BengalByTheBay Posted August 30, 2007 Report Share Posted August 30, 2007 You seem to believe that terms like "unfair" or "vindictive" are synonyms for "irrational" or (to borrow from DC) "arbitrary."I don't know who is more offended. Me, that you didn't associate BBTB with our ongoing dead-horse-beating dispute, or DC for having been mistaken for me. Actually, I suppose I would have to go with DC on that one. But I'm offended too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoosierCat Posted August 30, 2007 Report Share Posted August 30, 2007 You seem to believe that terms like "unfair" or "vindictive" are synonyms for "irrational" or (to borrow from DC) "arbitrary."I don't know who is more offended. Me, that you didn't associate BBTB with our ongoing dead-horse-beating dispute, or DC for having been mistaken for me. Actually, I suppose I would have to go with DC on that one. But I'm offended too.My bad. I stand corrected. Now, back to beating a dead hair...err...horse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShulaSteakhouse Posted August 31, 2007 Report Share Posted August 31, 2007 Why anyone is willing to tolerate Hair's ridiculous, argumentative nonsense and adolescent personal attacks eludes me.Blah, blah freakin blah. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoosierCat Posted August 31, 2007 Report Share Posted August 31, 2007 All teams take character risks in the draft.Actually, all teams don't. Quite a few take guys with character risks completely off their boards. Goody's point is to increase that number by at least one, namely the club in Cincinnati.So how is "breaking" one owner while largely ignoring the actions of 31 others something worth defending? And are you seriously going to claim that Goodell will willingly ruin the careers of a few players, impose restrictions on one franchise that he doesn't apply to all others, and in general unfairly upset the competitive balance within the NFL because he's got a grudge against Mike Brown? And it's all justified because the new CBA and Goodell's confirmation weren't passed unanimously?Nope. I'm saying he's doing those things because it's the only leverage he's got to change Mikey's behavior. And that's his goal."Our team has been hurt by this and we're trying to get it behind us. The way to do that is to not have this sort of thing happen. We're going to try and do that." --- Mike Brown, quoted in the FoxSports article that Hoosier didn't understand.Well, then, Goodell is succeeding, isn't he? Personally, I think Mikey's comments are far from swearing off character risks, but if they are...God-el's work here is done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BengalszoneBilly Posted August 31, 2007 Report Share Posted August 31, 2007 Why anyone is willing to tolerate Hair's ridiculous, argumentative nonsense and adolescent personal attacks eludes me.Blah, blah freakin blah.I find it a bit entertaining. A Bengalszone "Soap Opera" if you will. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cincy9275 Posted August 31, 2007 Report Share Posted August 31, 2007 so what you are saying is that it is ok that goodell is singling out the bengals because of his disagreements with mike brown. no it is not ok and not only that it is illegal discrimination treatment or consideration of , or making a distinction in favor or against a person or thing based on the group or class or category to which that person belongs to. and that is exactly what goodell is doing. so if he is breaking the law to punish the bengals how is he then any better than the ones he is suspending? that would also make goodell a bigot , a prejudiced person who is intolerance of any opinions differing from his own. that to is goodell. as for mikey other than the past year when have the bengals every had that many players in trouble before? he has been drafting the same way since he has been running this team. is goodell that much of a hate monger to punish a team forgiving people a second chance? what goodell is doing is not right in any way shape or form and if i was mike brown or forstiee or o'dell i would sue his ass for discrmination. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stripes Posted August 31, 2007 Report Share Posted August 31, 2007 Why anyone is willing to tolerate Hair's ridiculous, argumentative nonsense and adolescent personal attacks eludes me.Blah, blah freakin blah.I find it a bit entertaining. A Bengalszone "Soap Opera" if you will. I don't have an issue with a good back-and-forth between Hair and Hoosier. Usually they're funny, and I've learned more about the Bengals reading them than anything else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjakq27 Posted August 31, 2007 Report Share Posted August 31, 2007 Why anyone is willing to tolerate Hair's ridiculous, argumentative nonsense and adolescent personal attacks eludes me.Blah, blah freakin blah.I second that one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wisk Posted August 31, 2007 Report Share Posted August 31, 2007 Henry, a key member of Cincinnati's offense, is eligible for reinstatement after the first six games. Is that accurate? It was reported earlier that Henry's suspension couldn't be shortened under any circumstances, unlike those given to the Tanker and the Pacman.From the Cincinnati Post - 08/27/07"Henry is scheduled to meet with Goodell once the preseason is finished and there is some hope from those close to the 24-year-old wide receiver that the suspension could be reduced." