Mr. WEO
-
Posts
45,213 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Mr. WEO
-
-
A simple question for the DJ fans here: at the end of the season, when the Bills' worst kept secret was finally confirmed--that the Ralphie had locked up DJ for 3 more years months earlier---how many of you thought "alright! This is good news."?
Followup: if you did not, what has changed since then for you to continue to support him and his staff?
-
Lets hope Stallworth doesn't kill an animal instead of a human, he might end up in prison for a year instead of just 24 days.
Nice grasp on the fine points of both cases.
-
show me where I or anyone else said anything in favor of Johnson..your post is beyond idiotic...who the !@#$ cares about comparing the two? Is that the only argument you Flutie worshippers can come up with? He was better than RJ..so !@#$ing what? No one is denying that...still doesn't change the fact that your hero was a crappy QB in 1999
Get your head out of Flutie's crotch and stop insinuating that people are saying things they aren't.
As far as Williams and TD choosing RJ over Flutie, when one guy says he won't do what he's told and the other says he'll do everything he can to make things work, what do you expect?
Good God...do you spend every night with a Flutie blow-up doll, too?
How can anyone participate in this discussion and claim that the whole Flutie issue had nothing to do with RJ or his play at QB?
It is mystifying.
If RJ was a very good, dependable QB (or at least better than Flutie), there would have been no Flutie, and, by extension, no Flutie "magic" (or lack thereof), no "divided locker room", no discussion 10 years later.....
It had everything to do with RJ being a disaster at QB. I think that Flutie made it clear that this was his opinion also and history has proven him correct. TD's "plan" for QB and the offense was an incredible fiasco.
"Blow up doll"? This is what you have to say about others who appreciate a competitive, intense, intelligent Bills QB?
Focus on the Jills, Phil.
-
Did we need to take Levitre to get Wood?
-
Especially when management is the new GM and the new HC, and both have no allegiance to either candidate.
Instead of bitching about the Bills choosing RJ, and cutting Flutie loose, why don't you at least lay partial blame on the idiot that failed the interview process, because he could not keep his ego in check, and was too busy running his mouth.
Nah, it's better to lay blame where it belongs--with the idiot new GM, who in a more lucid state and as a football observer (like the rest of us), clearly stated the obvious:
"As a starter, Flutie's record is now 21-9, what's the decision?," Donahoe (the ESPN analyst) asked.
Perhaps durign the interview, TD should have realized that Flutie was trying to save him future embarrassment in his choice of QB.
-
How about the fact that he's the only sure-fire HOF on the team and has accomplished a hell of a lot more in the playoffs than Jackson or anyone else on the Bills roster? I realize the Fred Jackson worship on this board is almost limitless, but I really don't want a backup trying to tell the best guy on the team what to do.
Since TO broke up with Garcia, he has appeared in exactly 3 postseason games and has a total of 1 TD catch---in 5 years. That's quite a return on a $30+ million investment.
It is a testament to the chronic status of this team that some here consider TO a locker room leader who is only concerned about winning.
-
This was unbearable beyond 2 minutes and it just sucked up that point.
As someone said, they do this on Stern all the time and they (Sal and Richard) are actually funny.
Anyway, thought for a minute by the title of the post that I actually had found someone who identified themself as a Jim Rome listener.
-
Bloggers have no credibility. Professional writers at least have some, as well as accountability.
Except the hundred or so who have published all those lies about TO over the years, eh?
-
why do people keep thinking this thread has anything to do with johnson? stop going back to johnson. this thread is about flutie, not johnson. one more time: this thread is about flutie, not johnson. we know flutie was better than johnson. ok?
so your response to my assertion that flutie fans should "be objective and look at the numbers" about him is to say that he made the pro bowl and was voted comeback player of the year? nice analysis.
You obviously haven't realized that there would have been no QB controversey if RJ was better than Flutie. There would have been no "split locker room".
We say Flutie played well in Buffalo (look at the W-L numbers, for one), and you point to his career elsewhere. Nice analysis.
