Nfl Network Special Top 10 LB corps.

[ksm7]

Nah, the dog doesn't have a point. If the dog was talking about any other player in history other than LT, the dog might have a point, but the dog's point was stupid and doesn't make sense. Even the dog must realize this. LT was not a product of the system. The system was a product of LT. Anyone who knows one iota of football knows that LT changed the OLB position. The dog has therefore proven himself a fool for so much as insinuating that LT was a product of the Giant's system. The dog is a jealous Giant's hater that wastes hours of his life debating about a team he doesn't even like. The dog needs to take into serious consideration the dog's priorities.

 

Go sit in the corner for 3 days, numbnuts.

 

Not sure what the Dog would have to be jealous of, but that is neither here nor there...Taylor was good, the Dog agrees. The Dog's points continue to be that, one, he was most successful with coaches that developed a scheme to utilize his talents, two, other teams developed schemes to attack the Giant's DEFENSE, not just Taylor, and three, there is no way to logically argue that one NFL player can be considered the best ever in the sport (which, by the way, happens to be true of any sport)...and as far as wasting time, the Dog finds many people here entertaining, and if entertainment is a waste of time, then the Dog is left to believe that you have very little joy in your life...quite sad indeed...

[randoff]

You see randoof, this is what happens when you join the show late...The Dog is not exactly sure what the last paragraph above is about, except to further highlight Joe Montana's career, which the Dog has been doing all along...

The Doff doesn't quite understand about joining the 'show late'(the Doff has put in much input in this thread)....the Doff was mereley pointing out POSSIBLE hate for a team that beat the Cowboys. Doff still thinks either you're a Cardinal fan or a Cowboy fan. Just for the record, Doff-ster is NOT one of those guys that bashes other fans for liking other teams BUT the Doff enjoys friendly adult banter... ...let's keep it professional and courtieous and we can all 'sleep' at night, umm k?.

 

Again it would be ok in the Doff's book if you came out and said "The Dog has been a long time Cardinal fan".

[ksm7]

The Doff doesn't quite understand about joining the 'show late'(the Doff has put in much input in this thread)....the Doff was mereley pointing out POSSIBLE hate for a team that beat the Cowboys. Doff still thinks either you're a Cardinal fan or a Cowboy fan. Just for the record, Doff-ster is NOT one of those guys that bashes other fans for liking other teams BUT the Doff enjoys friendly adult banter... ...let's keep it professional and courtieous and we can all 'sleep' at night, umm k?.

 

Again it would be ok in the Doff's book if you came out and said "The Dog has been a long time Cardinal fan".

 

The Dog is no Cardinals fan, this much is true...nothing against them, but they are a tad boring as a franchise...and the Dog has stated before that he is no fan of Dallas, but since that is a team that seems to be debated often here, then that is quite often the direction things go in...if you notice, the Dog has never once started anything on behalf of the cowboys - it is just that when someone does, and it leads others to state silly arguments (it does go both ways mind you, and in all your valuable time spent searching past threads, you missed times when the Dog has eluded to not being a cowboys fan)...anyway, the Dog is and continues to be entertained by certain characters here, but cautions who you come to the defense of, there are certainly those here that are undefensible...time to be off to St. Kitts...

[randoff]

The Dog is no Cardinals fan, this much is true...nothing against them, but they are a tad boring as a franchise...and the Dog has stated before that he is no fan of Dallas, but since that is a team that seems to be debated often here, then that is quite often the direction things go in...if you notice, the Dog has never once started anything on behalf of the cowboys - it is just that when someone does, and it leads others to state silly arguments (it does go both ways mind you, and in all your valuable time spent searching past threads, you missed times when the Dog has eluded to not being a cowboys fan)...anyway, the Dog is and continues to be entertained by certain characters here, but cautions who you come to the defense of, there are certainly those here that are undefensible...time to be off to St. Kitts...

"The question is: What moves U?"

The Doff can agree on the 'entertanment' aspect of these boards. It's why the Doff enjoys the time posting here. And for the record the Doff should not have to "come to the defense of" other fellow posters. The Doff would like to think that posters, errrr Giants fans should (and they do) defend themselves in their own unique way. Diversity is a great thing! Opinions are good too....It's made this Giants forum very enlightening this off season. What else would we talk about IF the Dog and Egg weren't here spinning us around?

 

Hey, the Doff would like to repeat....it's okay to have a favorite team other than the Giants...but the Doff cautions YOU in what you discuss about the Giants. Obviously this is a Giants based 'crowd' what did u expect?

(P.S. Have fun in St. Kitts, ciao)

"...run, jump, swim....What moves U?"

