- 10:47 AM
- 04/19/24
Sherman needed to go, look what he did the last 5 years as GM and what he had to work with. His draft choices sucked and now it showed this year after we lost a few players we had no replacements that could step up. It really shows that in todays game it is very difficult to be both GM and head coach. I think only Belichek has been able to do it successfully. Andy Reid was close,...but there was this TO thing, well that's another thread.
Can I get a response to this question please. Name me a team that the 72 Dolphins could beat that won the supper bowl since 86? 85 bears do not count. When will the game be played. I think that any game played before 1982 would favor the Dolphins because their sheer size and strength advantages over the children they would be playing against would be too much to overcome. Now if the game were played today? the Dolphins wouldn't stand a chance. Shula's play calling is archaic. The death of several key players on defense makes them vulnerable to the modern day "quick strike" type offenses. Though Czonka still seems to have some teeth, he has lost some of his bite.
Sherman was one of the worst coaches I have seen in recent years. Why did he keep calling that play,where Favre throws the interception?... that play never worked!... especially not in the playoffs. I hope that when Favre fades away, he takes the " westcoast offense " with him. It only works if you have a stud at wide receiver.
And why? So he wouldn't have to go to class (not that he did anyway) and he could start getting rich and spending tons of money. Wow Dude, you and I are such different people!!! I could spend the rest of my life trying and never come up with a better reason! I wouldn't hesitate to challenge the authority of " Paul Tagliabue or anyother " godlike diety ", if it meant I " wouldn't have to go to class ", oh and that " getting rich " thing where he gets to into the " spending tons of money " Yeah, that's me too.
It wasn't me, it was the one armed man! Ummm....but, if this is a reference to he "Fugitive". It was the one-armed man!
Crime has no color, unfortunately neither does ignorance. Race has no color either. It is a distinction of ancestory. Crime has no color, but criminals do have a skin and that skin has a color. The classification of skin color, or race or any other singular point of analysis for purposes of negative judgement is a form of ignorance. judgement is a skill essential for human survival. It is our greatest defense mechanism. You have to recognize threats and take the appropriate action to protect yourself. Criminals are threats to society. People who make judgement with out all the facts are likely to make the wrong judgements. People who make the wrong judgements and learn from their mistakes are likely to be productive to society. People who are afraid to make judgements at all. are useless to society. People who make judgements based solely on one category or fact( race, skin color ) are less likley to be accurate with their judgement than a person who examines all the facts available. These people are ingnorant. There is a cure for ignorance. It is called learning and understanding. Don't believe me. Than judge for yourself! Maurice Clarett is no more guilty or innocent because he is a black man, than he is guilty or innocent because he is an ex-football player. I will always remember him for his come from behind ball stripping of a defender returning an interception in the Championship game. It was one of the most "heads-up" plays I had ever scene in such a big game. That play changed the whole momentum of the game. I also remember how he challenged the authority of the mighty NFL. He was a pioneer in this respect. That is how I will remember him.
I hope you can excuse my ignorance on this "crucial" fact of the story! Please humor me with an explanation. Don't they wear skiis when they perform this sport? So, where as the sport itself may be called "skeleton" It's a sledding sport like luge. Clearly, you're just trolling to get a rise out of people. No, I actually was ignorant to the fact, that this is a sledding sport. My knowledge of winter sports is very limited. The story seemed to crux on the behavior of the coach more than the sport itself. I now see that I should have done more research as to the actual sport itself. Now that I know it is a sledding type sport, I think they should lock up that coach Nardello and throw away the key!
(why anyone would ever call a 22 year old a "boy" or "kid" is beyond me)- Have you ever heard a college football coach talk about his team. He doesn't say these men played great today. He says our boys gave it all they had or our kids tried their hardest. You can call anybody anything you want, thats "freedom of speech", now you always should consider the physical consequenses of any name calling (ie getting your ass kicked) Calling somebody a "boy" is a matter of choice. Calling somebody a "criminal" could be slander. Specifically if that person has a public image to the contrary. A coach can call a player a boy because in our culture we have no "Rite of Passage" that anoints a male child with the" man" distinction. It is completely up to the individual to take it upon himself that he is now a "man" and should be addressed as such.
But if you can't raise the problem while you're directly involved in it, I don't have much sympathy for you. I find it sad that his behavior has been acceptable, seemingly, until there was no hope of making the team. However, this is where the HARRASSMENT part comes into play. This man had power over these athlete's careers. Their dreams were, in part, tied to his discretion. As long as he had some control over their dreams, they felt forced to tolerate his behavior. If the accusations are true, he has abused his authority and should be replaced. It is odd that his defenders are still on the team, while his accusers aren't. Sour grapes or liberation? I'll lean towards the latter. Not being able to raise the problem while you're directly involved in it, for fear of losing your job is exactly the premise that determines whether "sexual harrassment" has occurred. Without power over the harrassed, one is simply an asshole. With power over those whom are harrassed, one is simply... a criminal. You have raised the same questions that I wanted to express in my post. It is possible to question the accuser's motives with out dismissing the crime or agreeing with the motives of the accused. I knew somebody would eventually get the point. I only wish that I expressed myself as clearly as you have done. Thank you! Comment icon posted by tselson at 10:41 PM CST on January 1
> I hope you will not be testing me on these subjects any time soon, as I am booked for the next few months. For someone who is "booked" for the next few months you sure do have plenty of time to sit and type your long winded "stories" on this post. What he said/did was wrong. I don't find it to be that offensive. But I am a man. He did not say that he wanted to have sex with her, just that he didn't want to see her legs spread that far apart while she is going down the hill. It causes more resistance and slows her down. His choice of words might have been quit rough, but his intention, probably, was to get her a faster time for her trials. Grabofsky74- Long winded? I could say the same of you, sir. I have been blessed with a certain amount of wind, I will grant you that. While my next few months are "booked" as far as referencing "homophobia, it's roots and origins" as suggested in the post. I am living in the United States and these last few days have been a holiday, so I found the time to be long winded mostly defending "points" I never made. You seem to be the only one who has posted a similar view on the story. My whole point was just to show how accusations such as these are impossible to judge from a distance. I have always prefered the role of "devils advocate."