Anyway....
Flutie was an intense, competitive, intelligent, athletic guy with a very high level of confidence and a big chip on his shoulder. He had a hard time accepting that he was being walked over by the disaster that was RJ.
That's it fellas.
-
The CBA only cost "$100s of millions" if teams spent the max. Teams can't be forced by the CBA to spend to the cap each year.
If the union decertifies, the players cannot bargain with the league as a group.
You will not see guaranteed contracts---the lack of them is absolutely essential to the owners' financial stability. Very few players stay on the same team for more than 3 years and it will be hard to unload the contracts of players who bust. This should be a concern for the Bills.
The league giving up 3% more of total revenue has not hurt Ralph over the past 3 years. He's still putting plenty in the bank. If the anti-trust exemption was lost (who's going to pick up Bills broadcasts? How much is that worth?) or the owners surrendered the no guarantee status of their contracts to shave a few points off the players' take of revenues-----the Bills would quickly fold. It would be the worst choice the owners could make. Forget the Yankees---look at the Knicks--they are doomed to suck for years based on poor player selections and foolish contracts.
They will probably push for 60% of something less than total revenue for players. They'll sweeten it with some money for the codgers or something.
What is the players' leverage here?
-
LOL! That game was "humiliating" for TO...why? Because the Cowboys lost, thanks to Bledsoe shitting the bed and being just a few games away from getting benched, permanently? Hey, whatever made-up argument you can come up with, sport!
It was humiliating because it was the first game back in Philly since he was run out of town, it was just after his narcotic overdose (the fans were chanting "OD, OD"), he had three catches for 45 yards against a not so great Philly secondary.
It took as long as it did to count the number of postseason games that Garcia has appeared in since he left the 49'ers. And one of those seasons was in relief of McNabb with the Eagles, who were making the playoffs annually.Yes, the Eagles were making the playoffs annually----until TO's sophomore season.
He's as gay as TO was suicidal. Speaking of which, only in your warped little mind is it a crime to call someone gay, but it's okay to make fun of a (alleged) suicide attempt. Amazing. But hey, that's what we've come to expect from you in your short and entertaining time with us.You miss the point. It's not like Garcia was caught in a closet patting down another man. TO just outed him because he had the opportunity to do so, to be cruel, not because he may actually be gay. Conversely, TO actually OD'd and it was initially reported as a possible suicide attempt. The typical PR circus that followed was classic TO drama.
But yeah, you're right. Garcia putting up good numbers by throwing to HOF WR's was all about him. While TO's been chugging along since parting ways with Garcia. Oh and Garcia is on his FIFTH team post-49'ers, which is two better (or worse) than TO, for those keeping score at home. Is it because he's a cancer, he sucks, or he's "been relegated to the back of the bus?"And don't make me laugh comparing Garcia to Kelly, Mr. "Bills fan." But let me ask: give me the list of people you think might be presenting Garcia at his HOF induction? What, you're done already?
Look, you said Garcia was a "fraud". No facts to back it up. I pointed out that his numbers in SF, with TO, were pretty solid, in fact very similar to Kelly's best stretch (on a much better team). Garcia's performance after SF does not negate his results while he was there. In fact, he and TO were very good for eachother and TO has not doen better with another QB ever. You and TO cannot acknowledge this. Instead, you reach for the "some fan you are for questioning the greatness of Jim Kelly" noodle. Well played!
The "second year starting QB?" LOL! If Trent, who will be a 3rd year player and who has started 23 games in his 2 years in the league, can't put up a decent showing with TO, Evans, Reed, Lynch, Jackson, Fine, and Nelson, he's toast no matter what, get it?Even you can do the math here--he is entering his second season as the starter, not the backup who keeps coming in for the poorly playing or injured 1st round bust who is out of the league. And while the WR are top notch, you're stretching it more than a bit by mentioning Fine and Nelson, who have yet to do anything in the league.