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redsbengalsbucks Posted August 31, 2007 Report Share Posted August 31, 2007 Why anyone is willing to tolerate Hair's ridiculous, argumentative nonsense and adolescent personal attacks eludes me.Blah, blah freakin blah.While I would tend to agree with you on most of Hair's postings, he is correct on this issue and is slapping the crap out of HoosierCat in the process. Very entertaining, Kudos HOF. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DesperateDerelict Posted August 31, 2007 Report Share Posted August 31, 2007 Why anyone is willing to tolerate Hair's ridiculous, argumentative nonsense and adolescent personal attacks eludes me.Blah, blah freakin blah.Chop-house - we'll add it to the l-o-o-o-o-o-o-ng list of things that elude you.I find it interesting that the national media is so supportive of Good-all's actions, and are blindly assuming that the Commissioner's Office is aware of damning facts that aren't available to them.Case in point: PFT Rucker suspensionIsn't it the media's 'job' to investigate the facts, and doubt unsubstantiated information that authority's allude to without any detail. If the national sports reporters worked the political beat in Washington, George W's approval rating would be 98%.How long can Good-alls honeymoon last? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BengalszoneBilly Posted August 31, 2007 Report Share Posted August 31, 2007 Henry, a key member of Cincinnati's offense, is eligible for reinstatement after the first six games. Is that accurate? It was reported earlier that Henry's suspension couldn't be shortened under any circumstances, unlike those given to the Tanker and the Pacman.From the Cincinnati Post - 08/27/07"Henry is scheduled to meet with Goodell once the preseason is finished and there is some hope from those close to the 24-year-old wide receiver that the suspension could be reduced."That would be a huge break for the Bengals if it indeed happen, and God knows we're certainly due for one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoosierCat Posted August 31, 2007 Report Share Posted August 31, 2007 so what you are saying is that it is ok that goodell is singling out the bengals because of his disagreements with mike brown.Nope. I never said it was OK. I said that God-el will use the biggest hammer he has on any Bengal who gets in trouble because he wants to get Mikey to quit drafting troublemakers. Thus Rucker getting a game for something he did in college while Porter walks for punching Levi, or Allen gets a reduced suspension while Odell sits out another year for missing some AA meetings.Is it all terribly unfair to guys like Odell and Rucker? Of course. But unlike a real CEO, who can fire a manager who keeps stocking his division with problem employees that embarass the company, Goodell can't fire Mikey. Coming down hard on his organization every time someone screws up is the only weapon he's got. And it worked -- at least this year.no it is not ok and not only that it is illegal discrimination treatment or consideration of , or making a distinction in favor or against a person or thing based on the group or class or category to which that person belongs to. and that is exactly what goodell is doing.I'm no lawyer but I'm going to bet that "Cincinnati Bengal football player" isn't a group or class or category for the purpose of legally establishing discrimination.is goodell that much of a hate monger to punish a team forgiving people a second chance?God-el is not the commissioner of the National Second Change League, he's the head of the National Football League. Giving troubled youths a second chance isn't his job; his job is to ensure that the NFL makes gobs and gobs of money. Being perceived as a haven for miscreants works directly against that goal -- witness how much money Vick's lost in endorsements. It's not about hate, it's about business. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HairOnFire Posted August 31, 2007 Report Share Posted August 31, 2007 All teams take character risks in the draft."Our team has been hurt by this and we're trying to get it behind us. The way to do that is to not have this sort of thing happen. We're going to try and do that." --- Mike Brown, quoted in the FoxSports article that Hoosier didn't understand.Well, then, Goodell is succeeding, isn't he? Personally, I think Mikey's comments are far from swearing off character risks, but if they are...God-el's work here is done. So, after reading things for a third time you actually managed to almost understand what Brown was saying? Nice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HairOnFire Posted August 31, 2007 Report Share Posted August 31, 2007 Why anyone is willing to tolerate Hair's ridiculous, argumentative nonsense and adolescent personal attacks eludes me. Exactly. Why tolerate it? Why not stomp your feet a few times before walking away in a huff? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BengalByTheBay Posted August 31, 2007 Report Share Posted August 31, 2007 Why anyone is willing to tolerate Hair's ridiculous, argumentative nonsense and adolescent personal attacks eludes me. Exactly. Why tolerate it? Why not stomp your feet a few times before walking away in a huff? So, let me get this straight Steak -- you're arguing that somebody else should stop arguing? I guess that's what happens when you have nothing to add to an argument, but you want to hear your own voice anyway. If you're done with reading the back-and-forth (and who could blame you for that?), why are you still forcing yourself to look at it? There's a "Steely McBeam" thread in the smack forum that has, IMO, been ignored for far too long. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