[BIGBLUE01]

The Dog is no Cardinals fan, this much is true...nothing against them, but they are a tad boring as a franchise...and the Dog has stated before that he is no fan of Dallas, but since that is a team that seems to be debated often here, then that is quite often the direction things go in...if you notice, the Dog has never once started anything on behalf of the cowboys - it is just that when someone does, and it leads others to state silly arguments (it does go both ways mind you, and in all your valuable time spent searching past threads, you missed times when the Dog has eluded to not being a cowboys fan)...anyway, the Dog is and continues to be entertained by certain characters here, but cautions who you come to the defense of, there are certainly those here that are undefensible...time to be off to St. Kitts...

 

HAHAHA.......uhhhh OK.

[ksm7]

HAHAHA.......uhhhh OK.

 

The Dog applauds you - another brilliant response to a post that did not involve you...in the future, since you have accepted your new title of the Italian Hotdog's court jester, try to remember to come only when the Dog directly addresses you, you silly little guy, you...and if you would be so kind as to replace the picture of strahan with one of you in a court jester hat, that would certainly earn you a few bonus points with the Dog...

[Nesta]

Not sure what the Dog would have to be jealous of, but that is neither here nor there...Taylor was good, the Dog agrees. The Dog's points continue to be that, one, he was most successful with coaches that developed a scheme to utilize his talents, two, other teams developed schemes to attack the Giant's DEFENSE, not just Taylor, and three, there is no way to logically argue that one NFL player can be considered the best ever in the sport (which, by the way, happens to be true of any sport)...and as far as wasting time, the Dog finds many people here entertaining, and if entertainment is a waste of time, then the Dog is left to believe that you have very little joy in your life...quite sad indeed...

 

He was most successful with Giants' coaches? And what other teams are you comparing that to dog?

He didn't play for anyone else.

 

It is a stupid stupid argument you're trying to make.

Terrell Davis, yes, very well could've been a product of the Denver system.

A man who made the pro bowl for 10 consecutive years? Yeah he just might be the greatest to ever play the game, who would've been just as successful anywhere else.

 

You know why he would've had success anywhere? Because, any team would've changed their defense to suit LT. Product of the system? No fucking way, that's retarded.

 

Stupid stupid argument.

 

You're here for 'entertainment'? LOL right. If you believe that, there's no one here more sad than the little weiner. Little weiner is a bit harsh. How bout little pussy, since you're petrified to confess your NFL team of choice.

[ksm7]

He was most successful with Giants' coaches? And what other teams are you comparing that to dog?

He didn't play for anyone else.

 

It is a stupid stupid argument you're trying to make.

Terrell Davis, yes, very well could've been a product of the Denver system.

A man who made the pro bowl for 10 consecutive years? Yeah he just might be the greatest to ever play the game, who would've been just as successful anywhere else.

 

You know why he would've had success anywhere? Because, any team would've changed their defense to suit LT. Product of the system? No fucking way, that's retarded.

 

Stupid stupid argument.

 

You're here for 'entertainment'? LOL right. If you believe that, there's no one here more sad than the little weiner. Little weiner is a bit harsh. How bout little pussy, since you're petrified to confess your NFL team of choice.

 

Read more closely my dear man, the Dog said he is most successful with coaches that developed schemes that utilzed his strengths...he did play under several coaching staffs, did he not?

 

You unfortunately can not say that he is the greatest to ever play, which is the main point the Dog has been making all along, you are just too biased as a fan to see otherwise...it's a fact, you can't even say that he is the best linebacker to ever play the game, because those middle linebackers that were pretty good could make the very strong argument that they have a much more challenging assignment, and that they could run up big numbers and probowls and be the subject of this thread...

 

as for your last statement, the Dog fears nothing - but revealing the Dog's team of choice will only serve to have people respond to debatable points by simply making attacks...and then debates such as this get reduced to mudslinging, and although you are itching at the seams to engage in this with the Dog, unfortunately it will not come to pass...as for entertainment...if you are here for any other purpose (i.e., social contact, therapy, lack of self-worth, lonliness...etc...) then you have a significant issue and require immediate assistance from a trained and licensed proffessional - and since you are not here for entertainment, the Dog wonders, will you be so kind as to share with all of us, dear sir, why you are here?

[Sephiroth]

The Dog's points continue to be that, one, he was most successful with coaches that developed a scheme to utilize his talents, two, other teams developed schemes to attack the Giant's DEFENSE, not just Taylor, and three, there is no way to logically argue that one NFL player can be considered the best ever in the sport

 

I agree with you that no one player can be considered the best ever, because there are so many criteria for determining what makes a player great. It's like saying that someone is the best artist ever, or the best musician... or the best President, for that matter.