True, I have a long way to go to match your "Flutie and Jeff Garcia are gods" campaign.See, this is what you do--you are fighting an army of straw men (I never even insinuated that either of those QBs was a "god", HOF caliber, or even great). You just made that up because you can't keep up. You say things like "Garcia was a fraud", "Flutie was as big a self promoter as TO" (or "the cops falsified the police report"--another gem), yet you simply can't back this up. Instead you say that all of the evidence of TO-like Flutie behavior disappeared before it could be documented in the internet! Now you glom onto this rant by some hometown hockey hack, which quotes no one, not even anonymously, and attributes nothing---all after Flutie has left town.
If you want to bash the best QB the Bills have had since Kelly (and he was, regardless of what he did before or after the Bills), then go ahead, Superfan. Make your people proud.
-
The anti-trust legislation will never be successfully challenged in court and will never be changed by Congress.
The current CBA is not a threat to the success of all "small market" teams--it has been shown that low-cost teams can succeed. However, if there was no anti-trust exemption for the NFL, this would permanently change. Each team would be allowed to negotiate their own TV and product contracts. You can guess the rest.
-
From ESPN the magazine
- Leon Washington, Jets
It's obvious that because Ralph is so cheap, and refuses to modernize our facilities, our players cannot take the type of performance enhancing bowel movements that are required to win in the NFL.
Two TDs per dump??
The "Turk" should just forget any of his useless "gameplans" and spike the gatorade with Miralax.
-
Agree with Dazed.
It all starts at the top. Ralph bears "ultimate responsibility." He's the one who has alienated some of the icons of this organization through his pettiness (Saban, Cookie Gilchrist, Polian and Butler for awhile before burying the hatchet (probably Marv had something to do with these reconciliations).
He's also stuck with people like Harvey Johnson and Stew Barber when it was clearly not in the organization's best interest.
His most trusted confidant is the Treasurer, Jeff Littman.
I've always and will continue to maintain that Ralph Wilson is the reason we've had much less than average success over the 50 years of this franchise. I'm grateful for Ralph bringing the team here and keeping it here but otherwise he's been a subpar owner.
When you blame Jauron, you're "shooting the messenger." Jauron is only one symptom of a larger illness.
No doubt!
And counting in coaching and scout salaries and facilities will change nothing--unless, you somehow believe that we splurge in these areas.
-
And you know this, how?
Dick Jauron and "TurK" Schonert are still coaching the Bills. Need any more proof?
-
Look, I already debunked the "not...throwing him enough passes" caca by telling you that he led his team in receiving during his last 4 years in SF and 2 years in Philly (even being in the top-3 in every receiving category in 2005, before getting suspended), and that he wasn't the leading receiver in Dallas for the last 2 years, yet he didn't "destroy the team" until the final month of the season, when the Cowboys' playoffs hopes were fading faster than Jessica Simpson's career, as Romo continued to toss the rock to his best bud Witten. Then you changed your argument to "specifically TD passes," and I proceeded to inform you that over that same time span, he's led his team in receiving TD's every year. Now you've come full circle, again claiming "not...throwing him enough passes," with the dumb "TO blew up the Eagles because they didn't celebrate his 100th TD" thrown in for good measure. Loos like you no lissen so good.
I already told you that TO saw that Garcia was a fraud and the 49'ers were going nowhere (both of which have been proven in spades) and more importantly that he left THEM, while his dispute with the Eagles primarily came down to his contract (and Rosenhaus got him blockbuster deals with the Cowboys) and revealing that McNabb choked in the SB. The team doing everything they could to dis him at every turn just added fuel to the already-bightly-burning fire. And as for his last season in Dallas and that infamous meeting to complain about Romo throwing the ball too much to Witten, 2 other receivers (Roy Williams and Patrick Crayton) joined him in complaining about it. But most never heard about that. And now we hear the Joneses say that Romo wasn't a leader and that they had to release TO for Romo to become one, and for Roy Williams to justify the 1st, 3rd, and 6th round picks. Like it's that simple. And TO, when asked about the Jones' comments, was able to ascertain that the Joneses were talking about Romo not being a leader while he was around, so apparently the only one who didn't understand that is you.
