Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Moronic comments from Giants haters

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Moronic comments from Giants haters

    I love to read these moron haters comments Scroll Down,

    http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...se-draft-picks

  • #2
    Re: Moronic comments from Giants haters

    No different to the comments you see on here about the Saints, Eagles etc

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Moronic comments from Giants haters

      Thats why i dont read comments on football web sites. A lot of fans are ignorant morons.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Moronic comments from Giants haters

        [quote user="nYg24"]Thats why i dont read comments on football web sites. A lot of fans are ignorant morons.[/quote]

        possibly true. However what makes you an authority. Sometimes statments that one thinks are moronic are not. Football websites bring out the blindness of the fan. It is win win and stats stats stats. You can win and still be a ****ty coach, oc, dc, QB whatever. Many a true fan overlooks to what be obvious to the perosn that WATCHES the game.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Moronic comments from Giants haters



          [quote user="bashful"][quote user="nYg24"]Thats why i dont read comments on football web sites. A lot of fans are ignorant morons.[/quote] possibly true. However what makes you an authority. Sometimes statments that one thinks are moronic are not. Football websites bring out the blindness of the fan. It is win win and stats stats stats. You can win and still be a ****ty coach, oc, dc, QB whatever. Many a true fan overlooks to what be obvious to the perosn that WATCHES the game.[/quote]




          That's a two way street my freind.




          btw......winning is all that counts....EVER. The rest is for stat *****s and fantasy geeks.




          ****ty coaches don't win games or Superbowls. Your theory is garbage.

          I stopped fighting my inner demons. We're on the same side now.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Moronic comments from Giants haters



            Wait, what?
            8-Time NFL Champions - 1927 1934 1938 1956 1986 1990 2007 2011

            "You win close games because you're prepared to do it. It doesn't just come down to luck." -- Bill Parcells

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Moronic comments from Giants haters

              Everyone thinks MAra is the spearhead. Skins and Cowboys fans do have a gripe because technically there wasnt a rule. However to blatantly go against something the other 30 teams agreed to shows a complete lack of respect for the other owners and competitive balance.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Moronic comments from Giants haters



                Another classic hater comment I got from my Jet fan friend yesterday after asking him dumbfounded why the Jets were holding a press conference to introduce a backup QB......his comment was:




                "You're just jealous......"




                Riiiiiigggghhhhhttttt....jealous of over 40 years on ineptitude (sp?)....

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Moronic comments from Giants haters

                  This is the first time I can remember Mara looking bad in the press.

                  Not saying he's right or wrong, because I don't have the savvy of understanding the CBA (or lack thereof at the time).

                  But he should know better than to comment publicly on things like this.


                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Moronic comments from Giants haters

                    "Being that Mara stood to gain an obvious competitive advantage by punishing those two teams specifically for breaking no rules, even by his own admission, I think, quite frankly, he’ll be lucky if if his team doesn’t lose draft picks."


                    LMAO
                    But the Skins and Boys dont gain a competitive advantage by shedding money in the non cap year.


                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Moronic comments from Giants haters

                      [quote user="Redeyejedi"]"Being that Mara stood to gain an obvious competitive advantage by punishing those two teams specifically for breaking no rules, even by his own admission, I think, quite frankly, he’ll be lucky if if his team doesn’t lose draft picks."


                      LMAO
                      But the Skins and Boys dont gain a competitive advantage by shedding money in the non cap year.[/quote]

                      The difference is the legality of each owners actions. Skins and Boys were legal when they took advantage of the uncapped year. The salary cap docks were not.

                      Mara had every right to do the same as the Skins and Boys during the uncapped year, but he and the Giants didn't-- was their choice not too. Does that mean that the Cowboys and Redskins should be punished? And why weren't the other teams punished that benefited from the uncapped year as well? Packers? Bucs? Saints?

