What Bill Simmons should say: "I'm an idiot"

[Mr October]

You guys are almost deranged with this Simmons stuff.

As if ANY of you know what he was watching and when or how much he actually cares.

It bugs the crap out of us because he is the proclaimed biggest Celtics fan over at BSPN, and dropping a Miami win article after that (reverse-jinx) Lakers will win article in 2008, he has alienated the Celtics fans on this blog.

He's done Celtic Nation wrong.

[BudweiserCeltic]

You guys are almost deranged with this Simmons stuff.

As if ANY of you know what he was watching and when or how much he actually cares.

That's the beauty of Twitter.  We *do* know what he was watching.

Actually, we *do* know what he's typing. Plus, his tweets were retweets.

[Rondo_is_better]

You guys are almost deranged with this Simmons stuff.

As if ANY of you know what he was watching and when or how much he actually cares.

Bill?

[FallGuy]

You guys are almost deranged with this Simmons stuff.

As if ANY of you know what he was watching and when or how much he actually cares.

Bill?

*laughs*

No. I just find it amusing how otherwise rational people behave when presented with anything Simmons-related.

Edited to make my sentence more coherent.

[misha]

You guys are almost deranged with this Simmons stuff.

As if ANY of you know what he was watching and when or how much he actually cares.

Bill?

tp

[dlpin]

You guys are almost deranged with this Simmons stuff.

As if ANY of you know what he was watching and when or how much he actually cares.

Bill?

*laughs*

No. I just find it amusing how otherwise rational people behave when presented with anything Simmons-related.

Edited to make my sentence more coherent.

Eh, a public figure makes an outrageous statement to generate buzz and reactions, and people react. Really unsurprising. And you talk about this as if people were going out of their way to protest or whatever. People are simply posting on a forum that they don't like him. How is that irrational? Certainly no more irrational than attempts to defend the character of someone you've never and will never meet.

[FallGuy]

You guys are almost deranged with this Simmons stuff.

As if ANY of you know what he was watching and when or how much he actually cares.

Bill?

*laughs*

No. I just find it amusing how otherwise rational people behave when presented with anything Simmons-related.

Edited to make my sentence more coherent.

Eh, a public figure makes an outrageous statement to generate buzz and reactions, and people react. Really unsurprising. And you talk about this as if people were going out of their way to protest or whatever. People are simply posting on a forum that they don't like him. How is that irrational? Certainly no more irrational than attempts to defend the character of someone you've never and will never meet.

I'm reacting more to the qualities attributed to him, by people who, presumably, also don't know him. For a large portion of Celtics fans, anything that doesn't suggest they're the best team is considered outrageous. So yeah, I think it goes beyond what would be considered rational response. But to each his own, I suppose.

[dlpin]

I'm reacting more to the qualities attributed to him, by people who, presumably, also don't know him. For a large portion of Celtics fans, anything that doesn't suggest they're the best team is considered outrageous. So yeah, I think it goes beyond what would be considered rational response. But to each his own, I suppose.

Except that the issue here wasn't that he didn't think the celtics are the best team. Is that he wrote a column stating with absolute certainty that the celtics would lose to the heat.
So a guy who made a name for himself by being the voice of the boston sports fan (originally the "boston sports guy") suddenly decides to make outlandish claims about the celtics to both pull a "skip bayless" and to gain credibility with fans of other teams. People then call him on it when he is proven completely wrong. There is nothing irrational about that.
He himself does much worse on his twitter account whenever anyone disagrees with him and is proven wrong.

Personally, I think he was once very good, and now is what he used to make fun of. Completely unrelated to what he thinks of the celtics. He used to be a regular guy who made fun of sports writers who thought too highly of themselves, who were part of the overhype machine, and who said outrageous stuff just to get attention. Now he is exactly that.