But I'll ask the question I've asked you before: what could TO possibly do to the Bills to "destroy" them? Outside of the Bills moving to Toronto as a direct result of TO, there is NOTHING that TO can do to make things any worse than they've been for the past 9 seasons. Jauron, Schonert, and yes Trent, are on their last gasps as higher-position coaches or starting QB's. Because you see, it won't be because of TO that the Bills stumble, although he'll be the convenient scapegoat should he show his frustration at losing, which would kill his chances at a new contract, much less the blockbusters he got from the Cowboys.
TO's shenanigans only started in the last season? Right. Check his reaction in his first season, when he was shut down by the last team that dumped him (3 catches) in his humiliating (post overdose) "homecoming game", when he railed at the staff: "why did you all bring me here?"
No, the Eagles made it through the playoffs just fine without TO. True Mc Nabb gagged in the SB, but throwing a lot of passes to TO hasn't lead to many playoff wins (or games) for any team---other than the 49ers. In fact, check out the long list of postseason games that TO has appeared in since he left the 49ers. What? You're done already? See?, that didn't take long.
GArcia was a "fraud"? Gee, what else will you say to bolster your chronically weak arguments?
How about a 5 year stretch of 16,640 yards, 120 TDs vs. 80 ints? Oh, wait---those were HOFer Jim Kelly's numbers from '88-'92, his best 5 year stretch, statistically. Garcia's numbers were 16,408 yards, 113 TD's and only 56 ints for SF. In fact, Garcia tossed TO almost as many TDs as McNabb and Romo combined.
Yeah, I can see why you would agree that Garcia was a bum and did nothing for TO. I mean he's probably gay and all, right?
What can TO do to the Bills? That's pretty easy to say (unless you believe that all the well documented behavior by TO as a "teammate" was completely fabricated by the "media"): when a few losses start piling up, he can start in on the second year starting QB and the overmatched, dimwitted OC about how TO should be a bigger part of the offense. He will start assembling his lockerroom allies (maybe James Hardy and Johnson?) and get them all to rally around the "all this team needs is a little more TO" theme.
I don't think that would be a good thing. You disagree.
Now go back to work documenting your "Flutie was as big a self promoter as TO" claim. You are way behind.
-
he is ancient, Bills dont go after older players usually
Jarvis Redwine.
-
GODell definitely is walking around with a God complex. He needs to treat each player on a case by case basis. Pac Man and Henry both deserved to be suspended for the numerous times they were in trouble with the law. However, Burress has not been convicted so until then, nor has he been in trouble, thus his punishment if any should be a wait and see. As for Vick he has paid his price, loosing 2years of his life behind bars, loosing his job, loosing endorsements, loosing his home and now GODell wants to suspend him indefinitely. Vick deserves the right to compete for a job in the league.
For all of you who say he has not right or he is a criminal please reference Michael Milken the Junk Bond King who swindled Average Americans out of their savings, and only spent 2 years in prison. He is now in the top 500 richest Americans.
Goodell has the power to suspend at his discretion and is the sole appeal avenue for players. This system was agreed upon by the players and their union. Nuf said.
It does appear his suspensions are not always consistent (Tank Johnson's "second strike"--also for a misdeanor gun charge---cost him 6 games, not 3), but he has tended to wait until cases have been adjudicated before he lays down the suspension.
Vick didn't lose 2 years, his job, his endorsement, his home. Nor did anyone take them from him. He willingly gave them away. Now he wants them back. The NFL owes him nothing. To say he deserves "the right" to compete for a job in the NFL is just laughable. If he wants to play, let him try out for another league.
