Webster's College Dictionary, to lose is 'to come to be without as through accident'. If something was never really wanted in the first place, then it didn't decide to go away, it was thrown away.
Dear Anonymous,
I'm certainly not going to engage in a war of words with Webster. I mean, not only does he know every word in the English language, he knows their meanings, too.
I respect the big brain on Webster. He's a smart mothafucker.
Admittedly, the question is inherently flawed. Its wording implies possession but the word "decides" personifies the "it" that was lost. You technically can't lose something that has the power of choice.
And, while your answer is rational, it's not necessarily "the" answer. That's the beauty of Zen -- it's open to interpretation.
Plus, we're getting far too analytical. I was simply making a joke about the disappearance of my chronic under arm perspiration.
Botox isn't just good for getting rid of wrinkles!
My apologies to the "artist" for going too deep into a 'Zen Question'.
Perhaps I should be congratulating you on your "loss" of chronic underarm perspiration and lighter loads of laundry.
Congratulations!
Go Botox! It is an amazing little bacteria designed to cover up all those superficial flaws, for the superficial type. That's the beauty of it!
Here's to LOOKING good and a pit-stain-free wardrobe for 2010!
Cheers.
Botox is indeed an amazing bacteria. Too bad it can't help me with my superfluous third nipple, though.
I think I have to find a different bacteria for that.
Post a Comment