Bill Simmons loves Lebron James

[rondohondo]

To me, its just more of a realist approach.  The way the Celtics played the last 3 months certainly opened themselves to criticism and doubt from many Celtics fans.  If a Celtics fan had limited expectations of this team yet were pleasantly surprised by postive developments, it shouldn't involved being labeled a "front-runner".

Is it "realist" to:

1) Not say a positive thing about the team all season;

2) Say continually negative things about the team you purportedly bleed for;

3) Pick the team to lose to their biggest rival in 2008 and to the Cavs in 2009;

4) Say the team has no shot of winning against the Heat; and

5) Not show an ounce of excitement about the Paul Pierce game winner or any other Celtics victory, or even acknowledge the series other than cracks about the front office?

I think labeling Simmons a "realist" does a disservice to a lot of other realistic fans who follow this team through thick and thin.

What do people seriously want him to be? "Johnny Rah-Rah"?  I mean there's different levels of fandom.  If you feel that "realist" isn't the proper term, then we're really just discussing semantics, aren't we?  If the "realists" are peeved at me for using the label, so be it.  They can come after me.

Like I mentioned before, when all is said & done, I still believe the guy is a Celtics fan even if he's not fulfilling the expectations of other Celtics fans.

In regards to the Twitter thing , who cares?  I didn't update my facebook status after the win last night nor made any reference to the Celtics.  Does that destroy my fandom?  

Well when he is talking about every other series going on through twitter it seems really odd for him not to mention "his team" dominating a series and looking like they have their swagger back.

[jdpapa3]

What do people seriously want him to be? "Johnny Rah-Rah"?  I mean there's different levels of fandom.  If you feel that "realist" isn't the proper term, then we're really just discussing semantics, aren't we?  If the "realists" are peeved at me for using the label, so be it.  They can come after me.

Like I mentioned before, when all is said & done, I still believe the guy is a Celtics fan even if he's not fulfilling the expectations of other Celtics fans.

In regards to the Twitter thing , who cares?  I didn't update my facebook status after the win last night nor made any reference to the Celtics.  Does that destroy my fandom? 

If you say, and this is a direct quote, "I know the Celtics are going to lose in Round 1." and then the Celtics basically blow by the series in 5 games, I want at least a little bit of a comment about how wrong you were after that. And that's only because he is a national writer that has a fan base of a few million.

He tweets about Kosta Koufos and then not a word about the Pierce game winner, the Celtics turning it up 5 notches(his only comment on this referenced that QRich got us going...simply not true), or anything worthwhile about the series.

I just feel that if Miami was doing well, we'd get 20 tweets about how right he was...

[Donoghus]

To me, its just more of a realist approach.  The way the Celtics played the last 3 months certainly opened themselves to criticism and doubt from many Celtics fans.  If a Celtics fan had limited expectations of this team yet were pleasantly surprised by postive developments, it shouldn't involved being labeled a "front-runner".

Is it "realist" to:

1) Not say a positive thing about the team all season;

2) Say continually negative things about the team you purportedly bleed for;

3) Pick the team to lose to their biggest rival in 2008 and to the Cavs in 2009;

4) Say the team has no shot of winning against the Heat; and

5) Not show an ounce of excitement about the Paul Pierce game winner or any other Celtics victory, or even acknowledge the series other than cracks about the front office?

I think labeling Simmons a "realist" does a disservice to a lot of other realistic fans who follow this team through thick and thin.

What do people seriously want him to be? "Johnny Rah-Rah"?  I mean there's different levels of fandom.  If you feel that "realist" isn't the proper term, then we're really just discussing semantics, aren't we?  If the "realists" are peeved at me for using the label, so be it.  They can come after me.

Like I mentioned before, when all is said & done, I still believe the guy is a Celtics fan even if he's not fulfilling the expectations of other Celtics fans.

In regards to the Twitter thing , who cares?  I didn't update my facebook status after the win last night nor made any reference to the Celtics.  Does that destroy my fandom?  

Well when he is talking about every other series going on through twitter it seems really odd for him not to mention "his team" dominating a series and looking like they have their swagger back.

Just like the Lebron thing, I think some people are just looking to nail this guy to the wall on any little thing.  People nitpicking all the negatives.  

If some people have an axe to grind, fine.  Bash away.  I just take serious issue when people starting questioning the guy's allegiances.  I think questioning another's fandom is one of the stupider things to do.  Everyone is a fan, differently.  

[Roy Hobbs]

One of my favorite Celticsblog articles:

http://www.celticsblog.com/2008/5/31/644582/et-tu-bill

[incoherent]

Everyone here is a better fan to the Celtics then Simmons.

The guy wants us to lose so badly... why?