I promise that I will spend every waking moment the same way I spent the last 40 years. That is trying my best to be less ingnorant. Then check your alarm clock and wake up. Your understanding of sexual harassment and what's considered permissible behavior is way out of line with what the US courts consider permissible behavior. Likewise, it's ironic that you accuse rcade of having "banteed[sic] about" concepts of the "1950's Father Knows Best variety"; in fact, it is your attitude towards harassment -- women want the attention, how could they not? -- that's antiquated. You then go on to clarify your point: So, again from the top. We " the readers of the given post" do not know all the facts. It is "possible" that the man in question had a reason, whether you or anyone else agrees with it, for his actions. There that was it. ...and, to paraphrase rcade: we understood you just fine. We just don't agree. Yes, the facts are not all known; however, what is mentioned in the article points to one of two things: a clear and persistent pattern of sexual harassment and sexually inappropriate behavior, or a conspiracy that would require the cooperation of many different individuals who stand to gain nothing from it, and possibly lose a great deal. There are quite a few allegations from several sources. Not all of those sources were the victims of the alleged harassment, and at least one of them was another coach. It's pretty clear that you're not very familiar with how these things go, but take it from me, in cases of sexual harassment involving a power imbalance, it's pretty damn rare for one of the harasser's peers to volunteer a complaint. So, yes, we do not know all the facts, but what we do know is pretty damning. You then state that it's possible that Nardiello had a reason for doing what he did. I'm quite sure there is a reason; however, you have failed to differentiate between "reason" and "excuse". Possible reasons? Satyriasis, or some other mental disorder. Selfishness, a sense of entitlement the size of the Grand Canyon. The delusion that "no" means "yes", or that he is irresistible to women, or that -- as you suggested -- sexual tension can be some kind of useful coaching tool. But those are all delusions. None of them excuses his conduct. If you believe even the smallest part of what you've said here, I strongly encourage you to refrain from ever putting any of your beliefs into practice. It will only damage others and, if justice is served, get you into a lot of hot water. Comment icon posted by lil_brown_bat at 8:03 PM CST on January 1 Lilbrownbat, I appreciate your responce and it's candor. I have read your bio, I see that you are much closer to the world of skiing than I am, so I would imagine you know more of it's inner workings. I made no excuses for coach Nardellos behavior, I just said that I understood what may have happened. I specifically wrote that I did not condone his type of behavior. I understand that we are entitles to our own opinions. I welcome any and all intelligent discussion, However I feel that the opinion that you are opposing is not mine. You and rcade are having a debate with am imaginary villian. People on this forum are constantly asked to read the links and post carefully. So, I am not placed in the position of defending a point which I never made as my own. I think that this forum is a great place to vent your frustrations with an unfair world. Just try to remember that I live in the same world as you. I hold no power over you or anyone else on this board. I offer my unsolicited opinions, just like you. You are just like me in that respect. Good luck! I wish you well this year, I hope you get the tickets you wrote of in your profile.
SportingRhino: Did he suggest through his advancements that a skier could make the team if they responded to the advancements It's skeleton, damn it. Please read the posts and linked articles before commenting. Comment icon posted by qbert72 at 11:14 PM CST on January 1 I hope you can excuse my ignorance on this "crucial" fact of the story! Please humor me with an explanation. Don't they wear skiis when they perform this sport? So, where as the sport itself may be called "skeleton", I am again ignorant of the facts. How should I refer to the participants. Are they skeletons? or skeletors? thank you
This is a refreshing way to start the year! Technically, it's not illegal to be a racist. Any written expression along those lines would be protected by your First Amendment rights. Any specific hatred of a racist, as opposed to the racism itself, is still hatred. Hatred is hatred. This story seems a little short of facts and may indeed be more of an example of "Clarettism" then racism. Robbery is of course still a crime regardless of the race of the people involved. I am curious as to why the report has him identified as an alleged "burglar" which is parlance for having already been found guilty of a crime. The normal report will usually say supect or wanted for questioning in relation to a specific crime. I also wonder why he has not been apprehended yet, or released any statements to the contrary.
Any you "good ole boys" from the South?...cause it sounds like somebody's fixin' on gettin' a rope...You should ask yourself before you go off and do sumptin' you might regret later, WWRPD? What Would Richard Petty do? " Ohio, Where free thoughts go to die."- Homer Simpson -
Well, at least he is trying to earn his own way and is not on public assistance. he 22-year-old Clarett fled when the bar owner or manager, who knew both Clarett and the victims, came into the alley and identified him shortly before 2 a.m. Sunday, detectives said. Who is the reporter? Maybe I am just picky but to write a report and state that the main witness was either the " owner or manager " seems odd. Is that how he identified himself?... " Hi, I am Joe Brown and I either own or manage the bar." The Columbus police detectives could not put out an APB for the apprehension of Clarett based upon an ID made by either the "owner or manager" of the bar. It is standard procedure to seek a suspect for questioning. Yet, Clarett is already wanted for aggravated robbery, based upon a third party ID. Did they ID his vehicle?... or was he wearing a game jersey? The "owner or manager" came into the alley, when during the crime? Then wouldn't there be a third count of assault or robbery? It just seems a little under reported that's all. Guilty until proven innocent, right? No, that doesn't sound right.
