Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 131
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted
How can you not conclude, objectively, that Lynch is not a moron (pick a different descriptor if you need to)? See, this is my point. You (and so might I, in fact) may sit down with Marshawn and afterwards say: "he's actually a really nice kid". But that assessment does not disprove that he is a moron. His actions have proven this. He has willingly placed his livelihood, his freedom, his team and his fans hopes at risk.

 

 

Again, I do not doubt that TO may be a very nice guy in those moments when he steps away from the cameras. But his public behavior (and it seems it is all for public consumption with this guy) is just not normal--even for a star professional athlete in America.

 

If you disagree that TO is accurately portrayed as a pariah based on his own words and behavior, than I'm not sure how you are being objective. If I found TO pleasant in person, that subjective assessment would not change the conclusions about him I had already made based on historical facts. He has berated and belittled his teammates, his coaches, he has spit in an opponent's face, he has made numerous claims that he was not properly respected or celebrated by whoever his current team was, he has disrespected opposing teams on the field purely for his own edification, he has done almost anything to get attention--including the bizarre driveway workout and the even more bizarre "non suicide attempt". You know all this, yet I just don't see where it finds it's way into your posts to balance your impression of him based on personal interaction. Have we all just misunderstood TO?

 

 

 

 

I've made it clear that I simply don't believe what he claims. There is no logic to it. He has made a circus of the whole endevour and everyone will know where he lives as soon as he moves in (he'll tweet us!), wherever that is. And cameras will certainly be in his home.

 

What I don't understand is why two journalists would not be more skeptical of TO's crying "foul" on his landlord here--you know, that he gave her explicit instructions to keep the deal "confidential". It's really not that much of a stretch, is it? You balance all the self-crafted drama with this house stuff so far against "he is a nice guy in person" and the nice guy gets the benefit of the doubt?

 

Well, then. Amen to Mr. TO's righteous indignation, I guess. But in the end, he is an entertainer--and he knows this, so none of this is very significant in the grand scheme of things.

 

Just something to argue about until he starts catching TDs.

indeed, you've made it clear that you simply don't believe his claims. i get that.

i've made it clear that i think you're opinion is wrong and nothing you will say or write will change my opinion until i encounter something with T.O. that leads me to change my opinion.

this all began because i disagreed with your point, when you said it was "inconceivable," and went on to suggest that you might have been on firmer ground had you written "it might not be inconceivable." and you continue to bang your drum of stubborn absolutes, thinking the more you bang it the more we'll what, fold? see the light?

 

you've shared your opinion. you've called players all the names that you'd like. great. you think people are morons. i personally don't view people this way. i generally care to see people as who they are, people, having good and bad qualities, some more and some less.

of course, you being perfect, well ...

 

jw

Posted
I've made it clear that I simply don't believe what he claims. There is no logic to it. He has made a circus of the whole endevour and everyone will know where he lives as soon as he moves in (he'll tweet us!), wherever that is. And cameras will certainly be in his home.

 

What I don't understand is why two journalists would not be more skeptical of TO's crying "foul" on his landlord here--you know, that he gave her explicit instructions to keep the deal "confidential". It's really not that much of a stretch, is it? You balance all the self-crafted drama with this house stuff so far against "he is a nice guy in person" and the nice guy gets the benefit of the doubt?

 

Well, then. Amen to Mr. TO's righteous indignation, I guess. But in the end, he is an entertainer--and he knows this, so none of this is very significant in the grand scheme of things.

 

Just something to argue about until he starts catching TDs.

There is absolutely logic to it, which I've already pointed out. He loves the spotlight, but only when it's his decision to step onstage.

 

And consider this: I'm merely speculating here, but what if a tour of the new digs was supposed to be part of the VH1 show, and the Buffalo TV news footage blew that "exclusive" all to hell?

Posted
Actually, VOR, I know it was directed at me, or 'people like me'. Like I said, it didn't go over anyone's head - it was far too imbecilic for that. Also had a very juvenile quality, particularly at the outset, which it why I think caused me and others to find it so repugnant. Maybe if it was even slightly more tolerable I would have made it to the Jessica Simpson part.

Compared to the Hitler-TO video, that many seemed to think was the greatest thing since sliced bread (I thought it was okay...back 7 years ago when I first saw it when it was about Bledsoe being traded to the Bills), the production values aren't even close. But that video, as I said, was taken from a Hollywood movie and someone pasted subtitles on it. Not too hard to do and it didn't take much creativity, outside of coming-up with a funny line or two. If you can get past the production values and rap song, this video is actually a pretty good satire of the "TO is a cancer" saga, as well as being a creative piece of work for the reasons I mentioned. Maybe if the creator had more time and resources, or could have taken a pre-made film and rap over it, it would look as glitzy as the other one.

 

Problem is, I never said T.O was a "criminal", or a "cancer". I'm actually quite happy that Buffalo signed him. I do plead 100% guilty to calling him an "attention-starved, mentally-arrested, 36-year-old adolescent". Those words do not imply criminal behavior, do they? I didn't accuse him of being a problem in the locker room, did I?

 

Like I said - I'm glad he's a Buffalo Bill. I expect great things from him on the field. I just find his need - particularly off the field - to constantly be in the spotlight and draw attention to himself more than a bit narcissistic and immature.

Welcome to the world of celebrities, Sen. They are who they are because of what they are. Many are insecure and self-centered, mostly from troubled upbringings. If you read TO's autoiography, you'd realize that the kid had several strikes against him from the start. But he managed to make something of himself. He's a great player and he's never been in legal trouble, which more than a few people here these days seem to think are the most important things (witness the attitudes towards JP and Lynch). Except when said player is a "media whore." :doh:

 

My advice is to stop worrying about his off-field stuff, unless it involves legal action taken against him. Concern yourself more with his on-field performance.

