In the Inquirer's silly a-bunch-of-columnists-e-mail-each-other-and-we-put-it-in-the-paper thingy, Bob Ford delves into whether an athlete is or isn't a "Philly guy":
Philly guy? Let's see. He's got to work hard and not complain. He's got to say every 10 minutes or so how great the fans are. He's got to be a blue-collar, lunch bucket, regular sort of a fellow. He has to have grit, moxie, tenacity, spunk and spirit. Or is all of that a cliche for what a very narrow slice of sports fans in this community wants in its athletes? A kind of a Page 2 caricature of an athlete? Just wondering.That's the thing that I still don't get about this city- what if he isn't that? What if he meets some of the criteria, and not others? And if not, why must Philadelphia limit themselves to athletes who fit that narrow definition of who they accept, when other cities don't? I guess that's the price you pay for having a quarterback who, despite making the playoffs nearly every year, smiles too much. Posted by Stephen Silver at March 11, 2009 10:07 PM