[FallGuy]

I'm reacting more to the qualities attributed to him, by people who, presumably, also don't know him. For a large portion of Celtics fans, anything that doesn't suggest they're the best team is considered outrageous. So yeah, I think it goes beyond what would be considered rational response. But to each his own, I suppose.

Except that the issue here wasn't that he didn't think the celtics are the best team. Is that he wrote a column stating with absolute certainty that the celtics would lose to the heat.
So a guy who made a name for himself by being the voice of the boston sports fan (originally the "boston sports guy") suddenly decides to make outlandish claims about the celtics to both pull a "skip bayless" and to gain credibility with fans of other teams. People then call him on it when he is proven completely wrong. There is nothing irrational about that.
He himself does much worse on his twitter account whenever anyone disagrees with him and is proven wrong.

Personally, I think he was once very good, and now is what he used to make fun of. Completely unrelated to what he thinks of the celtics. He used to be a regular guy who made fun of sports writers who thought too highly of themselves, who were part of the overhype machine, and who said outrageous stuff just to get attention. Now he is exactly that.

I share some of your last-paragraph feelings. I think he's too invested in non-writing activities and his brand comes first. Understandably, I think, given all the opportunities he has now and his (seemingly genuine) fascination with celebrity and all those trappings. I have no use for that stuff.

However, you attribute motivations to him in your first paragraph that I would dispute. Perhaps he, like many others, saw this craptastic Celtics team and legitimately thought they'd lose in the first round. It wasn't a CRAZY idea. I don't think you can say with any certainty that he wrote that column as a credibility grab. I've heard that many times round these here parts and I don't find it anymore convincing now than I did then.

[Roy Hobbs]

I'm reacting more to the qualities attributed to him, by people who, presumably, also don't know him. For a large portion of Celtics fans, anything that doesn't suggest they're the best team is considered outrageous. So yeah, I think it goes beyond what would be considered rational response. But to each his own, I suppose.

Except that the issue here wasn't that he didn't think the celtics are the best team. Is that he wrote a column stating with absolute certainty that the celtics would lose to the heat.
So a guy who made a name for himself by being the voice of the boston sports fan (originally the "boston sports guy") suddenly decides to make outlandish claims about the celtics to both pull a "skip bayless" and to gain credibility with fans of other teams. People then call him on it when he is proven completely wrong. There is nothing irrational about that.
He himself does much worse on his twitter account whenever anyone disagrees with him and is proven wrong.

Personally, I think he was once very good, and now is what he used to make fun of. Completely unrelated to what he thinks of the celtics. He used to be a regular guy who made fun of sports writers who thought too highly of themselves, who were part of the overhype machine, and who said outrageous stuff just to get attention. Now he is exactly that.

I share some of your last-paragraph feelings. I think he's too invested in non-writing activities and his brand comes first. Understandably, I think, given all the opportunities he has now and his (seemingly genuine) fascination with celebrity and all those trappings. I have no use for that stuff.

However, you attribute motivations to him in your first paragraph that I would dispute. Perhaps he, like many others, saw this craptastic Celtics team and legitimately thought they'd lose in the first round. It wasn't a CRAZY idea. I don't think you can say with any certainty that he wrote that column as a credibility grab. I've heard that many times round these here parts and I don't find it anymore convincing now than I did then.

Legitimate question:  has Simmons wrote a single positive thing about the Celtics this season?  

I think people question his motivations because he hasn't tweeted anything positive at all about the Celtics first round win, despite being *very* vocal about other series.  The things he has said about Celtics-Heat have been either complimentary of the Heat, or negative toward the Celts.

Ultimately, Simmons doesn't matter all that much.  He's simply a guy that many Celtics fans find irritating, in the mold of Peter May or Dan Shaughnessy.

[BudweiserCeltic]

I'm reacting more to the qualities attributed to him, by people who, presumably, also don't know him. For a large portion of Celtics fans, anything that doesn't suggest they're the best team is considered outrageous. So yeah, I think it goes beyond what would be considered rational response. But to each his own, I suppose.

