News
Hate them or not, Patriots fans want the glory back in Super Bowl LX
Patriots superfan Keith Birchall (right) celebrated with a friend in Denver for the AFC Championship game and was thrilled to see the Pats punch their ticket to this year’s Super Bowl. He’s old enough to remember the Pats’ losing years, and is appalled by the “cockiness and entitlement” in many spoiled young Pats fans today.
Elizabeth Johnson
hide caption
toggle caption
Elizabeth Johnson
BOSTON – As Seattle Seahawks fans look to win their second-ever Lombardi trophy in Sunday’s Super Bowl showdown, New England Patriots fans are aiming to win their seventh. And just as importantly to many, they’re hoping to “finally” end what they call their “long” and “agonizing” six years of losing.
“Don’t worry, we’ll be on top again soon enough,” said Aidan Lafferty, 24, with the swagger of a 20-something who grew up with the Patriots winning, and winning again.
“It’s the starting of a dynasty, again!,” gushed 24-year-old George Zabalou, nursing a beer a few tables away at the Game On! sports bar where walls are covered with banners, photos and jerseys all attesting to the city’s embarrassment of sports riches. Starting in 2001, Boston’s four major sports teams delivered 12 championships in 18 seasons, including the Patriots’ six Super Bowl wins.
Those lucky enough to grow up during those years when Boston called itself “Title Town” never went more than two years before getting to skip school again for another championship celebration.
“It was like parades on parades on parades,” said Jenna Freni, 24. “It was awesome.”
Frenzi’s friend Angel Galiotzakis, 23, nodded. “Growing up, I didn’t know that going to the Super Bowl wasn’t a normal occurrence.”
Jenna Freni, 24, (left) and Angel Galiotzakis, 23, spent their childhood celebrating Patriots Superbowl championships. Sharing drinks at the Game On! sports bar in Boston, they’re hoping this is the year New England starts winning again. “We’ve suffered enough,” Galiotzakis smiles.
Tovia Smith/NPR
hide caption
toggle caption
Tovia Smith/NPR
So, it was quite the shock to many when star quarterback Tom Brady left, the Pats parades paused, and fans found themselves suffering through a painful Patriots drought, — for those of six long years.
“Dude, I was in a dark place,” said Lafferty. “I was like, ‘Is it always going to be like this? Are we not going to win for … ever?’”
Another Pats fan Joe Reynolds says it was a rough time for him, too. “It was like, ‘What’s going on?” he said from his home in Cambridge. “This is like a huge drop off from what I’ve come to expect.”
“There is a clear connection between the Patriots losing and your use of antidepressants,” added his wife, Emily Borges.
But listening to Pat’s fans complain about their suffering is what’s insufferable to NFL fans from, well, basically everywhere else.
“Oh! Get over yourselves! It has not been that hard,” scoffed Noah Seligson, a fan of the New York Jets with a much, much longer history of suffering. “The Jets haven’t made the Super Bowl since 1969! Boston fans should grow up and feel fortunate for what they have.”

Andrew Lawrenson, who lives in New England but roots for the Miami Dolphins, said Pats fans don’t know what real suffering is. The Dolphins’ last won a Super Bowl in January 1974.
“Patriots fans drive me crazy,” Lawrenson said. “They’re all obnoxious and like to run their mouth off. The Patriots deserve to suffer a little more. They’ve had 20 years of greatness, they can have at least 10 years of misery.”
George Zabalou, a security guard at the Game On! sports bar in Boston, says he loved “the bragging rights” that came from being a New England Patriots fan during their winning years. Now after six “horrible” seasons, he’s hoping for a Pats win, and what he believes will be another dynasty run.
Tovia Smith/NPR
hide caption
toggle caption
Tovia Smith/NPR
Zac Vug, who hosts the online sports talk show Take Back With Zac, calls New England the “most spoiled franchise in the universe.”
“Oh my god, their attitude is horribly disgusting,” he said.
Even some Patriots faithful – of a certain age — will admit that an attitude adjustment might be in order.