                      It's just a shady situation. And the more details that are revealed the shadier it gets.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Moronic comments from Giants haters



                        [quote user="Ntegrase96"][quote user="Redeyejedi"]"Being that Mara stood to gain an obvious competitive advantage by punishing those two teams specifically for breaking no rules, even by his own admission, I think, quite frankly, he’ll be lucky if if his team doesn’t lose draft picks." LMAO But the Skins and Boys dont gain a competitive advantage by shedding money in the non cap year.[/quote]

                        The difference is the legality of each owners actions. Skins and Boys were legal when they took advantage of the uncapped year. The salary cap docks were not.

                        Mara had every right to do the same as the Skins and Boys during the uncapped year, but he and the Giants didn't-- was their choice not too. Does that mean that the Cowboys and Redskins should be punished? And why weren't the other teams punished that benefited from the uncapped year as well? Packers? Bucs? Saints?

                        It's just a shady situation. And the more details that are revealed the shadier it gets.

                        [/quote]




                        Cowboys and Redskins fans keep saying that other teasm took advatage of an uncapped year, yet you're basing this off of nothing.




                        Boys and Skins fans seem to think that only their teams thought of the idea to restructure their contracts to take advantage of the uncapped year. I'm sure EVERY team in the NFL, especially those that were cap strapped, thought of that same idea. If they didn't think there was a problem with it, either in written rule or something that was agreed upon at owners meetings, then they would have done it.




                        I will say though that the NFL should have pulled Mara off the committee on this to prevent the PR problem that is now occurring. I'm sure Mara was chair of this committee long before this issue even came up, but understanding what the issue was he should have been asked to obstain from it.

                        All Hail The New York Giants!!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Moronic comments from Giants haters

                          [quote user="FBomb"]

                          [quote user="bashful"][quote user="nYg24"]Thats why i dont read comments on football web sites. A lot of fans are ignorant morons.[/quote] possibly true. However what makes you an authority. Sometimes statments that one thinks are moronic are not. Football websites bring out the blindness of the fan. It is win win and stats stats stats. You can win and still be a ****ty coach, oc, dc, QB whatever. Many a true fan overlooks to what be obvious to the perosn that WATCHES the game.[/quote]




                          That's a two way street my freind.*




                          btw......winning is all that counts....EVER.* The rest is for stat *****s and fantasy geeks.




                          ****ty coaches don't win games or Superbowls.* Your theory is garbage.

                          [/quote]

                          Steve Mariuci, Barry Switzer, George Seifert, and Jon Gruden all won Super Bowls. I wouldn't consider any of them particularly good coaches.

                          They all inherited great teams.
                          I don't always root for the Cowboys but when I do I wear my pink Jessica Simpson edition Romo jersey. (yes I lost a bet)

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Moronic comments from Giants haters

                            [quote user="TrueBlue@NYC"]

                            [quote user="Ntegrase96"][quote user="Redeyejedi"]"Being that Mara stood to gain an obvious competitive advantage by punishing those two teams specifically for breaking no rules, even by his own admission, I think, quite frankly, he’ll be lucky if if his team doesn’t lose draft picks." LMAO But the Skins and Boys dont gain a competitive advantage by shedding money in the non cap year.[/quote]

                            The difference is the legality of each owners actions. Skins and Boys were legal when they took advantage of the uncapped year. The salary cap docks were not.

                            Mara had every right to do the same as the Skins and Boys during the uncapped year, but he and the Giants didn't-- was their choice not too. Does that mean that the Cowboys and Redskins should be punished? And why weren't the other teams punished that benefited from the uncapped year as well? Packers? Bucs? Saints?

                            It's just a shady situation. And the more details that are revealed the shadier it gets.

                            [/quote]




                            Cowboys and Redskins fans keep saying that other teasm took advatage of an uncapped year, yet you're basing this off of nothing.




                            Boys and Skins fans seem to think that only their teams thought of the idea to restructure their contracts to take advantage of the uncapped year. I'm sure EVERY team in the NFL, especially those that were cap strapped, thought of that same idea. If they didn't think there was a problem with it, either in written rule or something that was agreed upon at owners meetings, then they would have done it.




