- Joined
- Sep 13, 2004
- Messages
- 72,773
- Reaction score
- 22,604
As they say when you cant argue facts call the other guy names. It’s your specialty.You are an idiot.
Last edited:
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.Boston.com | Posted: 06/15 New! |
| Report: After knee procedure, Patriots rookie LB is NFL’s only unsigned second-rounder |
98.5 The Sports Hub | Posted: 06/15 New! |
| 4 Big takeaways from Patriots OTAs and minicamp |
MassLive | Posted: 06/15 👁: 31 |
| Behind the powerful message Patriots coaches gave Christian Barmore |
MassLive | Posted: 06/15 New! |
| How Tom Brady helped transform Harry Kane from doubting teenager into England’s greatest scorer |
MassLive | Posted: 06/15 👁: 50 |
| Patriots coach ‘very pleased’ with young wide receiver’s development |
| Our Defense is NOT Loaded; our BACKUPS are weak. 9 Reactions | 06/15 at 1:26 am |
| OT: Aldon Smith Dead at 36 6 Reactions | 06/15 at 8:49 am |
| TODAY'S TOP POSTERS: | # | |
| mayoclinic | 15 posts | |
| Clonamery | 7 posts | |
| Triumph | 6 posts | |
| Raccoonsuit | 6 posts | |
| Ice_Ice_Brady | 3 posts |
As they say when you cant argue facts call the other guy names. It’s your specialty.You are an idiot.
The article being partisan was obvious, the partisan opinion he was using it to support was right in his post.Full disclosure: I haven't read the entirety of this Dumpster fire of a thread, but where did IC say the article was partisan?
Of course you didn't launch a "personal attack," but that doesn't mean that what you did was not an ad hominem.
You're the one ignoring facts, so I guess the shoe fits.As they say when you can argue facts call the other guy names. It’s your specialty.
Don't know if it's been mentioned yet (I skipped over the last couple of pages), but the 2-Minute Drill on Sirius/XM radio's NFL channel this morning announced that the Rooney Rule has been updated to demand that teams now include At Least Two non-whites during any HC searches - and at least one NW during any Coordinator search...
I like this idea better than the previous one we've been discussing...
Which playing field? There's the coaching field and then there's the ones you coach field. While you're leveling one you're creating an advantage to that team and hurting a team that maybe doesn't need a coach.I believe in fairness, and in my opinion this will make the playing field a bit more level. I implied earlier in the thread that I took the poll literal. It asked if I like "this idea", which generally I do, but I think there is room for improvement. But I think it has people thinking about the possible these types of inequities and I am always in favor of seeing people think about addressing problems/perceived problems.
Might as well, I suppose, though this new Coordinator business might also dove-tail with the link that XLIX posted in the previous page...It also sounds like the league is going to be more demanding - Much more demanding - that all teams comply with this update than they might've done in the past, when in some cases the Rule seems to have been ignored completely...should make the coordinator one 2 as well.
I love these topics, it is very stimulating for me, in a PG rated kind of way.
You're the one ignoring facts, so I guess the shoe fits.
Which playing field? There's the coaching field and then there's the ones you coach field. While you're leveling one you're creating an advantage to that team and hurting a team that maybe doesn't need a coach.
I am speaking only of facts. You are the one who faces a fact you don’t like, and can not refute so you attack the messenger. Low class, low intellect thing to do. If the shoe fits.You're the one ignoring facts, so I guess the shoe fits.
That is a fact.But it is what our system is based upon.
Practically speaking most of them do. Why should a good coach have to leave?coaches should have term limits
I believe in fairness, and in my opinion this will make the playing field a bit more level. I implied earlier in the thread that I took the poll literal. It asked if I like "this idea", which generally I do, but I think there is room for improvement. But I think it has people thinking about the possible these types of inequities and I am always in favor of seeing people think about addressing problems/perceived problems.
I just made an observation based on factsYou sound awfully chipper today. You must've gotten one of those rare atta boys from the old man. I'm happy for you.
What specifically does % of players have to do with % of coaches?I love all the people worried about "fairness" ... in the NFL.
There's like 5 combined black coaches and GMs in a league where blacks make up 70% of the players.
That's a lot more egregious than moving up a spot or two in the 3rd round.
That really has to be explained to you, huh?What specifically does % of players have to do with % of coaches?
The article being partisan was obvious, the partisan opinion he was using it to support was right in his post.
| 11 | 567 |
| 7 | 415 |
| 8 | 720 |
| 5 | 1K |
| 6 | 2K |
From our archive - this week all-time:
May 31 - June 15 (Through 26yrs)