Except that the issue here wasn't that he didn't think the celtics are the best team. Is that he wrote a column stating with absolute certainty that the celtics would lose to the heat.
So a guy who made a name for himself by being the voice of the boston sports fan (originally the "boston sports guy") suddenly decides to make outlandish claims about the celtics to both pull a "skip bayless" and to gain credibility with fans of other teams. People then call him on it when he is proven completely wrong. There is nothing irrational about that.
He himself does much worse on his twitter account whenever anyone disagrees with him and is proven wrong.

Personally, I think he was once very good, and now is what he used to make fun of. Completely unrelated to what he thinks of the celtics. He used to be a regular guy who made fun of sports writers who thought too highly of themselves, who were part of the overhype machine, and who said outrageous stuff just to get attention. Now he is exactly that.

I share some of your last-paragraph feelings. I think he's too invested in non-writing activities and his brand comes first. Understandably, I think, given all the opportunities he has now and his (seemingly genuine) fascination with celebrity and all those trappings. I have no use for that stuff.

However, you attribute motivations to him in your first paragraph that I would dispute. Perhaps he, like many others, saw this craptastic Celtics team and legitimately thought they'd lose in the first round. It wasn't a CRAZY idea. I don't think you can say with any certainty that he wrote that column as a credibility grab. I've heard that many times round these here parts and I don't find it anymore convincing now than I did then.

Legitimate question:  has Simmons wrote a single positive thing about the Celtics this season? 

I think people question his motivations because he hasn't tweeted anything positive at all about the Celtics first round win, despite being *very* vocal about other series.  The things he has said about Celtics-Heat have been either complimentary of the Heat, or negative toward the Celts.

Ultimately, Simmons doesn't matter all that much.  He's simply a guy that many Celtics fans find irritating, in the mold of Peter May or Dan Shaughnessy.

What is fun from Bill, is that we really don't know what he's thinking or where he stands. All these threads just turn into theories and speculations of where he actually stands.

Anyways, with the abundance of negative crap that has been going on in this forum throughout most of the year, I don't think many here are in that much of a position to criticize him. But he's a professional sports writer, so we have to hold him to a higher standard, but even so, I think there's a bit of an hypocritic phenomenon going on here by some here I think.

[FallGuy]

I'm reacting more to the qualities attributed to him, by people who, presumably, also don't know him. For a large portion of Celtics fans, anything that doesn't suggest they're the best team is considered outrageous. So yeah, I think it goes beyond what would be considered rational response. But to each his own, I suppose.

Except that the issue here wasn't that he didn't think the celtics are the best team. Is that he wrote a column stating with absolute certainty that the celtics would lose to the heat.
So a guy who made a name for himself by being the voice of the boston sports fan (originally the "boston sports guy") suddenly decides to make outlandish claims about the celtics to both pull a "skip bayless" and to gain credibility with fans of other teams. People then call him on it when he is proven completely wrong. There is nothing irrational about that.
He himself does much worse on his twitter account whenever anyone disagrees with him and is proven wrong.

Personally, I think he was once very good, and now is what he used to make fun of. Completely unrelated to what he thinks of the celtics. He used to be a regular guy who made fun of sports writers who thought too highly of themselves, who were part of the overhype machine, and who said outrageous stuff just to get attention. Now he is exactly that.

I share some of your last-paragraph feelings. I think he's too invested in non-writing activities and his brand comes first. Understandably, I think, given all the opportunities he has now and his (seemingly genuine) fascination with celebrity and all those trappings. I have no use for that stuff.

However, you attribute motivations to him in your first paragraph that I would dispute. Perhaps he, like many others, saw this craptastic Celtics team and legitimately thought they'd lose in the first round. It wasn't a CRAZY idea. I don't think you can say with any certainty that he wrote that column as a credibility grab. I've heard that many times round these here parts and I don't find it anymore convincing now than I did then.

