Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Moonax
Go back and read the dates. Read what I said
Stringer was a member of the Vikings line in 1998
The Vikings line I gave you was 1988. A 10 year difference.
The Vikings line was 'big' then.
The largest lineman drafted in 1988 was Tony Mandrich at 315.
.
|
Ok, my and (someone else’s, not you!) misread that, still players do get bigger and stronger, they have in all sports. 40-60lbs over 16yrs that’s 2.5 – 3.75/lbs a year. You also need to account heights in that.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Moonax
John Rocker lost his job because he couldn't throw strikes not for being a racist or homophobe.
Had he still been able to strike people out then he would still be treated like a hero. That to me is fucked up.
|
A Hero? No. Do I agree with his views, no, but he’s allowed to have them. He doesn’t have to like someone because they are gay, or black, or Jewish etc. It’s stupid, but not illegal, if he acts on it, i.e.: has a company and won’t hire blacks or burns a cross on a Jews lawn, that’s illegal. Not all athletes are treated as “Hero’s” not sure where you get that idea.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Moonax
You claimed that the NFL has a 'strict' drugs policy. The standard penalty for failing a drugs test is a 2 year ban. For failing a second test is a lifetime ban. In the NFL the penalty for failing a second test is a 4 week ban.
|
Standard? Whose standard? The NFL is also the only league I know of that has policies and has suspended players for off-field issues such as “wife-beating”.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Moonax
No one who does a 'normal' job is paid millions of pounds or has sponsorship deals, nor are they treated as heroes by the media and thousands of people. Thus your argument is irrelevant.
|
Yeah, that makes sense, no it doesn’t that’s you just avoiding questions and counter argument. You don’t lose your job because you break the law unless it affects your job. That being said, athletes who have had problems don’t get sponsorship deals or treated like the so-called “Hero” that you seem to think there all treated as. People can like and cheer for who they want, that’s their choice, people cheered Hitler, doesn’t mean you or I agree with that, but they did.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Moonax
Are you telling me that Joe Buck has never sat down and read an article saying that Pete Rose should be forgiven for gambling, etc? Does Joe Buck live in a cupboard during the week and only come out on sundays for games?.
|
No, but if you want to pick on exactly what he said, and ignore any reasoning, then let’s go with exactly what you said he said (again, the quotes I’ve seen don’t have the words your using) “SEEN” is the key word your claiming he said, and if that’s the case, he would have had to watched Pete Rose gamble to make your argument.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Moonax
The very fact that you are trying to argue a position of saying that criminal and anti-social behavior should not have a bearing on how we view people demonstrates that you place conduct on the field as more important (and thus worse) than wife beating or racism.
|
Again, could you stop making things up that I never said (you don’t look like Kane Knight), I personally do view them differently, I think someone who hits their wife is scum, but does it mean they should be fired from their job? Then what? What job are they allowed to have? Or do they just go on unemployment and when that runs out, social security? How do we decide what crimes are worth someone having their life ruined and someone not getting a 2nd chance? If that’s the way you feel, then why don’t we just give anyone who breaks the law the death penalty, because if they can’t be allowed to have a job, and we should all look down upon them…
No one is saying what Moss did was worse then someone beating their wife, or drug use, etc… Let’s remember this is a guy though who tried to run over a cop (or meter maid?).
But in some people’s opinion, what he did was wrong; does that mean its worse then other hardcore crimes? No.
Let me give you this example.
Someone breaks into a home, no one is there, and they steal a TV and leaves.
Someone breaks into a home, rape and murders the family and steals a TV and leaves.
Both are wrong, both are crimes, both should have penalty, but clearly one is worse then the other.