membengal Posted August 31, 2007 Report Share Posted August 31, 2007 Just want to make sure I understand...Goodell is still suspending Rucker for an incident that happened while he was in college, but Joey Porter is still only getting a fine for organizing a criminal assault and battery on another NFL player during this past off-season? Is that right?If so, remind me again how pure Goodell's motives are? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HairOnFire Posted August 31, 2007 Report Share Posted August 31, 2007 I don't have an issue with a good back-and-forth between Hair and Hoosier. Usually they're funny, and I've learned more about the Bengals reading them than anything else. There you go. For the life of me I can't understand how anyone could get upset at anything that happens on a sports message board. Yet some people are easily angered over the silliest of things, and I confess happily that I find their misery to be a rich source of enjoyment. In short, fuggem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HairOnFire Posted August 31, 2007 Report Share Posted August 31, 2007 While I would tend to agree with you on most of Hair's postings, he is correct on this issue and is slapping the crap out of HoosierCat in the process. Very entertaining, Kudos HOF. Right back at ya'. You and I never seem to agree on anything but earlier in the thread you wrote a great post that summed up things perfectly. Kudos, kudos, kudos. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cincy9275 Posted August 31, 2007 Report Share Posted August 31, 2007 i disagree hoosier when you are singling out any one team then are not doing league wide that is in it self discrimination and any good lawyer could very easily prove that point. you are right a bengal player is not a group but the bengals team is a group and they are being punished for being part of that group. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redsbengalsbucks Posted August 31, 2007 Report Share Posted August 31, 2007 While I would tend to agree with you on most of Hair's postings, he is correct on this issue and is slapping the crap out of HoosierCat in the process. Very entertaining, Kudos HOF. Right back at ya'. You and I never seem to agree on anything but earlier in the thread you wrote a great post that summed up things perfectly. Kudos, kudos, kudos.As the Devil slowly turns to Hitler and says, hand me that jacket, Dumbass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoosierCat Posted August 31, 2007 Report Share Posted August 31, 2007 i disagree hoosier when you are singling out any one team then are not doing league wide that is in it self discrimination and any good lawyer could very easily prove that point. you are right a bengal player is not a group but the bengals team is a group and they are being punished for being part of that group.In the first place, Goody is doing it league-wide (Tank, Pacman, Vick). The new personal conduct policy applies to everyone, not just the Bengals. And if he wants to hit the Bengals with maximum possible harshness under that policy, in order to change the organization's (read: Mike Brown's) behavior...he can. Secondly, guys like Odell and Henry aren't being "punished for being a bengal," they're being punished for their own dumb actions; had they not done anything, they'd be playing. God-el has just taken advantage of their screw-ups to put the screws to Mikey, too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HairOnFire Posted August 31, 2007 Report Share Posted August 31, 2007 So, let me get this straight Steak -- you're arguing that somebody else should stop arguing? I guess that's what happens when you have nothing to add to an argument, but you want to hear your own voice anyway. If you're done with reading the back-and-forth (and who could blame you for that?), why are you still forcing yourself to look at it? I just went back to the start of the thread and reread every word I've written. Remarkably, almost everything I've written has been serious stuff totally free of any real insult. All things considered I don't feel I have any reason to apologize to anyone...especially the always whining Kid Steakhouse. In fact, if you read each of the posts he's written in this thread you'll find that he's offered absolutely nothing in the way of content or opinion. All he's done is whine about the subject matter, blather that it isn't worth his time, and finally...lob a personal attack against me. In short, his contribution to this thread has been entirelly worthless and delibertaly negative. Which is something we've all grown used to, right? I'm just saying.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HairOnFire Posted August 31, 2007 Report Share Posted August 31, 2007 Oh, I have no doubt Goodell has a special axe to grind with Cincy (thanks Mikey). Now is not the time for flip flopping, Hoosier. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HairOnFire Posted August 31, 2007 Report Share Posted August 31, 2007 We're talking about whether Goodell is going to vary his punishment of players based on whether they are NFL stars or NFL nobodies. Which is indeed an argument you made (and you were right)... No flip flopping. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.