 

But Dog, you should watch NFL films' video titled "LT."

 

They have interviews with the coaches who went up against Taylor. Joe Gibbs... Tom Landry... Bill Walsh... etc. ALL of them say when their games were over on Sunday, the first question when they got to the office on Monday was "how are we going to stop Lawrence Taylor." Not, "what will we do against the Giants defense," but speciafically about Taylor. Did EVERY coach say this? Probably not... but those who didn't were likely shut out when they came to the Meadowlands... or their QB left on a stretcher.

 

There's footage of him beating triple teams. TRIPLE teams. He's hurdled offensive linemen. He threw 280-lb tackles around like dolls. He was a genetic freak that nobody had seen before or since.

 

The coaches' argument holds no water. Parcells was only in NY for five years... ditto for Belichick. Unless you think Rod Rust, Ray Handley, Dan Reeves, and Mike Nolan developed some great schemes that made Taylor successful (after years of Pro Bowls)... it's just a lame argument.

 

C'mon man... you can pick a better fight than this.

[ksm7]

I agree with you that no one player can be considered the best ever, because there are so many criteria for determining what makes a player great. It's like saying that someone is the best artist ever, or the best musician... or the best President, for that matter.

 

But Dog, you should watch NFL films' video titled "LT."

 

They have interviews with the coaches who went up against Taylor. Joe Gibbs... Tom Landry... Bill Walsh... etc. ALL of them say when their games were over on Sunday, the first question when they got to the office on Monday was "how are we going to stop Lawrence Taylor." Not, "what will we do against the Giants defense," but speciafically about Taylor. Did EVERY coach say this? Probably not... but those who didn't were likely shut out when they came to the Meadowlands... or their QB left on a stretcher.

 

There's footage of him beating triple teams. TRIPLE teams. He's hurdled offensive linemen. He threw 280-lb tackles around like dolls. He was a genetic freak that nobody had seen before or since.

 

The coaches' argument holds no water. Parcells was only in NY for five years... ditto for Belichick. Unless you think Rod Rust, Ray Handley, Dan Reeves, and Mike Nolan developed some great schemes that made Taylor successful (after years of Pro Bowls)... it's just a lame argument.

 

C'mon man... you can pick a better fight than this.

 

Now this is a well thought out, logical response - the Dog appreciates that...certainly when coaches are asked to comment on Taylor, the responses will be that way (and deservingly so), but an NFL films documentary about Taylor interviewing coaches about Taylor is only going to serve as favorable to Taylor...certainly it is conceivable to believe that coaches had to start with Taylor - just like coaches had to start with Singletary, Lewis, White...every team has to start with the other team's biggest impact player, and if a coach is starting any other way, then they would typically not be coaching for long...

 

What is fascinating to the Dog is that fans here want to hand over the best player ever title to Taylor blindly (and we know it is impossible to say that he is anyway...), and not recognize the fact that Taylor was surrounded by a strong cast of defenders throughout most of his career, and was also sugject to playing under some of the brilliant defensive minds (parcells and Belichek) at that time...don't you think coaching plays a little here? Don't you think having an entire defensive unit that was strong plays a little?

 

The fact is, and the Dog never once has denied this - Taylor was a very good outside linebacker, possibly the best ever in that position - but it remains impossible to say anything further...

[BIGBLUE01]

The Dog applauds you - another brilliant response to a post that did not involve you...in the future, since you have accepted your new title of the Italian Hotdog's court jester, try to remember to come only when the Dog directly addresses you, you silly little guy, you...and if you would be so kind as to replace the picture of strahan with one of you in a court jester hat, that would certainly earn you a few bonus points with the Dog...

 

 

 

 

Yet I get you to write a paragraph in response to me every time. You silly dog.....

[Sephiroth]

What is fascinating to the Dog is that fans here want to hand over the best player ever title to Taylor blindly (and we know it is impossible to say that he is anyway...), and not recognize the fact that Taylor was surrounded by a strong cast of defenders throughout most of his career, and was also sugject to playing under some of the brilliant defensive minds (parcells and Belichek) at that time...don't you think coaching plays a little here? Don't you think having an entire defensive unit that was strong plays a little?

 

Taylor played with some great players... Carson, Banks, Johnson, Reasons... and those were just his linebackers. But I'd argue that a guy like a Leonard Marshall made a career out of playing next to Taylor than the other way around. A lot of those guys had no careers when they left the Giants... but was that due to bad coaching, age, or due to the extra attention they recieved since a guy like Taylor didn't tie up three guys on offense anymore?