Wow. It took you five lines of blaming the media, the general public and everyone here before you accidentally slipped in what I take is the actual point of your post: It is well within my(and coach Nardello's) rights to derive pleasure from the beauty of the feminine form. No. Not in the capacity of being their coach, it's not. Never mind the legal issues, of which there are many, and none of which favor Coach Nardiello. And forget about the fact that sexual attraction is actually not always mutual, especially between people in an uneven power situation, and when it isn't and someone forces sexuality into a non-sexual situation, it actually hurts (psychologically, emotionally, and sometimes physically) the people involved. And I'm ignoring the homophobia inherent in everything you've said so far (google Mike Danton or Sheldon Kennedy, to name two, and get back to this thread on that front). Never mind all that. When the dynamic between a coach and athlete is strained like this, it affects performance. And what's a coach doing adding extra pressure to his charges, especially leading up to the marquee event in your sport, simply because he needs his dingle played with? Unless I'm mistaken, you don't run the skeleton course using your sex organs. There are many instances of coaches and athletes finding attraction between each other. And the right thing to do is to wait until the coach is no longer coaching that particular athlete, at which point the two of you can go off and do your thing. SportingRhino, if you've somehow made it to 2005 and you're still ignorant enough to think it's appropriate for a coach to make repeated unwanted sexual advances to the athletes under his care, then I sure as hell don't want you anywhere near my kids. Comment icon posted by chicobangs at 12:11 PM CST on January 1 Chicobangs, Thank you, It seems you did actually read the first five lines of my post, as per your nararration, ( which I am sure is for the members who cannot actually read for themselves ) beyond that I find your post a bit convoluted. I cannot tell if you are taking my words and rearranging them to fit some imagined opposition to your unestablished moral point, or you may just be cofused. I say this because, I think you may be responding to a composited posting which includes some of my points with some other yet undetermined person or persons. The homophobia reference is a complete mystery. I think maybe because I mentioned my opposition to pedophilia, When responding to the member who asked me about "my little boy and his football coach" ? Homophobia does that mean that I am afraid of homosexuals?, Okay that was a joke, but seriously I do appreciate your googling suggestions. I hope you will not be testing me on these subjects any time soon, as I am booked for the next few months. The last two paragraphs get a little hazy. You seem to agree with my basic point, but feel the need to defend the counterpoint.(huh?) Thank you, I did make it to 2005 and now 2006. I promise that I will spend every waking moment the same way I spent the last 40 years. That is trying my best to be less ingnorant. Do you want to make a resolution to the same effect? I would prefer not to meet your children under the current conditions. Happy New Year!!!
Your points were pretty clear the first time around, Rhino. Consider the possibility that people who disagree with you don't necessarily misunderstand you. I think your view of human sexuality in regard to women is reductive and gross. When you claim to be defending the coach's right to "derive pleasure from the beauty of the feminine form," and you declare that you "luvs da ladies," it's pretty clear which organ dictates your thinking on this issue. Comment icon posted by rcade at 11:50 AM CST on January 1 rcade, The reason I though that you misunderstood my points was that your responce seemed a to smack of a pecking order style of self righteous projection on your part. The morality of the group being dictated by yourself " the great emancipator of woman rights." The concepts you have banteed about are of the 1950's Father Knows Best" variety. This seemed incredulous to me. So I felt a need to explain further my point which you so dearly missed. So, again from the top. We " the readers of the given post" do not know all the facts. It is "possible" that the man in question had a reason, whether you or anyone else agrees with it, for his actions. There that was it. See how I did it with out casting any aspersions on your character. I did not refer to my opinion of you or your lifestyle, just on your opinion as expressed through your posting. I did not take two seperate postings and apply them out of context, in order to project a point that was irrelevent to my post (as if any intelligent reader could not easily see this abberation ) I just reponded to your post. I do enjoy the feminine form and I do "luvs da ladies" I also have a sense of humor about myself. While I will always defend your right to not share my opinion on human sexuality. I am curious as to why you think my veiws are "reductive and gross"
We have made the girls fully aware of why and how being "taken advantage of" can manifest itself. This way situations like the one being discussed in this thread will be less likely to happen to them.( unless they want it for their own satisfaction ) I am confused. Rhino are you saying the girls must have done something to encourage this? We don't know all the circumstances but IMHO I don't think the girls asked for sexual harrassment so they could cry foul against the guy. Comment icon posted by skydivemom at 11:29 AM CST on January 1 Skydivemom, I do not know anything about this situation beyond what was posted in the thread. It was my understanding that this forum was designed for discussion about the threads as they are posted. I appreciate yor interest in my posting and I thank you for asking me to clarify my point without challenging my character or parenting skills. I did not mean to imply that the woman in this story did not have a legitimate right to expect a certain type of treatment from a trusted coach. I believe that coaching is all the woman were looking for from coach Nardello I made the point of explaining a few coaching theories, that might have led to the situation. I offered my opinion as to what might happen if a natural attraction was cultivated to be used for a positive effect, in terms of athletic success. People are taken advantage of everyday in many ways not just sexual.It is never a pleasant thing. It is however unpleasant, a part of life. I mentioned the way we have raised our daughters, who are both aspiring dancers and actresses, because I thought that it was relevant to the discussion. They have choosen a vocation which is infamous for the way it uses people. We drew upon our personal experiences, their mother especially, to prepare them for the mistreatment they may encounter. We hoped to establish in them a sense of self worth, which could be part of their sexuality without being dependent upon it completely. Dancing and acting are often forms of sexual expression. I especially feel that you cannot "world proof" your children. They will ultimately have to make their own decisions.
SprotingRhino I have a lot of respect for you but it would make it a whole lot eaiser on us if you put some spacing in between paragraphs once in a while. Comment icon posted by Ying Yang Mafia at 11:28 AM CST on January 1 Thank you for the support YingYang. I will always return respect with dividends. If your moniker was choosen beacuse your are a fan of eastern religions specifically taoism, then you will understand my logic more than most. Simply that, nothing is absolute. There is a little bad in all that is good and conversely, there is a little good in all that is bad. I have been free forming most of this, but I will work on my punctuation and syntax errors.Thanks again for the positive input. Happy New year!