Perhaps you haven't heard, but Goodell has not suspended Burress yet. And the injunctions the union have sought were against the TEAM's fines and suspensions, not the league's. Since the judge who moved back his trial must be a Giants fan, expect Goodell to suspend him soon.
-
Actually, there were a number of stories during Spygate that stated or implied that players and coaches at least were pretty much told to say nothing negative about Spygate in terms of what they really felt. One I recall in particular was written by someone on SI.com (either King or Z) at the combine that year and was quoting folks in attendance (mainly coaches, but some players) anonymously and "off the record" for that reason and guess what, those folks were ripschitt mad at Belicheat and the Pats*, but were pretty much told to gag it officially. Folks closing ranks for their overall long-term mutual benefit happens all the time, even when some individuals in the group find it very distasteful to do so. Why do you find that so hard to believe, especially when applied to the NFL, which is run notoriously well (read disciplined) among sports leagues. Why, just look at the united front the owners are putting up in their dealings over the CBA recently, for example. I'm sure that there are differing opinions there (must be, since some, like your owner were among the architects of the original deal they're now trying to break--funny how "business geniuses" like Kraft and Jones seem to get let off the hook for that one, yet guys like Wilson and Brown who voted against it were so chastised as dottering old fools at the time), but we don't really see them, least of all in the press.
I would be inclined to lend these conspiracy nuts some credibility if someone could explain why it would make sense for owners to go along with a plan to make the league look like it's run by crooks and a Commissioner who blatantly favors one team over the rest. That makes sense to you, too?
I have no doubt some coaches and players were pissed off, but they didn't have the financial stakes the cheated owners have. A SB loss takes a lot more money out of an owners pocket than players and coaches. Why wouldn't the owners demand that BB be suspended---you know, for the good of the League's reputation? Why would sweeping under the rug "look" better for everyone? What is the "long-term mutual benefit"?
It just isn't plausible. It is just as likely that they were aware of the history of video taping and just didn't consider it a capital offense. Perhaps they didn't want the video taping investigation to dig any deeper...
As for the CBA, these guys made a deal, secured TV contracts, play continued and they are now opting out for a different deal. Upshaw's dead. The players and their union will huff and puff until they stop getting game checks and start seeing the Joe Montanas of the league crossing the picket lines. 30 of 32 owners know this.
-
He has a killer first step.
-
But again, look at it from Goodell's point of view. The worst thing in the world is that only Belicheat* cheated, if the cheating was significant enough to help them win even a few of their games. That would make people think maybe NE* should forfeit a championship or two. That at ALL costs Goodell couldn't allow to avoid harming the image of the NFL. The whole thing had to be minimized and these were the steps taken:
1.) Goodell made a very quick ruling and made the penalty mostly a matter of money and a draft choice. The draft was a long way off and by then a lot of people wouldn't even notice that NE* was missing a pick, esp. since they had 2 #1 draft choices. The thing Goodell could not allow was that Belicheat* would be suspended for even one game, because that would draw a lot more attention to the situation.
2.) Rumors quickly surfaced of other allegations against NE* such as shutting off opponents mikes during games, and using mikes on def. players to hear off. signals, taping the Rams practice at the SB, etc. Also, it was stated in the media that the Jets, Bills, and Fish were all unhappy with the small penalty against the Patsies*. Goodell was forced to at least make it seem like he was looking for more possible violations. He told NE* to surrender all the tapes it had and sign an affidavit saying it handed over all evidence (as if Kraft and Belicheat care anything about ethics or the NFL laws). Goodell announced that more penalties may be forthcoming based on this.
3.) But Goodell quickly announced that all the evidence had now been safely destroyed and no further penalties were needed based on this. Case closed for the NFL. All the other items like shutting off mikes were ignored. Mike Millen, then still Lions GM, but also a member of the powerful NFL rules committee, who had previously brought up allegations now was backpedaling and saying that all that was in the past and if there had been a big enough issue (shutting off the mikes) it should have been addressed in the past and now it was too late, time to move on. Also the AFCE teams all said in concert that it was time to move on and they didn't have any more interest in the case. More damage control by Goodell.
