Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

ESPN selects Cam Newton's 2010 college season


tiger7_88

Recommended Posts

Its a game pointing out that most years this board read like the comments section of a Cam article?

I would hope portraying an entire race as an eternal victim is a game to you and not something you actually think is constructive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah I saw KT posted in this thread and I wondered how he'd turn it into a racial discussion.

No doubt dude lol

Like I said earlier though the NBA forums have been quiet lately so the troll has gotta eat

PS lots of rookies in this thread who don't have a lot of XP dealing with Queen Taharaq. This will be the hottest thread of the day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would hope portraying an entire race as an eternal victim is a game to you and not something you actually think is constructive.

And spamming the comments section of Cam articles because people hate losing to black QBs is? Why are dudes so weak and insecure like that? Its sad man, Id hate myself if I was that cowardly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had nothing against Vick until he drowned and electrocuted dogs for amusement.

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.

Why is it so hard for anyone to convey a thought around here without going way over the top with the facts for no other purpose that I can see other than just being cute?

Cam's senior year at Auburn was awesome. Why some people are automatically defending him when he needs no defense says a lot about how confident they are in Cam's clean image.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Why is it so hard for anyone to convey a thought around here without going way over the top with the facts for no other purpose that I can see other than just being cute?

Cam's senior year at Auburn was awesome. Why some people are automatically defending him when he needs no defense says a lot about how confident they are in Cam's clean image.

According to the Federal Indictment he did: http://www.thesmokin...ndicted?page=16

Is that fact enough for you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And spamming the comments section of Cam articles because people hate losing to black QBs is? Why are dudes so weak and insecure like that? Its sad man, Id hate myself if I was that cowardly.

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

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And spamming the comments section of Cam articles because people hate losing to black QBs is? Why are dudes so weak and insecure like that? Its sad man, Id hate myself if I was that cowardly.

Most of the spamming seems to be coming from fans of other SEC teams. "Black QB" isn't the reason they're whining.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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?

Link to comment
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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


×
×
  • Create New...