There could be no sexual energy between my little boy and his football coach because they are of the same sex. You're confusing the things that make you tingle in your special place with the things that make other people tingle in theirs. Sexual attraction is not universal. And thank God for that, because your titillation over the "sexual role based relationship" that could grow from a "father/child" relationship, coupled with your belief that your daughter's sexuality is some kind of asset she can exploit, is disturbing. The women on the U.S. skeleton team are Olympic-class athletes. There's nothing motivational about Coach Grabass slobbering over their bodies before a race, unless you think it inspires them to get away more quickly at the start. Comment icon posted by rcade at 7:00 AM CST on January 1 Happy New Year to you sir, There are so many directions to go with this, that I must first thank you for the opportunity to respond to such a multi-dimentional thread as the one we now read. I am a bit surprized that a person of who is a founding member of such a great forum, would respond in such a reactionary manner. You have taken my statements and arranged them for your own muddled attack upon the premise which they support. It's a tactic which is often employed by many of the spin doctors currently working within the media. I am glad that I have a chance to correct your mistakes of both courtesy and fact. I can only hope that anyone who would respond as being disturbed by my understanding of the basic concept of "sex sells", could remain calm long enough to actually read all the words in all the of the posts to which they are responding. If you would care to take the time to review my first post in this thread, you will read that I begin the whole premise with the word "perhaps". I don't like to do straight word definitions, but it seems necessary. The word "perhaps" implies that what is about to follow could be one possible reality in the realm of many. Now, back to the basics of my post, sexual attraction while not universal is often mutual. If you think that there has never been a mutual attraction between a male coach and a female athlete you are being naive. Perhaps( there's that word again ) you should come out of cyberspace long enough to get a taste of the real world. It is full of all kinds of nasty and unseemly things but, the sooner you acknowledge that it does exist, the more you will be able to understand about it. It is well within my(and coach Nardello's) rights to derive pleasure from the beauty of the feminine form. These athletes were woman long before they were athletes. If you deny a woman the privilege of being a sexual creature you are committing a grave injustice. Womans sports have an element of "titillation" whether you accept it or not. You seem to run several of my points together in order to make a "non existant" point about my daughter and a sexual relationship. This is certainly a low point of your reply. I can only hope that you were slightly confused, because if you were trying make a lucid point, it would seem inflammatory in nature and a little "mean spirited" as well. The father coach / child athlete point was a seperate theory about a type of inspirational strategy. The sexual role based theory was meant to be a seperate "adults only" strategy. It was not my intent to imply that they are the same strategy. Finally, the way we have choosen to raise our daughters ( we have two) is to make them aware that there are people in this world that are not very nice and that will take advantage of you , if you let them. We have made the girls fully aware of why and how being "taken advantage of" can manifest itself. This way situations like the one being discussed in this thread will be less likely to happen to them.( unless they want it for their own satisfaction ) If "my parts" did not "tingle" then my daughters would not exist, and that would be truely disturbing. I hope that the new year brings you many more opportunities to open your mind and "perhaps" even experience a little bit of the real world. Good luck sir!
When the athlete and coach are of opposite sexes a sexual role based relationship can develop. It does not have to be acted upon physically, but the energy that comes from the relationship can be redirected toward a successful athletic performance. Hey, why just the opposite sex? Why not the same sex? How about if some football coach tries it with your little boy? SportingRhino, you're a complete jackass. Why just the opposite sex you ask? You see for a relationship to have the type of energy that I am speaking about, and that you may have never felt, is the energy that is created when a man and a women come together. I could explain it biologically, but that would only confuse you more. There could be no sexual energy between my little boy and his football coach because they are of the same sex. Please do not confuse the lust of a pedophile for the kind of positive sexual energy that inspires athletes and artists. My little boy is actually a little girl, so it could be possible, but to be honest with you she really has shown no interest in football. I hope she does receive her share of advances(she's 13), because she has been taught well about respect and integrity. She already knows the value of a well timed flirt. She also knows that all "men" want the same thing. That thing has great value and needs to be valued highly. I would suggest that, if you have had some personal "experience" with a football coach or a "little boy", that there is therapy available, but you need to make the first step, Come on, start the New Year off right!..Just pick up the phone and make the call. It's the first step toward recovery. Happy New Year!!!!
Some of the reasons I love Hockey: It's played on ice!, not wood, grass or plastic, If during the course of a game you feel the need to beat the shit out of another player you can, but they may ask you to sit out the next 5 minutes. The very same action in another sport and they may ask you to sit out the season. If you feel occation to hit another player with a stick you have to leave the game for 2 minutes, 5 if he bleeds, maybe the rest of the game if he is unconscious. If you even attempted this in baseball they would never let you play again. Players routinely have facial lacerations that require them to leave the game long enough to get 20 or 30 quick stitches then back to the action. What a game!
So, three year ago it was okay, but now that it's trendy I feel violated (...Come to think of it I did catch him looking at my butt that time in 2003... and there was that waxing incident..he never hit on me, hey what's wrong with me.. I don't want to look like the only one so I'll just say he did...) What you have just read is a ficticious account of what could have happened. Remember the truth only counts if it helps you. You may justify your completely unfufilled life by jumping on just one bandwagon. Who's it gonna be you or some sleazy prick of a coach who cut you! Why you may even be due some monetary compensation."..and why is he head coach? I'm just as good as a coach as any man. He is gonna pay for every man that ever pissed me off..) Yes , just like a wild fire..good bye coach Nardello.
<em>Anaheim did not win the Stanley Cup. New Jersey did. Giguere is still in Anaheim, and he was never the worst with the pad size, so I don't know who or what you are talking about. Garth Snow is "king pads". I think he was using "shingles placed on their edges" on his shoulder pads. but he was born in Vermont.. although both he and Jean Sebastian have fallen on harder times.
I am starting to think that these guys are more interseted in the "money', than any concepts of fair play or sportsmanship. If I can't trust high stakes poker players who can I trust. I mean; what's next boxing, wrestling, horse racing, no not jai alai too? Where does the corruption end? I had plans to steer my kids toward a professional gambling career, but now I just don't know!
Everyone has the right to complain about the way they have been treated in life. I would like to take another approach with this event. There is more to coaching than just strategy and training techniques. There is inspiration. Some coaches are able to inspire athletes through various mechanismsm. A common one is that the athlete has so much respect for the coach that the athlete would feel shame, if they let the coach down with a poor performance or did not meet the coach's expectations. There is a father/child development in the coaching relationship. When the athlete and coach are of opposite sexes a sexual role based relationship can develop. It does not have to be acted upon physically, but the energy that comes from the relationship can be redirected toward a successful athletic performance. When a coach has success with any type of technique, he is likley to repeat it. Eventually somebody can cross the line, especially if an added emotion of disappointment (over being cut) is added to the mix. This is all speculation on my part, but I believe it is plausable. It would take a bigger man than me to resist all of the temptations that ten years or so of coaching physically perfected women is likley to bring about. I am reminded of the coach of the North Carolina womens soccer team, they won about 15 NCAA titles over the years . Then allegations came out about several "physical relationships", that had occurred during his tenure. So this kind of daliance does happen from time to time in the heterosexual world. I do not condone it, but I understand.