Guest dog14787
Posted
There is absolutely logic to it, which I've already pointed out. He loves the spotlight, but only when it's his decision to step onstage.

 

And consider this: I'm merely speculating here, but what if a tour of the new digs was supposed to be part of the VH1 show, and the Buffalo TV news footage blew that "exclusive" all to hell?

 

 

Good point, and I'll bet your speculations are right on the money.

Posted
There is absolutely logic to it, which I've already pointed out. He loves the spotlight, but only when it's his decision to step onstage.

 

And consider this: I'm merely speculating here, but what if a tour of the new digs was supposed to be part of the VH1 show, and the Buffalo TV news footage blew that "exclusive" all to hell?

 

Your speculation is likely correct, Lori. Absolutely plausible. Which is consistent with my now often repeated suspicion that his protestations about this violation of his newly prized privacy are bogus.

 

And jw, spare me the sanctimony (this isn't about "perfection"--talk about a guy who deals in absolutes)--you are aware of the modern usage of the words "moron" and "pariah". You understand why I would use these terms to describe ML and TO, yet you dismiss it as "name calling". You are being disingenuous.

 

But, hey, maybe, through your personal interaction with him, you'll be the first journalist to find the "real" TO; to portray the true man when all of your colleagues around the country have failed.

Posted
Your speculation is likely correct, Lori. Absolutely plausible. Which is consistent with my now often repeated suspicion that his protestations about this violation of his newly prized privacy are bogus.

 

And jw, spare me the sanctimony (this isn't about "perfection"--talk about a guy who deals in absolutes)--you are aware of the modern usage of the words "moron" and "pariah". You understand why I would use these terms to describe ML and TO, yet you dismiss it as "name calling". You are being disingenuous.

 

But, hey, maybe, through your personal interaction with him, you'll be the first journalist to find the "real" TO; to portray the true man when all of your colleagues around the country have failed.

waitasecond. son of a bleep.

i wouldn't refer to anyone as a moron, not even you. and the whole pariah thing doesn't exactly jibe when considering that it was TO who helped get the Eagles to the Super Bowl and then, despite numerous doctors and trainers telling him that he shouldn't play, he went off and nearly won the game for them single-handedlly on offense. maybe there is something in the modern definition of pariah that i'm not geting.

and as for being the "first journalist" to find the "real TO," i don't exactly understand what you're getting at Mr. Pulitzer.

once again, you bang on your stubburn drum of absolutes, discount everything postive that's ever been written about Owens, dismiss any suggestion that he is nothing but an pariah and then attempt to explain to me how to do my job.

 

what high horse are you riding, sir, and who gets the job of cleaning up behind you because there's a lot of stuff that requires being shoveled.

 

mother of god, you are so enormously bullheaded that pigs and asses bow down before you.

 

jw

Posted
waitasecond. son of a bleep.

i wouldn't refer to anyone as a moron, not even you. and the whole pariah thing doesn't exactly jibe when considering that it was TO who helped get the Eagles to the Super Bowl and then, despite numerous doctors and trainers telling him that he shouldn't play, he went off and nearly won the game for them single-handedlly on offense. maybe there is something in the modern definition of pariah that i'm not geting.

and as for being the "first journalist" to find the "real TO," i don't exactly understand what you're getting at Mr. Pulitzer.

once again, you bang on your stubburn drum of absolutes, discount everything postive that's ever been written about Owens, dismiss any suggestion that he is nothing but an pariah and then attempt to explain to me how to do my job.

 

what high horse are you riding, sir, and who gets the job of cleaning up behind you because there's a lot of stuff that requires being shoveled.

 

mother of god, you are so enormously bullheaded that pigs and asses bow down before you.

 

jw

Welcome to the altered states of Mr. WEO. We're still not sure if the pompous ass personality is his true self, and we're wondering when the Bills fan personality will ever make an appearance.

Posted
Welcome to the altered states of Mr. WEO. We're still not sure if the pompous ass personality is his true self, and we're wondering when the Bills fan personality will ever make an appearance.

thanks. i thought it was just me.

 

jw

Posted
waitasecond. son of a bleep.

i wouldn't refer to anyone as a moron, not even you. and the whole pariah thing doesn't exactly jibe when considering that it was TO who helped get the Eagles to the Super Bowl and then, despite numerous doctors and trainers telling him that he shouldn't play, he went off and nearly won the game for them single-handedlly on offense. maybe there is something in the modern definition of pariah that i'm not geting.

and as for being the "first journalist" to find the "real TO," i don't exactly understand what you're getting at Mr. Pulitzer.

once again, you bang on your stubburn drum of absolutes, discount everything postive that's ever been written about Owens, dismiss any suggestion that he is nothing but an pariah and then attempt to explain to me how to do my job.

 

what high horse are you riding, sir, and who gets the job of cleaning up behind you because there's a lot of stuff that requires being shoveled.

 

mother of god, you are so enormously bullheaded that pigs and asses bow down before you.

 

jw

Relax, jw. TOs flair for the dramatic seems to rubbing off on you.

 

Pariah: outcast.

 

Why don't you google Terrell Owens pariah and find out what some of your colleagues have written in thsi regard.

Posted

How can a "pariah" be so well-liked by his teammates, and at least in the case of the Cowboys, the leader on offense? About the only place he could be considered a "pariah" is when it came to the Eagles and Cowboys' organizations, who "cast him out." But hey, never let it be said that Mr. WEO needs facts, or ever let them stand in his way.

×
×
  • Create New...