Herald Calls It: Belichick Wins Coach of the Year

Can we be honest here? When we saw the backpage of the Herald today, we got a little nervous for our favorite tabloid. In case you missed it, the kids decided to do a little sleuthing (they called it spying, which doesn’t make a lick of sense, but whatever) and determined that Bill Belichick would be your 2007 NFL Coach of the Year.

We got a little nervous, because these things have a way of backfiring and the last thing the Herald needs is to be the butt of more jokes. Naturally, when the AP made it official (10 days before it was supposed to), the Herald patted itself on the back for its polling acumen.

But anyway, Belichick’s selection is hardly surprising. When you go 16-0, you have to win the award even for some of the writers whose voting criteria seems a little shaky. Like, say, Charean Williams of the Ft. Worth Star-Telegram.

The Pats were picked to win the Super Bowl before the season started. Their undefeated season was talked about early on. They did do something that had never been done before in a 16-game season, but I don’t think anyone is surprised, Williams wrote in an e-mail. The Jags had no Pro Bowlers voted to Hawaii. They likely will have no All-Pros. If the Jags have no all-star talent, there has to be some reason they won 11 games. The only explanation is coaching.

The Jaguars have no Pro Bowlers because the people picking the Pro Bowl team don’t have the slightest clue what they’re doing. How, exactly, does that reflect on a coach? It doesn’t, of course.

Ms. Williams goes on to acknowledge that no one had ever gone 16-0 before, but then dismisses it because “Their undefeated season was talked about early on. I don’t think anyone is surprised.” Um, OK.

To review: An achievement that had never been accomplished in 30 years of the 16-game schedule doesn’t count because “everyone talked about it.”

It makes you long for the widsom of baseball Hall of Fame voters.