I think the point of the picture was to illustrate to some of the guys crying "old school head down football" that, yes, in fact - there were on field celebrations even back in the good ol' days when men were men and their idea of what's right and wrong wasn't threatened by the next generation. Point taken. The picture I believe was taken on the last play of the game. Bednarick had just seperated Gifford from the ball and his senses. He was celebrating because the Eagles had won and were going on to beat Vince Lombardi's Packers in the NFL championship. The raised fist is somewhat pale in comparison to what we see today. but it still looks like...Victory!
Football does it and no one seems to complain: - In the regular season, you can still end up with a tie. - In the playoffs, there is ALWAYS a winner. True that! However football and hockey have completely different pacing. A football game has constant stoppages as per the rules of the game to allow for a reset. There are multiple ways to score in football. Hockey has one goal, that is to score one goal. It is a continuous(some times beautiful) flow of action. This is one reason why football is a much better TV sport than hockey. Now quickly can you remember the last time there was a tie in the NFL, I can't!... and I have total recall! ( sort of)
Perhaps, He was using a negative reinforcement technique. This is not highschool these woman are of the age of consent. So many factors in a sexual harrassment accusation. Even the word itself seems a bit leading.( why isn't it sexual hisassment) It is not uncommon in sports to pat the butt of an athlete. Did he suggest through his advancements that a skier could make the team if they responded to the advancements, or that they would be cut if the responded negatively. The spread legs comment seems a bit crass, but I don't know the general banter that may have taken place on that given occation. The skiers could have been playful in their previous responces, leading up to his alleged aggregious statement. The age old conflict of men and women ( sexual ) is not inhibited by sports. If one member of the team willfully responded to his advances, then a president was esablished. This would then be cause for further advancement, as even though he is a coach, he is entitled to pursue his own happiness. I would have to agree, they do look hot in those ski suits! Though it seems unfair that soneone should be made to feel uncomfortable about their sexuallity, whether they are on a ski team or work in an office, life is rarely fair. I think that, when we decide as a society to dictate where and when sexual advancement is appropriate, we run the risk of disrupting the natural selection of nature. Mostly cause, I luvs da ladies!
Would anybody have been happier if the multiple overtime finals contest between the Panthers and the Avalanche could have been settled by a shoot out. I know that there will be no shootouts in the playoffs. Which is what makes the regular season all the more pointless( there is a pun in there somewhere) How can hockey have two sets of rules for deciding the winner of a game? When technically the shoot outs do not determine a winner of the games played, but rather a winner of a standing point, which is even more pointless.( same pun intended )If you consider that the fan base at a play off game is generally more casual( and wealthy) than a regular season contest. So If the NHL board of governors would have thought this through( if their intent was to draw more fans outside of the base core of "die hards") then they would reverse the regular season and playoff rules. That of course would conclude that they want sell a weaker product to a broader audience. Then I will be forced to watch college basketball and minor league hockey. How long before they start to count shoot out goals, so we can have 150 goal scorers(bye,bye Great one(99), hello great ones!), then we can have MLB like record breakers.Yeah! and a" magic pinata" in between periods full of Ipods and local gift certificates( I though of it first) to enhance the already "mall-like" atmosphere of the newer arenas.
I certainly don't expect to be agreed with 100%! This may seem a bit picyune, but in keeping with the spirit of this thread; You are mixing predicate "tenses". " I certainly don't expect(future perfect tense)/ "to be agreed(past perfect tense) If I may impose a suggestion, perhaps something of this nature." I certainly do not expect 100% agreement. "(future tense) or "I certainly did not expect 100% agreement."(past tense) This has been a fun exercise(present perfect tense), but I promise not to do it again, thanks(present tense). Yerfatma, thanks for the "Chuck Bednerick crushing Frank Gifford" photo. It has been a tough year for Eagle fans. I can't believe that it was only 45 short years ago that the Eagles won their last Championship!
Nope. Do you have something meaningful to say besides suggesting football was somehow better when it was a bunch of wheezing old white dudes like Frank Gifford Technically; Frank was not any older in his playing days than the players of 2005. They just look older in black and white. So while he has always been a "white" dude the oldness and the wheezing came after he married Cathy Lee.
I don't miss the two-line pass calls, I don't miss the " left-wing lock "( does anyone who can skate?). but I think I am starting to miss the ties. Did anyone really complain about the ties? A sport which scores by ones, that has historically established that it is hard to score more than a few goals in a game( Edmonton of the 1980's not included )is defined by the struggle to come back and save a point with a tie. I believe that aspect of the sport is undermined by a "shoot out" Of course that being said; it sure is fun to watch. It reminds me of when I was a kid we would play a game called "Showdown" one on one, mono y mono, goalie vs shooter, me vs you. That was mostly because not enough kids had showed up yet to get in a full game, but it was still fun!
Tiger is the greatest golfer I have ever seen, I really did not see Nicklaus in his prime. Though the 1986 Masters was inspiring. Tiger has also been a beacon for the sport a dramatic influence comparable only to Arnold Palmer in attracting people to the game. One thing I can't explain is why I just can't like him. I loved to hate Jack, he was so obnoxious. What a snob, simply legendary, yet he has a discernable character. I know he wants me to hate him. I'm okay with that, only happy to oblige. Tiger has 0 personality. He is the worst interview in sports. even his nerd appeal is pale in comparison to the Bill Gates of the world. I can only hope that golf will continue to grow in popularity ultimately to draw as many NASCAR type fans as possible and hopefully an element of WWF(WWE) will emirge. Hopefully before Tiger bores us all to death with his excellence, domination and uber nerdness.
