Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

tiger7_88

ESPN selects Cam Newton's 2010 college season

62 posts in this topic

I don't want to come off as defending Vick. I've never really been a fan. This comment however is how one might define the words "irresponsible" or "defaming".

Vick owned the house and it is unknown just how much he knew about these acts when you discuss having the dog fights all the way to the horrific ways the wounded or "weaker" animals were disposed of. I think if it had been proven that he was flipping the switch or holding the animals under water he would never see another day in the NFL much less be close to seeing freedom again.

He is guilty and he is a scumbag but nobody believes this guy was the trigger man or had anything to do with how the animals were destroyed. Maybe he did, maybe he didn't, but that has not been proven and it's pretty reckless to hang that on the guy like he was grinning in the crowd while these things happened or like it was all his personal doing.

Didn't Vick admit to agreeing to the hanging of 6-8 dogs that underperformed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't Vick admit to agreeing to the hanging of 6-8 dogs that underperformed?

not that I ever heard. If so, then he should still be behind bars IMO. Anyway, people "admit" all sorts of things in court despite whether it happened or not or if there is any proof or not. Deals are deals and to admit something as part of a deal typically means there is no proof of what you are admitting to. If there were, no admission would be necessary.

Plus agreeing to the hanging off dogs and "electrocuting and drowning dogs for amusement" is quite different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Plus agreeing to the hanging off dogs and "electrocuting and drowning dogs for amusement" is quite different.

They are different, but I can't say it's not as bad. Funding the operation, facilitating the venue, and agreeing to that torture is just as bad. Just because he wanted to keep his hands as clean as possible doesn't mean it's not as bad as actually doing it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They aren't different, but I can't say it's not as bad. Funding the operation, facilitating the venue, and agreeing to that torture is just as bad. Just because he wanted to keep his hands as clean as possible doesn't mean it's not as bad as actually doing it.

I see your point and I agree with you. I don't see this as a mastermind of the conspiracy situation though. This guy owned a house. That is the only thing ever proven against him personally. In the house he owned lots of hanus poo went down. In the case of pulling a trigger under orders from a mob boss, yeah the guy is dead and he who gave the order is guilty just like the trigger puller. It goes a bit further when you talk about this kind of cruelty. Kinda like most "hit men" would have issues with killing a kid or a woman, it takes a sick person to do what was done to these animals. I just can't see Vick ever being in the league again if there was ever any proof or real evidence that pointed to him actually "doing the deed".

Are both parties guilty? Of course. Are they both guilty of doing the same thing. I don't think so. I may be wrong about that.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey this isn't a topic of race, but I'll make it anyways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what do you call it when we troll a facebook page for a Saints*** event? Is that because the QB is black too?

I call being a lame ass with too much free time on your hands. If you had a life you wouldnt have time to worry about the Saints**.

The only thing I'm seeing from you is that the only reason you care about Cam or Vick is because the color of their skin.

The only reason you care about Chuck Norris and Jerry Richardson is the color of their skin. If they were arabic muslims, you wouldnt have Chuck in your avy and you wouldnt pull for Jerry's team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Vick hate has nothing to do with skin color or style of play...

1. He was the Falcon QB. Explains Panther hate

2. NFL attempted to make him the face of the league at one point....he was never good enough for the hype

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can he get banned already. I'm so damn tired of getting on here to get told im scared of black qbs, or rich black people. Then he whines when MRTD uses racial undertones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only reason you care about Chuck Norris and Jerry Richardson is the color of their skin. If they were arabic muslims, you wouldnt have Chuck in your avy and you wouldnt pull for Jerry's team.

Wow, the fact that you truly believe this is proof enough to me that you are a racist.

The only reason you hate Jerry Richardson is the color of his skin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

KT's mistake is simply painting with a broad brush.

many of his points regarding hidden as well as blatant biases against black quarterbacks are valid, particularly in the context of southern college/pro teams. unfortunately the ignorant and uneducated have made these sorts of qualifications necessary; thankfully they are being gradually forced to the wacko fringe of society, where they will disappear quietly.

men like cam newton will be an effective agent in this process.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Of course, he's so massive he has his own gravitational pull. 
    • You miss the point. Taylor was here before. We picked him because of what he could do for our wide receivers not because he had some great knowledge no other person had on the staff. Shula and Rivera and Gettleman studied multiple college systems for months before signing Taylor or drafting McCaffrey or Curtis and would have drafted the same whether Taylor was here or not. They liked the way Taylor developed McCaffrey which showed his talent but Stanford's offense wasn't Taylors idea or unique to him. Shula has a connection to Taylor as early as when Shula was at Alabama.  The debate was whether Taylor was chosen to replace Shula because Shula didn't know what to do to run a college offense and if he screwed up Taylor would replace him. And that Taylor was the reason and most influential in getting McCaffrey. I said it wasn't even close to the truth and this plan predated Taylor and was more thorough and we'll thought out. Everything since then just confirms I was right once again like usual.  
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      18,243
    • Most Online
      2,867

    Newest Member
    GSO Goat
    Joined