Legitimate question:  has Simmons wrote a single positive thing about the Celtics this season? 

I think people question his motivations because he hasn't tweeted anything positive at all about the Celtics first round win, despite being *very* vocal about other series.  The things he has said about Celtics-Heat have been either complimentary of the Heat, or negative toward the Celts.

Legitimate answer: I don't know. He didn't write much on basketball the first few months of the season when the team deserved praise (I know this because I had to suffer through NFL columns and podcasts, neither of which I can tolerate). There hasn't been a lot of positive stuff to write in 2010.

He did do an early-Jan podcast with Bucher and Stein - you could check that.

But again, some people think he doesn't actually like the Celtics and is now biased against them. And others think he loves the Celtics and picks against them for credibility's sake. Both seem bunk to me.

And the twitter thing - I mean, REALLY? The guy could be doing any number of things (like, say, talking to friends on the phone about the C's win, or attending to his family or working). To submit the lack of a tweet, an hour after the game ended, as evidence of anything... man, you've lost me there.

[Roy Hobbs]

I'm reacting more to the qualities attributed to him, by people who, presumably, also don't know him. For a large portion of Celtics fans, anything that doesn't suggest they're the best team is considered outrageous. So yeah, I think it goes beyond what would be considered rational response. But to each his own, I suppose.

Except that the issue here wasn't that he didn't think the celtics are the best team. Is that he wrote a column stating with absolute certainty that the celtics would lose to the heat.
So a guy who made a name for himself by being the voice of the boston sports fan (originally the "boston sports guy") suddenly decides to make outlandish claims about the celtics to both pull a "skip bayless" and to gain credibility with fans of other teams. People then call him on it when he is proven completely wrong. There is nothing irrational about that.
He himself does much worse on his twitter account whenever anyone disagrees with him and is proven wrong.

Personally, I think he was once very good, and now is what he used to make fun of. Completely unrelated to what he thinks of the celtics. He used to be a regular guy who made fun of sports writers who thought too highly of themselves, who were part of the overhype machine, and who said outrageous stuff just to get attention. Now he is exactly that.

I share some of your last-paragraph feelings. I think he's too invested in non-writing activities and his brand comes first. Understandably, I think, given all the opportunities he has now and his (seemingly genuine) fascination with celebrity and all those trappings. I have no use for that stuff.

However, you attribute motivations to him in your first paragraph that I would dispute. Perhaps he, like many others, saw this craptastic Celtics team and legitimately thought they'd lose in the first round. It wasn't a CRAZY idea. I don't think you can say with any certainty that he wrote that column as a credibility grab. I've heard that many times round these here parts and I don't find it anymore convincing now than I did then.

Legitimate question:  has Simmons wrote a single positive thing about the Celtics this season?  

I think people question his motivations because he hasn't tweeted anything positive at all about the Celtics first round win, despite being *very* vocal about other series.  The things he has said about Celtics-Heat have been either complimentary of the Heat, or negative toward the Celts.

Ultimately, Simmons doesn't matter all that much.  He's simply a guy that many Celtics fans find irritating, in the mold of Peter May or Dan Shaughnessy.

What is fun from Bill, is that we really don't know what he's thinking or where he stands. All these threads just turn into theories and speculations of where he actually stands.

Anyways, with the abundance of negative crap that has been going on in this forum throughout most of the year, I don't think many here are in that much of a position to criticize him. But he's a professional sports writer, so we have to hold him to a higher standard, but even so, I think there's a bit of an hypocritic phenomenon going on here by some here I think.

I don't think so.  Almost to a man, those fans who talked junk about the Celts are now rooting them on boisterously.  That's pretty much the opposite of what Simmons is doing.  

I mean, a very vocal NBA fan -- and purportedly a Celtics fan above all else -- doesn't have a single word to say about the Pierce game-winner?  And yet, he's salivating all over Kevin Durant?