've also watched Mickey Mantle hit the ball a mile, put his head down so as to not show up the pitcher, and run the bases. Mickey was a class act. Reggie earned all those Bronx Cheers. I always admired the guys who "Act like they've been there before". That was just the way they did it back then. Mickey was not the only guy who ran around the bases with his head down, they all did. The classy thing about Mickey was that he did it with 2 hours sleep and a hangover....and believe me he had been "there" before! Go Mick!... now that's a celebration! Seriously, I thought that the NFL banned pre-orchestrated celebrations about 15 years ago, when the Redskins WRs used to do some kind of "cabbage patch thing"? How about if the TV networks refuse to show the celebrations, like when a fan runs on the field? I think it's just a phase, but like the "High Five" it could be here a while
The aquisition of the top pick in the draft is hardly a gaurantee of a championship. The superbowl era has only produced a few #1 picks who went on to win the SB with their drafting teams( Bradshaw, Rodgers, Aikman ) This is my self- edit. George Rodgers did not win a superbowl with the team that drafted him (Saints) So, he is in the same catgory as Elway(Colts), Jim Plunkett(Patriots) and Keyshawn Johnson(Jets) as 1# picks that won Superbowls with a team other than the one who drafted them. Drew Bledsoe as the back up for the Patriots in 2001 gets a special mention.(damn you Brady) That's it 6 guys in 39 years that were drafted #1 have gone on to win SuperBowls. The "point" is that, developing whatever talent you have is more important than your draft order! Coaching and general management is also a plus. That of course is if your goal is to actually win the SuperBowl and not just sell advertising rights and team based products.
Good grief, just look at some of the horrible quarterbacks playing around the league. What do you have against Joey Harrington and Jeff Garcia! Lol Yes, Where I would agree that Joey Harrington does not deserve to be 'Lionised"(sorry, it was there and I took it) Apparently, The "hype-machine" needs to crank out superlatives for every completed pass or else the viewing public might change the channel to a 24hr"the Wedding" marathon. The announcers are paid to "pile on" the credit no matter who is playing. ESPN is the buisness model for this strategy. That said; it is not easy to play QB in the NFL. Statistically only 32 men in the world are talented enough to start at QB for an NFL team. A little over half of them win more games then they lose. Only 12 will start a playoff game. Only 1 will hold the Superbowl trophy. There are only 5 starting QBs in the league who have won a ring as a starting QB( Favre, Warner, Dilfer, Johnson and Brady) only 2 stlll play for the same team. 39 superbowls have only 19 different winning QBs. Some where Mark Ripien laughs a mans laugh!...and Brett Favre is a Hall of Famer!
The aquisition of the top pick in the draft is hardly a gaurantee of a championship. The superbowl era has only produced a few #1 picks who went on to win the SB with their drafting teams( Bradshaw, Rodgers, Aikman ) The real goal of any league or team is to convince as many people(fans) that their team is worth watching(generating TV advertizing dollars) because they might have a chance at winning the Championship. This marketing strategy is what supports the NFL licensed products, not to mention a billiion dollar cottage industry. The media(ESPN) generates plenty of third party stories(TO) to keep the hype machine running. The media also generates another cottage industry of ubiqitous bulletin board forums( irony or coincidence? ) and talk radio shows which inturn generate even more advertizing dollars. It would be difficult to find an industry that is more ensconced in American Life. I only wish I though of it first!
Monopsony, come on you made that word up! Why not monopanasonic or monopipod? The reason that the league has an exclusive oppurtunity to bid for the 'talent" of these athletes is because outside of the NFL their respective talents do not carry the same value( i e Dion Sanders NFL=multi-million dollar contract, MLB=league minimum, TV announcer=< 0 )Though the value of a half completed "physical eduction degree" is hard to quantify in the current economic enviroment, the NFL seems a somewhat obvious career choice. Everyone has the 'right" to play NFL football, but only a select few have the "opportunity". The difference is not an artifically manipulated market but the talent of the individuals.
While I think Favre(gosh, I hope I spelled it right) is far from "sucking". He had the kind of injury riddled team that only an Eagles fan could envy. They did win the divison just last year. The level of skill in the NFL is so close that even a minor drop off in skill, can make a big difference. I remember this with Dan Marino. He and Favre "were" the kind of guys who's instinct and arm strenth , allowed them to throw into double even triple coverage with great success. Just a slight mistake and you have an interception. Sugar Ray Robinson used to say that as he aged he could still see the opening in his opponents defense, but by the time he pulled the trigger on a punch the opening was closed. This is what I see with Favre, he's just a hair off, but doesn't realise it until its too late. That's a gunslinger mentality. Who is gonna have balls to tell him? Marshall Faulk is a curiosity. He went from the best player in the NFL(and Madden) to not even playing in two short years I have no explanation. Did he piss somebody off, like Marcus Allen in Oakland? I can't tell if he still has the "goods" because he has not played. It seems kind of sad.
I'm not sure where to begin with this. You seem to think the Marshall Plan was a bad thing and that we wanted Germany (and Japan?) as a colony? I kinda got lost there. I guess if you're saying we had an interest in the future of Germany and Europe for that matter, you are correct. Were our reasons selfish? STL,you have correctly begun at the beginning(well done sir!) I did not intended to imply a polarizing qualifier( good/bad) in my review of the Marshall Plan. I had only hoped to show it as the template for American style consumer culture. Which as you well know has its quirks( Paris Hilton,homeless people ) As for the winners implementing their plans and direction after war, this has been and always will be the case. Good then you agree! Your agreement is both refreshing and disturbing. I will always give my country credit where credit is do. There has never been a better designed government. The founders of our constitution were able to rise above their own deverisiveness and prejudices to create some of the most inspiring documents ever created! This country is governed by the words";. of the people, by the people. for the people.The true strength of this government is the ability of its members to challenge any short sightedness. The weakness is it is only as strong as the people who oppose its totalitarianism. I am curious your statement was phrased in the second person( Give "your" country some credit..) are you not a US citizen?