                            I will say though that the NFL should have pulled Mara off the committee on this to prevent the PR problem that is now occurring. I'm sure Mara was chair of this committee long before this issue even came up, but understanding what the issue was he should have been asked to obstain from it.

                            [/quote]

                            Nope, Mara became the Chair of the committee in late October of 2011.

                            Not basing it off of nothing. You can look at player contracts around the league including Nick Collins breakdown-- he was given 40 percent of his salary in 2010. The difference between he and Austin? His contract was only 14 million? I dunno... Also, you can look at teams like the Bucs who spent only 80 million in 2010. How is that gaining an advantage in future seasons? I mean, they DID just sign Vincent Jackson and Carl Nicks amongst other expensive free agents.

                            Although, everything those teams did, as well, was within bounds of the rules at the time. Every team that year was free to do as they please. Mara's statement 'violating the spirit of the salary cap' is not substantial in the least bit. He's basically admitting that there was no legal or contractual obligation for the Cowboys, Redskins or any other team in the NFL to abide by. Of course we already knew that because that's the very definition of an un-capped year.

                            I don't understand how anyone can logically refute that or stand by the salary cap docks.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Moronic comments from Giants haters

                              [quote user="Ntegrase96"][quote user="TrueBlue@NYC"]

                              [quote user="Ntegrase96"][quote user="Redeyejedi"]"Being that Mara stood to gain an obvious competitive advantage by punishing those two teams specifically for breaking no rules, even by his own admission, I think, quite frankly, he’ll be lucky if if his team doesn’t lose draft picks." LMAO But the Skins and Boys dont gain a competitive advantage by shedding money in the non cap year.[/quote]

                              The difference is the legality of each owners actions. Skins and Boys were legal when they took advantage of the uncapped year. The salary cap docks were not.

                              Mara had every right to do the same as the Skins and Boys during the uncapped year, but he and the Giants didn't-- was their choice not too. Does that mean that the Cowboys and Redskins should be punished? And why weren't the other teams punished that benefited from the uncapped year as well? Packers? Bucs? Saints?

                              It's just a shady situation. And the more details that are revealed the shadier it gets.

                              [/quote]




                              Cowboys and Redskins fans keep saying that other teasm took advatage of an uncapped year, yet you're basing this off of nothing.*




                              Boys and Skins fans seem to think that only their teams thought of the idea to restructure their contracts to take advantage of the uncapped year. I'm sure EVERY team in the NFL, especially those that were cap strapped, thought of that same idea. If they didn't think there was a problem with it, either in written rule or something that was agreed upon at owners meetings, then they would have done it.




                              I will say though that the NFL should have pulled Mara off the committee on this to prevent the PR problem that is now occurring. I'm sure Mara was chair of this committee long before this issue even came up, but understanding what the issue was he should have been asked to obstain from it.

                              [/quote]

                              Nope, Mara became the Chair of the committee in late October of 2011.

                              Not basing it off of nothing. You can look at player contracts around the league including Nick Collins breakdown-- he was given 40 percent of his salary in 2010. The difference between he and Austin? His contract was only 14 million? I dunno... Also, you can look at teams like the Bucs who spent only 80 million in 2010. How is that gaining an advantage in future seasons? I mean, they DID just sign Vincent Jackson and Carl Nicks amongst other expensive free agents.

                              Although, everything those teams did, as well, was within bounds of the rules at the time. Every team that year was free to do as they please. Mara's statement 'violating the spirit of the salary cap' is not substantial in the least bit. He's basically admitting that there was no legal or contractual obligation for the Cowboys, Redskins or any other team in the NFL to abide by. Of course we already knew that because that's the very definition of an un-capped year.

                              I don't understand how anyone can logically refute that or stand by the salary cap docks.
                              [/quote]

                              Yeah, I completely disagree with what is happening right now with the sanctions. The only thing I've read so far that makes the punishment legitimate is that the Cowboys and Redskins were warned several times that punishments could be handed down in advance to them loading their contracts for the uncapped year.

                              I still don't believe this should be an issue. If anything, it was good a business strategy.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X