4.) The the major media like ESPN and others kicked in with damage control. Peope like Jimmy Johnson stated he had done the same thing, etc. and it was no big deal. The NFL promoted this unofficially to allow the fans to feel like it was no big deal and that NE* hadn't won unfairly.
5.) The thing to remember is that the NFL, ESPN, former coaches and players, all have an incentive to make the NFL look legitimate kind of like both political parties, major corporations and institutions all work to make the USA seem legitimate in what it does. Things get swept under the carpet so that we don't stop believing in the system, NFL or USA as the case may be.
So Belicheat* had no need to play a card to play with Goodell to intimidate him by saying he would reveal cheating by others. Goodell was happy that people like JJ said he had also cheated, because it made it seem like this whole thing was no big deal. Also Belicheat had nothing to fear from Goodell because Goodell wanted this thing swept under a carpet a lot more than Belicheat* and Kraft* could hope for. No way Belicheat* could even be forced to resign because that would fix a cloud over the NFL forever anytime the name Belicheat* came up. Living in NE, I remember how calm Belicheat* was discussing his meeting with Goodell--the cheat* was never nervous because he* understood all this better than you and I could.
Wow, you need to get out of NH, brother.
So all of the owners accepted that Super Bowls were stolen by the Pats. In addition, they willigly participated in the Commish's coverup. And despite knowing that all "intelligent fans" thought this was an outrage and compromised the very sanctitiy of the league, they did it anyway because it would be...........better for the league's reputation?
Are you for real? Does that seem logical to you?
And the press went along? Because that's what they do for the NFL--because "hey, there's no story there"? Boy, the press must really hate MLB, becuase they are continuously trying to destroy that league's reputation with all these endless reports of the best players (all players?) on the juice.
And the example you give is the political system in the US--how both parties tow line to keep the people faithful to the ol USA?
Maybe you didn't read about it or see it on TV, but there was a major change in the political leadership over the past 2-3 years brought on by many factors but won mainly by one party's incessant bashing of the other party's blunders.
Man, you asbolutely could not have picked a worse example than American politics to describe an organization all working together.
-
Time to get your viewpoints straight, pally. First of all, no one can dispute 2 things: TO is a great player and has never had any legal troubles. He may not be nice, but boo freakin' hoo! This isn't tiddly-winks they're playing. Judging by the way you've gone after Bills players who suck but are clean and nice (JP) or players who are good but have legal issues (Lynch), you should be loving a guy like TO. And you don't strike me as a touchy-feely guy when it comes to caring about whether a person is nicey nice or not. But since you're such a Bills fan, you latch-onto him calling out teammates who aren't pulling their weight and/or suck. It's a joke. Even moreso since I saw what you said about the Eagles never coming close to making the SB again because of McNabb, while Garcia and Romo have done nothing to earn your love, if not Romo deserving ridicule for that Cabo thing.
We all saw how Flutie acted when he came back to the NFL and worked his way back to being a starter (about 5 years too late, which was the point). He divided the Bills' lockerroom and went on TV and said that he would have won the Titans playoff game, when his poor play at the end of the 1999 season is what got him benched and when it was the ST's that was directly responsible for losing that playoff game. That's about as "infamous" as you are trying to make TO out to be, and Flutie isn't even in the same zip code as TO as a player (forget the CFL). And there was other stuff, as Jim McMahon has alluded to, which involved him trying to divide the Bears' lockerroom. But since he didn't commit double homicide, and since Flutie was a sideshow for a couple years and then faded back into relative obscurity, no one cares.
But if you think that Flutie was a "nice guy," you're as simple as I think you are.
Look, I cannot make this any simpler for you. I have never stated that TO was not a great receiver, nor have I suggested that he was a criminal. I have been harsh with ML becuase his moronic behavior has cost his team and his fans (it absolutely doesn't bother you that he has done this--another way we are different). I think McNabb is a choker, but he made it throught the playoffs in 04 without TO. Jp sucked and when he played poorly, he was quick to share the blame. When he was benched for the 3rd time in his brief career, he moped and isolated himself. Yeah, great guy.