Maybe I'm a bit slow but it sounds like you're saying the Cuban missles were unproven? If this is correct I say again, are you serious? STl, your use of the word "maybe" implies some understanding of the word itself. However your assuptions of my intent belies the actual meaning of the word in it's given context. I hope that my statements don't cause you any further issues with your dogmatic reality. I had only hoped to inspire some discussion(ie thought) as to the reality of a punitive embargo. I wanted to establish that political "ends" are often established by illogical '"means". The denial of a friendly baseball tornament because of an embargo which is based upon a supposed ideological indifference or an idle threat(idle because the technology of ICBM's make Cuba the strategical equivilent of the moon.) I do agree my spelling is suspect at best. I seem to spell Israel as Isreal as a hideous inside joke ( like i can't beleive that this place isreal ) This is a cheap and somewhat tawdry way of drawing attention to a somewhat tawdry political situation( or should I say "state"). you are correct: Israel is fighting for its existence( with some help from the USA ) That is because it's existance is political. The State of Israel was established, much like the UN to serve a political agenda. Which is in stark contrast to Cuba which was fought for in a standard winner( Castro ) takes all historical sense. Now as to question of my "seriousness". I will leave that for you to decide. I am not sure what your level of understanding of Russian or Cryllic language you have achieved. So, if you do get the chance to review the UN tape s of the Kennedy/Kruschev debate. You known ."... Mr. Kruschev will you remove your missles..." Kruschev actually replies by asking Kennedy if he was in fact a "Donut", what kind would he be? Kennedy refused to answer so, Kruschev stormed out. Cuba has never fired an "official" shot on American troops, Israel sunk one of our destroyers in the Gulf of Tonkin(1967). They said it was an accident. It amazes me that we can show that kind of resilience when one of our ships is attacked and our soliders are killed, but yet won't allow a baseball game to be played because of an embargo which ceases to have relevence in the modern global economy. The continuence of the Cuban embargo seems a bit too much "buisness as usual". It just lends itself to ridicule when compared part and parcel to the whole world of bad guys agenda(Iraq,Iran,North Korea) While China and Israel run unfettered.This fact is especially embarissing, when you acknowled their total lack of a quality baseball product!
It seems to me that just about everyone I see at my local Denneys must have done something wrong and is just waiting to get arrested. Especially that guy in the kitchen, he looks like a cat burgular and the valet that parked my car looked a little nervous. Comment icon posted by Termite at 10:15 AM CST on December 28 We are a nation of jailers. It is a well known fact that Denny's food is loaded with medications. Did you see "fight Club"? I personally believe that if a man accomplishes a great athletic feat, he gets one free crime. It is of course directly proportional to the athletic feat.300 saves= 1 robbery,3 NBA titles=1 rape,Heisman Trophy, well you get the idea
I think they should adopt the "Special Olympics " format. That way everbody can be a winner! yeah! then we can have cake! How about a Bowl game BCS type of non-playoff system, with cheerleaders and fireworks? We could have a day care center in the stands and shopping yeah shopping!and more cake! I like old time "eddie shore" hockey, when the players didn't count their concussions. They didn't have any fake implants(teeth). They didn't body block shots with their "body armour" They would fore check, take effedrine during the game and relax with a pack of smokes a couple of whores and six of Lablatts. Then get up and do it all over again. They didn't own teams. They owned bars! they made 100 grand a year!!! old time hockey..I only remember 1967 through my hockey stamps"remember them?" but that was the year my beloved Flyers came into the league.Bobby Clarke was in juniors and years away from screwing the organization as a GM'president who refused to draft Europeans especially the Russians. Broad Street Bullies forever!" only god saves more than Bernie!"
The Monroe Doctrine was a flag staking declaration. Where the Marshall Plan was more of a US led capitalist protectionism outline presented as a care package. You obviously know the history of neither. The primary purpose of the Marshall plan was to avoid the conditions that existed after WW1 where Germany, in particular, was left for dead thus creating the conditions that led to WW11. The Monroe Doctrine's purpose was to keep European powers out of the Americas. If your teachers are filling your head with something different, I guess I'm not surprised. This of course is a matter of opinion and is open for conjecture. Today in class Miss Jones taugh us about "revisionist history" I did not pay real good attention because the girl in front of me got her braces off to day and she was real cute..oh but again I digress, so I think the gist of what the teacher had to say was; The winners write history. How do you think 1930's Germany got to their retched state? They lost the previous war. They were forced in to unfair reparations,taxations and embargos. Their dire economic state allowed Hitler rise to power because the people were desperate. Now back to the winners, they impliment their plans as divine right. The key to an effective colonization is to destroy the history and culture of the defeated peoples. Then you can build the emerging culture as your own costruction( the US was a major investor in Germany after both world wars) . Which then can be replicated for many generations of happy consumers. One world, One store,One bank.One consumer culture. This is not a "bad" thing as long as "bad" people don't control it. I am not sure what Miss Jones has been filling our heads with...but even she would never make reference to "WW 11(eleven)". Unless that...,she really is a robot from the future! SCF if you know about WW !! then you too could be a ...Robot from the future! Either that or you are getting you info from Wikipedia". You know they don't edit that stuff right? If the Marshall plan was so great, then why are there no great "german" baseball players?
There are people in Cuba who have their freedoms restricted, but one of our most favored trading nations, Isreal has similar conditions. A bullit in the head will usually restrict a person's freedom. And comparing Cuba to Israel is quite ridiculous. Well, I guess you have point there. I really should just keep my opinions to myself......Hey wait a minute...I just remembered that there is this web site were you can see people, from both Cuba and Isreal, with" bullets in their heads"., it's a little obscure oh yeah its....CNN,Yahoo,google,ad on infinum. So based upon your rather cryptic reply, which took me a bit to decifer, you would agree that there is a certain simularity( not an exact clone) to the restricted freedoms( as defined by your" bullet in the head" theory ) in both Cuba and Isreal So ofcourse to bring this full circle: the embargo on Cuba can not be completely based upon human rights violations. There by confirming my theory that baseball is more fun than politics. Thank you for your time. ...just a foot note you were refering to a "bullet"- a small projectile usually made of metal and fired from a gun. Not, "Bullit" the movie with Steve Mcqueen, right?
Maybe there never were any missles and it was just a massive PR/slander campaign. Remember those ariel photos of Sadaams chemical factories?..Are there any links to official Soviet documentation to this "event"? Are you serious? STLcardinalfan(scf) Your question is abit difficult to answer as my premise begins with the word "maybe". I would hotlink this word to a dictionary site, but that would seem petty. Your question is presented as the supposition that my scenerio is presented as the opposition to a proven fact. It is not. I was asking you to consider the possibility that based upon the current situation in the great hunt for WMD's in Iraq, that would an equally assertive search in Cuba, have netted any more weapons then what have so far been found in either country? I was serious about seeing some Soviet sourced coverage of the same events (missle crisis). However, I have never taken myself as a serious person, thanks for asking.