New England superfan Keith Birchall, 58, has been around long enough to remember decades of the Pats losing and when the team was mocked as the Patsies. That’s kept him more grounded than the “entitled” young fans today, he said.
He still seethes at the young fans who couldn’t bother going to this year’s Wild Card game, taking it for granted the Pats would win and they’d have a chance this season at an even bigger game.
“That’s just cockiness and entitlement,” Birchall said. “They don’t get it. They have no idea how bad we once were.”
As for the hate coming from rival fans, New England diehards brush it off as just jealousy. As Pats fans love to say, “They hate us cuz they ain’t us.”
And they’re not entirely wrong.
“I do! I hate ’em cuz I ain’t ’em,” concedes Vug, whose LA Chargers have won a total of zero Super Bowls. “I’m a man of Christ. I have to admit my shortcomings. I am a jealous human. I envy what the Patriots have. I envy the ease of their life. It’s just a perfect sports relationship. And all I have is pain and suffering.”
You’ll hear no such confession, however, from Seattle Seahawks fan Jason Hibbs.
“We don’t want to be them,” he snapped. “They’re obnoxious!”
But a moment later, Hibbs offers a caveat: it wouldn’t be all bad to be hated.
Seattle Seahawks fan Jason Hibbs is one of many around the nation who find it infuriating to hear Patriots fans grousing about the “long-suffering” years since they last won a championship. Hibbs is hoping the Seahawks beat the Pats and “shut up” their “obnoxious” fans.
Suzanah Schoen
hide caption
toggle caption
Suzanah Schoen
“It means you’re winning,” he said. “In a few years, maybe everybody hates us because we’ve won two or three times. I want to be hated for once. That would be a fantastic feeling.”
Yup. Just ask any Pats fan and they’ll tell you, winning is totally worth it.
News
Supreme Court blocks redrawing of New York congressional map, dealing a win for GOP
The Supreme Court
Win McNamee/Getty Images
hide caption
toggle caption
Win McNamee/Getty Images
The Supreme Court on Monday intervened in New York’s redistricting process, blocking a lower court decision that would likely have flipped a Republican congressional district into a Democratic district.
At issue is the midterm redrawing of New York’s 11th congressional district, including Staten Island and a small part of Brooklyn. The district is currently held by a Republican, but on Jan. 21, a state Supreme Court judge ruled that the current district dilutes the power of Black and Latino voters in violation of the state constitution.
GOP Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, who represents the district, and the Republican co-chair of the state Board of Elections promptly appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, asking the justices to block the redrawing as an unconstitutional “racial gerrymander.” New York’s congressional election cycle was set to officially begin Feb. 24, the opening day for candidates to seek placement on the ballot.
As in this year’s prior mid-decade redistricting fights — in Texas and California — the Trump administration backed the Republicans.
Voters and the State of New York contended it’s too soon for the Supreme Court to wade into this dispute. New York’s highest state court has not issued a final judgment, so the voters asserted that if the Supreme Court grants relief now “future stay applicants will see little purpose in waiting for state court rulings before coming to this Court” and “be rewarded for such gamesmanship.” The state argues this is an issue for “New York courts, not federal courts” to resolve, and there is sufficient time for the dispute to be resolved on the merits.
The court majority explained the decision to intervene in 101 words, which the three dissenting liberal justices summarized as “Rules for thee, but not for me.”
The unsigned majority order does not explain the Court’s rationale. It says only how long the stay will last, until the case moves through the New York State appeals courts. If, however, the losing party petitions and the court agrees to hear the challenge, the stay extends until the final opinion is announced.
Dissenting from the decision were Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson. Writing for the three, Sotomayor said that if nonfinal decisions of a state trial court can be brought to highest court, “then every decision from any court is now fair game.” More immediately, she noted, “By granting these applications, the Court thrusts itself into the middle of every election-law dispute around the country, even as many States redraw their congressional maps ahead of the 2026 election.”
Monday’s Supreme Court action deviates from the court’s hands-off pattern in these mid-term redistricting fights this year. In two previous cases — from Texas and California — the court refused to intervene, allowing newly drawn maps to stay in effect.
