ARE YOU NEW HERE? NOT LOGGED IN? PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO REGISTER FOR AN ACCOUNT AND LOGIN TO REMOVE THIS WINDOW
Welcome to PatsFans.com. Do you have an account? If not - please take a moment to register for our forum and experience a much smoother experience with fewer ads, along with no longer having to see this notification window. Also learn about how you can receive a free Patriots T-Shirt from the Patriots Official ProShop by CLICKING HERE. Please enjoy your stay here, and Go Pats!
Healthy dose of the obvious from Shank Shaugnessey
Shank Shaugnessey wrote an article today, the point of which seems to be that sports fans are hypocrites by supporting and liking players for their teams when they would not support and would hate the same player in different laundry.
Then it typical Shank fashion, an article that starts out about football ends up with more baseball related references than football related references (Bonds, A-Rod, Clemens, Canseco).
Gee, thanks Shank, for pointing out something I had never realized before
FEATURED ADVERTISEMENT
DONATE TO PATSFANS.COM
RECEIVE A FREE PATS T-SHIRT AND SAVE 15% OFF WHEN YOU BUY FROM THE OFFICIAL PROSHOP!
Free T-Shirt & Save 15% Off!
Like Our Site? Please help support our site and server costs by DONATING TO PATSFANS.COM and receive a FREE PATRIOTS T-SHIRT and SAVE 15% off EVERY purchase you make from PatriotsProShop.com. You'll also receive added benefits to your account including Removing All Ads During Your Experience Here At Our Forum.
NEEDED YEARLY SITE DONATIONS: 345 | CURRENT # OF SUBSCRIBED SUPPORTERS: 98
Re: Healthy dose of the obvious from Shank Shaugnessey
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuiGon
Shank Shaugnessey wrote an article today, the point of which seems to be that sports fans are hypocrites by supporting and liking players for their teams when they would not support and would hate the same player in different laundry.
Then it typical Shank fashion, an article that starts out about football ends up with more baseball related references than football related references (Bonds, A-Rod, Clemens, Canseco).
Gee, thanks Shank, for pointing out something I had never realized before
The Globe must be having a knip***** with all of the press that the Pats are getting. The Red Sox beat the Yankees 2 out of 3 (my poor Yankees) in NY and all everyone is talking about is the Pats. Plus their top Pats hating columinst is sitting on the bench for plagarism.
Remember it was the Globe that rallied everyone in Southie against a downtown Boston Stadium for the Pats. It would have made the waterfront in Southie a place to go and be. As it stands the waterfront looks like a ghost town on the weekend.
Re: Healthy dose of the obvious from Shank Shaugnessey
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuiGon
Shank Shaugnessey wrote an article today, the point of which seems to be that sports fans are hypocrites by supporting and liking players for their teams when they would not support and would hate the same player in different laundry.
Then it typical Shank fashion, an article that starts out about football ends up with more baseball related references than football related references (Bonds, A-Rod, Clemens, Canseco).
Gee, thanks Shank, for pointing out something I had never realized before
Re: Healthy dose of the obvious from Shank Shaugnessey
I'm shocked. No, not at the article which is precisely all too predictable but shocked that anyone still reads The Curly Haired Boy-Friend and the NY Times Boston edition fish wrapper.
__________________
"Would I rather have my phone records collected and inspected by the National Security Agency, or have my genitalia handled and scrutinized by the Transportation Security Administration? Why choose? In today’s America you can have both."
Re: Healthy dose of the obvious from Shank Shaugnessey
What's not to love about Randy? Who hasn't had a moment of road rage? Who hasn't dogged it at work for a day now and then? Who hasn't mooned somebody once in their life? Who hasn't smoked a little weed?
As I said in a previous post, there was an excellent article in SI about the guy a couple years back. It really changed my opinion of the man.
Now TO on the other hand is a total scumbag, but the Pats did not sign TO.
When does his jersey go on sale?
__________________
Fan since 85'
Ticketholder since 01'
Re: Healthy dose of the obvious from Shank Shaugnessey
Just for the record, I have to say I don't love Randy Moss. He is undeniably talented but I don't know that I trust him. He has alot to prove. However, I do love the deal. It's low risk, high reward. And if the people in charge are willing to take a chance on him, so am I.
If I should be ashamed of that, it's OK I can live with it.
Re: Healthy dose of the obvious from Shank Shaugnessey
Quote:
Originally Posted by denverpatsfan
What's not to love about Randy? Who hasn't had a moment of road rage? Who hasn't dogged it at work for a day now and then? Who hasn't mooned somebody once in their life? Who hasn't smoked a little weed?
As I said in a previous post, there was an excellent article in SI about the guy a couple years back. It really changed my opinion of the man.
Now TO on the other hand is a total scumbag, but the Pats did not sign TO.
Re: Healthy dose of the obvious from Shank Shaugnessey
Quote:
Originally Posted by denverpatsfan
What's not to love about Randy? Who hasn't had a moment of road rage? Who hasn't dogged it at work for a day now and then? Who hasn't mooned somebody once in their life? Who hasn't smoked a little weed?
As I said in a previous post, there was an excellent article in SI about the guy a couple years back. It really changed my opinion of the man.
Now TO on the other hand is a total scumbag, but the Pats did not sign TO.
Re: Healthy dose of the obvious from Shank Shaugnessey
Shank is just pissed because while the sports media in this town never tries to drive agendas...it is teribbly frustrating for guys as bright as them to find they are unable to herd the sheep in what to them is the obviously correct direction.
Problem is these dogged sheep herders almost never give up on an agenda, and eventually they get us to where they want us on 7 of 10 and feel vindicated over time. That is why BB drives them batty. They can't turn the sheep on him and his because he now posses an impenatrable Lombardi Media shield (the tri-level model) which blinds all but media shepards to the danger this guy exposes his sheep to as it reflects the sun.
But they will continue to attempt to drive their agenda even at the added effort and expense of persuing him personally and via individual players, some of whom do not yet have the player version of the shield in their posession. This often requires their teamates with shields gather around them to deflect the curley haired sheep barbs that the agenda drivers will launch their way. Randy is a pretty tall target - I hope we have enough shields to maintain a safe distance between him and Lucchino's little curley haired shepherd until we can get him a shield of his own. Shouldn't be that hard to do in Foxboro given the security at that facility as opposed to the one on Yawkey Way where CHB can always find a way into a restricted nook or cranny from which to overhear information that isn't already deliberately leaked to him.
Speaking of hypocrits...Didn't the CHB fairly hate the carpetbagger from So. Florida and the sleezey lawyer from DC via SD and the goofy Holllywood producer (not to mention the odd ball dentist) when they engineered the team sale away from wonderful local interests whose water the Globe was toting? Until they added the NYT to their ownership group and started dropping dimes on him and having him over for dinner dates? And he suddenly morphed into their pro bono media defense counsel. Even when they temporarily screwed the pooch with their boy genius and fairly covered every inch of CHB's beloved bandbox with crass ads. LOL