I think Simmons was absolutely in love with the Celtics teams of the 1980s.  I'm not so sure, though, that he has much love for the current organization.

[BudweiserCeltic]

I'm reacting more to the qualities attributed to him, by people who, presumably, also don't know him. For a large portion of Celtics fans, anything that doesn't suggest they're the best team is considered outrageous. So yeah, I think it goes beyond what would be considered rational response. But to each his own, I suppose.

Except that the issue here wasn't that he didn't think the celtics are the best team. Is that he wrote a column stating with absolute certainty that the celtics would lose to the heat.
So a guy who made a name for himself by being the voice of the boston sports fan (originally the "boston sports guy") suddenly decides to make outlandish claims about the celtics to both pull a "skip bayless" and to gain credibility with fans of other teams. People then call him on it when he is proven completely wrong. There is nothing irrational about that.
He himself does much worse on his twitter account whenever anyone disagrees with him and is proven wrong.

Personally, I think he was once very good, and now is what he used to make fun of. Completely unrelated to what he thinks of the celtics. He used to be a regular guy who made fun of sports writers who thought too highly of themselves, who were part of the overhype machine, and who said outrageous stuff just to get attention. Now he is exactly that.

I share some of your last-paragraph feelings. I think he's too invested in non-writing activities and his brand comes first. Understandably, I think, given all the opportunities he has now and his (seemingly genuine) fascination with celebrity and all those trappings. I have no use for that stuff.

However, you attribute motivations to him in your first paragraph that I would dispute. Perhaps he, like many others, saw this craptastic Celtics team and legitimately thought they'd lose in the first round. It wasn't a CRAZY idea. I don't think you can say with any certainty that he wrote that column as a credibility grab. I've heard that many times round these here parts and I don't find it anymore convincing now than I did then.

Legitimate question:  has Simmons wrote a single positive thing about the Celtics this season?  

I think people question his motivations because he hasn't tweeted anything positive at all about the Celtics first round win, despite being *very* vocal about other series.  The things he has said about Celtics-Heat have been either complimentary of the Heat, or negative toward the Celts.

Ultimately, Simmons doesn't matter all that much.  He's simply a guy that many Celtics fans find irritating, in the mold of Peter May or Dan Shaughnessy.

What is fun from Bill, is that we really don't know what he's thinking or where he stands. All these threads just turn into theories and speculations of where he actually stands.

Anyways, with the abundance of negative crap that has been going on in this forum throughout most of the year, I don't think many here are in that much of a position to criticize him. But he's a professional sports writer, so we have to hold him to a higher standard, but even so, I think there's a bit of an hypocritic phenomenon going on here by some here I think.

I don't think so.  Almost to a man, those fans who talked junk about the Celts are now rooting them own boisterously.  That's pretty much the opposite of what Simmons is doing.  

I mean, a very focal NBA fan -- and purportedly a Celtics fan above all else -- doesn't have a single word to say about the Pierce game-winner?  And yet, he's salivating all over Kevin Durant?

I think Simmons was absolutely in love with the Celtics teams of the 1980s.  I'm not so sure, though, that he has much love for the current organization.

Playing devil's advocate, for someone who in the past has countless times done the jinx gimmicks, and someone we know for all his life has been a Celtic fan, that he actually doesn't make these sorts of mentions about an organization that he has grown up being a huge fan of, don't you think it's a bit evident of that this might just be another of his jinx gimmicks?

I mean, from what I can see, seems like all has been kept consistent with times that he has done the jinx thing.

I don't think there's anything wrong with his love for KD love. I mean, we gush about him a lot in here too, plus he's playing against the Lakers.

Also, this phenomenon isn't exclusive to the Celtics.

[cornbreadsmart]

i agree with hobb's opinion that simmons is not as big a fan of this latest celtic title team. that's fine but i don't really view him a s a real die hard anymore because after all it's about the name on the front, not on the back.