Requests for Supreme Court intervention on redistricting issues has been a recurring theme this term, a trend that is likely to grow. Earlier last month the high court allowed California to use a voter-approved, Democratic-friendly map. California’s redistricting came in response to a GOP-friendly redistricting plan in Texas that the Supreme Court also permitted to move forward. These redistricting efforts are expected to offset one another.
But the high court itself has yet to rule on a challenge to Louisiana’s voting map, which was drawn by the state legislature after the decennial census in order to create a second majority-Black district. Since the drawing of that second majority-black district, the state has backed away from that map, hoping to return to a plan that provides for only one majority-minority district.
The Supreme Court’s consideration of the Louisiana case has stretched across two terms. The justices failed to resolve the case last term and chose to order a second round of arguments this term adding a new question: Does the state’s intentional creation of a second majority-minority district violate the constitution’s Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments’ guarantee of the right to vote and the authority of Congress to enforce that mandate?
Following the addition of the new question, the state of Louisiana flipped positions to oppose the map it had just drawn and defended in court. Whether the Supreme Court follows suit remains to be seen. But the tone of the October argument suggested that the court’s conservative supermajority is likely to continue undercutting the 1965 Voting Rights Act.
News
Map: Earthquake Shakes Central California
Note: Map shows the area with a shake intensity of 3 or greater, which U.S.G.S. defines as “weak,” though the earthquake may be felt outside the areas shown. The New York Times
A minor earthquake with a preliminary magnitude of 3.5 struck in Central California on Monday, according to the United States Geological Survey.
The temblor happened at 7:17 a.m. Pacific time about 6 miles northwest of Pinnacles, Calif., data from the agency shows.
As seismologists review available data, they may revise the earthquake’s reported magnitude. Additional information collected about the earthquake may also prompt U.S.G.S. scientists to update the shake-severity map.
Source: United States Geological Survey | Notes: Shaking categories are based on the Modified Mercalli Intensity scale. When aftershock data is available, the corresponding maps and charts include earthquakes within 100 miles and seven days of the initial quake. All times above are Pacific time. Shake data is as of Monday, March 2 at 10:20 a.m. Eastern. Aftershocks data is as of Monday, March 2 at 11:18 a.m. Eastern.
News
US says Kuwait accidentally shot down 3 American jets
The U.S. and Israel have been conducting strikes against targets in Iran since Saturday morning, with the aim of toppling Tehran’s clerical regime. Iran has fired back, with retaliatory assaults featuring missiles and drones targeting several Gulf countries and American bases in the Middle East.
“All six aircrew ejected safely, have been safely recovered, and are in stable condition. Kuwait has acknowledged this incident, and we are grateful for the efforts of the Kuwaiti defense forces and their support in this ongoing operation,” Central Command said.
“The cause of the incident is under investigation. Additional information will be released as it becomes available,” it added.
In a separate statement later Monday, Central Command said that American forces had been killed during combat since the strikes began.
“As of 7:30 am ET, March 2, four U.S. service members have been killed in action. The fourth service member, who was seriously wounded during Iran’s initial attacks, eventually succumbed to their injuries,” it said.
Major combat operations continue and our response effort is ongoing. The identities of the fallen are being withheld until 24 hours after next of kin notification,” Central Command added.
This story has been updated.
-
World5 days agoExclusive: DeepSeek withholds latest AI model from US chipmakers including Nvidia, sources say
-
Massachusetts6 days agoMother and daughter injured in Taunton house explosion
-
Denver, CO5 days ago10 acres charred, 5 injured in Thornton grass fire, evacuation orders lifted
-
Louisiana1 week agoWildfire near Gum Swamp Road in Livingston Parish now under control; more than 200 acres burned
-
Technology1 week agoYouTube TV billing scam emails are hitting inboxes
-
Politics1 week agoOpenAI didn’t contact police despite employees flagging mass shooter’s concerning chatbot interactions: REPORT
-
Technology1 week agoStellantis is in a crisis of its own making
-
Oregon4 days ago2026 OSAA Oregon Wrestling State Championship Results And Brackets – FloWrestling