No, I don't hate TO. I'm just pointing out how many on this board have bent over backwards to ignore or trivialize what this guy has done with each team with who he has played. (I am "making him out to be"??--this is TOs biography, bro!) If TO was a Pat or a Jet--you would be falling over yourself to mock their aquisition of him.
To demonstrate how you need to rwist reality to feel better about your newfound love for TO, you have to say he is the same as Flutie was, despite all that is documented about TO and the lack of same for DF. You still cannot back up any of this, except to say that, by pointing out to his teammates that he was better QB than the guy who replaced him, he was "dividing the lockerroom." Well, guess what--he was right--and all of his teammates soon realized this as they were stuck with RJ until he was mercifully released.
Another example of your holiday from reality is that you believe, or at least pretend to, that TO is only "calling out" poorly performing teammates. Ah, no--he is "calling out" his QB's because they are not, based on his assessment, throwing him enough passes. It has nothing to do with "winning" or "teamwork". It is about maximizing the glory of TO. How can you not understand this? How is this being a "leader" or a great teammate?
-
This is all just so simple for Jerruh. Romo can be a leader on his own, so he cuts the leader and makes Romo the leader by default. How can that not work? And Williams can't do jack squat with TO around and hogging the ball, so he cuts the best receiver on the team to allow for Williams' ascension. Brava!
You still haven't caught on that the Jonses didn't think that leveraging his popularity with teeamates to influence them against their QB in order to advance his own personal glory ("that MF won't throw a brother any passes! Now what y'all think is up with that??") did not make TO a "leader".
Is it possible that you still don't understand their thinking? I initially asumed you did, but the above highlighted quote from your post makes it clear you do not.
-
You didn't know that OJ was smacking-around Nicole, or his first wife Marguerite. And when he was first named a suspect, you were shocked to learn that he might have killed Nicole (FYI I'm acting like you and presuming to know what you were thinking). And the newspapers, magazines, ESPN, etc. were all around back then. You probably don't even know half the stuff Kelly and Bruce were said to have done.
And Flutie is and always has been a shameless self-promoter. Maybe he hasn't spit on a player or called a teammate gay (again, both of which I said were wrong), but he's no less a jerk than you think TO is. The media has just fooled you into thinking he's some great guy who is just like you and me, while that whole 2-year stint with the Bills cemented him as being the guy who got jerked-around despite the fact that "he just won." Again maybe if his ego wasn't getting so stroked in the CFL, he might have come back to the NFL and worked his way to being a starter, rather than expecting it to happen and then dividing the lockerroom if it didn't.
Thanks for the excellent OJ example to prove my point. The media did a great job of exposing OJ as a serial abuser after his wife was killed. Yet you cannot answer why they did not provide us with the details of Flutie's TO-like poor behavior when at the height of his popualrity, nor have they since---over all these years.
Why has the media chosen instead to "fool" me by painting a portrait of DF that is actually the opposite of what you say he truly is? Explain this.
And you keep saying that I am "presuming to know what you are thinking", yet you won't tell me what information you have that no one else has. You simply keep repeating that there's this body of info that you kno wof and the press refuses to report on. I call you on it and you produce nothing except the same ridiculous claim.
Just tell us what you got--it must be a boatload, because you are likely the first guy to put Flutie on the same level of infamy as TO.
And by the way, Flutie DID "come back to the NFL and worked his way to being a starter"--for the Bills in fact. It was in all the papers at the time.
Does Eli Manning Deserve To Be The Highest Paid QB...
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
No, the highest paid player should be a slob like Haynesworth who will be entirely forgotten in fewer than ten years.
I don't understand the point of this post. It's a market and any player's value is exactly the highest amount any team will pay him.
Why even ask the question?