Kennedy's plan worked It worked as in comparison to the "bay of pigs" but in and of itself, what was the plan again? There was no internet where people could challenge the reality of what was presented to the population as being truth. Maybe there never were any missles and it was just a massive PR/slander campaign. Remember those ariel photos of Sadaams chemical factories?..Are there any links to official Soviet documentation to this "event"? The comparison to Israel is ridiculous - Israel's citizens - Jewish, Christian and Muslim - have their freedom. The issues in Israel revolve around non-citizens. When you say "non-citizens", do you mean the "terrorists"?
he isn't in the NHL because Muckler fucked him, and the Sabres ownership vacuum (remember the Rigas fiasco) sucked him into it. Yeah, that is what I thought. I think the NHL is the best league for holding grudges.Some guys can't trade their integrity for a cash redeemer He was convinced at the time he was in Motown that Nolan had been dishonest with him, and from every single impression I've ever gotten of Ted he doesn't lie to his players, unless HE has been fed misinformation So, Hasek was paranoid? How were they dishonest with him?
Comment icon posted by daddisamm at 12:49 AM CST on December 28 Its really easy to write funny jokes and comments when somebody is down on their luck. I hope and pray that thinks work out December 28 Well, I wouldn't say its "really" easy, but here is another scenerio..."your honor I was just kidding,..you thought I was serious,..listen I never would have done this if I knew I was gonna get caught. I have money in the bank why would I rob a jewlery store..Can't they take a joke?"
It was before I was born, but I don't think Castro ever lauched those missles. I would have heard about it. How about the recent Weapons of Mass Destruction "stuff" I heard about in the news...is that like the same thing?..All that I know is that if you have a righty on deck you better get your lefty warming up..Something about seeing the ball better.
So, He doesn't coach in the NHL because he prefers the minors? Coaching in the NHL was too hard? I did not understand why he left the NHL based upon what I read in the article. Was it a Canada/USA thing. Does he have rich parents?
Yeah , Well I don't really do that "benefit of the doubt" thing with people I don't know personally. So if you can make a few people think or laugh with out personally offending someone, then I think the good ( laughter ) = ( hahaha ) of the group out weights the expense of the lone "unknown" individual. So I wish Mr. Reardon luck as everyone deserves a second chance. Even though his 9th inning gopher ball..." please forgive me as I am completely medicated right now.Whoa yeah.... Think I'm gonna go jackme a liquor store ".....no wait it wore off... I'm cool. The man just made a mistake. Although by law it is the kind of mistake that usually puts you in jail. If the "...your Honor, I was so high, that I did not know what I was doing at the time" defense worked, the jails would be empty!
I tend to do the same yerfatma. The US tried implementing the same ideals in Latin America, but they did not have the basic structure of post-war Europe.So, it was left to the individual dictators who became " back-pocketed " by US dollars. I think the same thing has happened in North Africa. Although, They don't play baseball. They play soccer (and call it football ).
What more embarrassing the arrest or the location where it occurred? Doesn't he have any memorabillia he could hock on ebay?
That is a tough call. I live and work in NYC. I walk by MSG every night. The excitement of a hockey game is now amplified by a winning Rangers team. The original six have not been the upper eschelon of the NHL in recent years. Chicago has been playing at an expansion level for years. I think that there are some great rivalries that would be disrupted with an all six division; Flyers/devils(best in hockey), Rangers/Islanders a natural. I think that the NHL has realised most of it's financial problems are from trying to copy the NBA/NFL formula and resulting over expansion. I blame Gretsky for hockey being played in such unnatural ( no natural ice ever ) places as; Florida,Texas,Georgia,North Carolina and Southern California. ( I am undecided on Ohio )Thank Goodness( or Bettman) that the league has finally gotten rid of the ' flow crushing " left-wing lock style of play. Does any one miss the two-line calls?
Thank you! SkyDiveDad, I am glad somebody was paying attention. I was refering to the " Monroe Doctrine" when I incorrectly referenced the "Marshall Plan". I am not sure if the other members were mistaken in their choice of world shaping US policy documents. The Monroe Doctrine was a flag staking declaration. Where the Marshall Plan was more of a US led capitalist protectionism outline presented as a care package. It too worked well, but met with far more resistance, as Old Europe was really set in their respective ways. I would rather talk about sports. I am not sure what the other posts were really about.
Guys, Help me out here if you can.. I have obtained all my information about Cuba from two movies. The Godfather II shows the communists clearing the non-tax paying mob of organized crime out of Cuba. Not really a bad thing, depending on where and with whom you work. Scarface showed that the worst thing that Castro has done to the United States, which was release his criminals and insanity cases with the great Mariel boat excursion of 1979. Now I understand that there are people in Cuba who do not live a prosperous life. I believe we have that here ( USA ) as well. There are people in Cuba who have their freedoms restricted, but one of our most favored trading nations, Isreal has similar conditions. Cuba seems to be rich in sugar, tobacco and left-handed pitchers. I am not sure how the embargo benefits the US. It seems to be purely punative. The Marshall plan was conceived as the ground work for the US exploitation of the hemisphere which we occupy. It has worked great! We run the world. Cuba has been a hold out to US oppression. The embargo is retribution for that lack of cooperation. Social dictatorships don't work in prosperous countries. So it is a symbiotic relationship between Castros rule and the US embargo that keeps the Cuban people poor. However for some, prosperity and freedom are not the same thing. I believe the Cubans are one oil field away from true Iraqi-like liberation.
SkyDiveDad, Which one is the space bar? Just kidding, I know it is right next to the any key! This seems like a great sports forum. I found it while trolling the Yahoo Sports pages. The forum I usually post on has a tight character restriction, so I have developed a (habitofcramming). There seems to be plenty of room to run here..Thanks for the tip. I am happy to comply!.
Ex-Ohio State Star Runner Wanted for Armed Robbery
But u wouldn't rob someone at gunpoint would u. Not if they just handed it over. Now, what if somebody owed me money. I could not use legal methods to retrieve it, because the reason they owe me money was the result of an illegal activity. Then I may have to flash some metal... I'd say something like" excuse me sir, but your account is in arrears. I am requesting your immediate remittance in this matter or I shall be forced to take further action, up to and including reporting your failure to make remittance to the other drug dealer in town.... or maybe..." sup holm boy...I step out for you and you dis me like a bitch. u don't come correct wit my bub an I'll bust a cap in your punk ass! Now, please if you value your credit rating you'll place your payment in my extended hand. Thank you for your cooperation "