patterns of past behavior indicate future results. There is no benefit of the doubt when the aforementioned patterns of behavior are firmly established.
No they don’t. In any walk of life - the stock market, crime, etc. It’s no different here.
I believe otherwise. He clearly leads with his helmet towards the receivers head.
Sure. He clearly leads with his helmet… as long as his helmet is resting on his shoulder pad.
Obviously you do care, otherwise you wouldn't have brought it up. If my argument was "weak" then you you would not have said anything at all.
A weak argument is easy to take apart, hence the debate. Not sure why you wouldn’t think that I wouldn’t say anything at all. You, on the other hand? You said there was no point in arguing with me and look at you now… heels dug in, dying on a ridiculous hill.
You are an intelligent person kontra, and don't say things for no reason.
I ****post all the time.
As for the Safety position, there are a multitude of safeties who don't feel the need to go head hunting.
Correct. Jackson has head hunted before and he’s had big hits which were not head hunting. The hit on Thomas was head hunting. You can see the intent. The hit against Green Bay was clearly not. He was punished for past transgressions.
If the idea is to separate the ball from the carrier, there are more ways to do it than launching ones self at a defenseless players head.
I read what you write. I get you are trying to flip this around on me, but meh, thats a hollow point. If I were to post an angry response, you'd know it, and there would be no "probably" about it. That might be therapeutic in its own fashion, but as such is not the case here.
And continually bringing up "You Need Therapy" or some sort of variation when someone disagrees with you is a classic case of manipulative behavior by a people with control and anger issues because you don't like it when someone disagrees. Put it on them because its never your fault, isn't that the way it goes? No need to answer that, we both know the answer.
On the contrary, I love it when people disagree. That’s the whole point of being on a message board… is it not? I’m not sure what my perceived “anger” has to do with the discussion, though. I just think you’re reading my post with angry eyes, you’re losing the debate, your point is taking on water, you’re trying to distract from all of that by making this personal. To that point, I say that therapy is good and that this board is not a substitute for that.
A yes or no question? eh, sorry, the world doesn't work like that.
Sure it does. It’s the basis for any defense attorney’s cross examination. Key issues can always be boiled down to yes or no questions. You simply would prefer to fight a losing battle and waste both of our time instead of answer it because you know full well, as do I, that it would blow up your point.
Every single tackle? No of course not. But way to move the goal post.
And there you go… answering it. Thank you for that. Now, allow me to finish you off - if you cannot infer malicious intent with a much bigger sample size (all tackles), how are you going to infer malicious intent with a smaller sample size (big hits)? You can’t. So, then, you would be in agreement with me that some of his big/high hits had intent and others did not. Simple as that.
A more poignant question to ask would be is - when he goes high, is there intent? To that I would answer Yes, more likely than not.
“More likely than not?” You sound like Ted Wells here. You also just conceded. My whole argument is based around the fact that not every high hit of Jackson’s had intent. By saying “more likely than not,” you’re agreeing with me.
Every single tackle where he puts his head into the head and shoulders into a defenseless receiver head /neck area is indicative of his pattern of past behavior.
But that’s not what he did against Green Bay. That was shoulder pad to shoulder pad contact. A huge hit? Sure. But not one that had intent to injure (ala the Logan Thomas hit).
So now that you’ve agreed with me, in more ways than one, why not just call it a day and let it go? You seem to know I’m right. Why argue further when all it’s going to do is make you more and more upset?