 

There's also NO DOUBT that coaching played a part in Taylor's success... but again, the argument can be made that any competent coach plays a part in a great player's success. Taylor's numbers went down when Rod Rust replaced Belichick... but a lot of that is because you can't put up sacks when you're not allowed to rush the passer. Taylor put up similar numbers in the Ray Perkins years too... although Perkins wasn't the greatest coach, he also wasn't brain dead and half-retarded like Rust and Handley.

 

You're entitled to your opinion, and I don't mean to beat you over the head... but a few quotes from Wikipedia:

 

Taylor's explosive speed and power is credited with having changed the position of outside linebacker from a "read and react" type of position to a more attacking, aggressive position.[71]

Washington Redskins coach Joe Gibbs developed the two tight end offense and the position of h-back to prevent Taylor from blitzing into the backfield unhindered.[41][72] As Gibbs stated, "[w]e had to try in some way have a special game plan just for Lawrence Taylor. Now you didn't do that very often in this league but I think he's one person that we learned the lesson the hard way. We lost ball games."[41] His skills at outside linebacker forced other coaches to retool their offensive schemes to manage his impact. In the late 70's and early 80's, a blitzing linebacker was almost always picked up by a running back. However, these players were usually no match for Taylor.[73] The tactic employed by Bill Walsh in the 1982 playoffs, namely of employing an offensive guard to block Taylor, began to be copied around the league. This move, however, left a hole in the offensive protection that a middle linebacker could exploit. Later, Walsh and other coaches began using offensive left tackles to block Taylor. Although Taylor made adjustments to his game to remain dominant, it soon became common in the NFL for offensive linemen to pick up blitzing linebackers, such as Taylor. In addition to the changes in offensive schemes Taylor influenced, he also introduced new defensive techniques to the game such as chopping the ball out of the quarterback's hands rather than tackling him.[68]

[BIGBLUE01]

Taylor played with some great players... Carson, Banks, Johnson, Reasons... and those were just his linebackers. But I'd argue that a guy like a Leonard Marshall made a career out of playing next to Taylor than the other way around. A lot of those guys had no careers when they left the Giants... but was that due to bad coaching, age, or due to the extra attention they recieved since a guy like Taylor didn't tie up three guys on offense anymore?

 

There's also NO DOUBT that coaching played a part in Taylor's success... but again, the argument can be made that any competent coach plays a part in a great player's success. Taylor's numbers went down when Rod Rust replaced Belichick... but a lot of that is because you can't put up sacks when you're not allowed to rush the passer. Taylor put up similar numbers in the Ray Perkins years too... although Perkins wasn't the greatest coach, he also wasn't brain dead and half-retarded like Rust and Handley.

 

You're entitled to your opinion, and I don't mean to beat you over the head... but a few quotes from Wikipedia:

 

Taylor's explosive speed and power is credited with having changed the position of outside linebacker from a "read and react" type of position to a more attacking, aggressive position.[71]

Washington Redskins coach Joe Gibbs developed the two tight end offense and the position of h-back to prevent Taylor from blitzing into the backfield unhindered.[41][72] As Gibbs stated, "[w]e had to try in some way have a special game plan just for Lawrence Taylor. Now you didn't do that very often in this league but I think he's one person that we learned the lesson the hard way. We lost ball games."[41] His skills at outside linebacker forced other coaches to retool their offensive schemes to manage his impact. In the late 70's and early 80's, a blitzing linebacker was almost always picked up by a running back. However, these players were usually no match for Taylor.[73] The tactic employed by Bill Walsh in the 1982 playoffs, namely of employing an offensive guard to block Taylor, began to be copied around the league. This move, however, left a hole in the offensive protection that a middle linebacker could exploit. Later, Walsh and other coaches began using offensive left tackles to block Taylor. Although Taylor made adjustments to his game to remain dominant, it soon became common in the NFL for offensive linemen to pick up blitzing linebackers, such as Taylor. In addition to the changes in offensive schemes Taylor influenced, he also introduced new defensive techniques to the game such as chopping the ball out of the quarterback's hands rather than tackling him.[68]

 

 

You know dog, I try, I mean keep on tryin to give you reasons why LT is the best LB ever.

 

But everyon keeps beatin me to it.

[Nesta]

Read more closely my dear man, the Dog said he is most successful with coaches that developed schemes that utilzed his strengths...he did play under several coaching staffs, did he not?

 

You unfortunately can not say that he is the greatest to ever play, which is the main point the Dog has been making all along, you are just too biased as a fan to see otherwise...it's a fact, you can't even say that he is the best linebacker to ever play the game, because those middle linebackers that were pretty good could make the very strong argument that they have a much more challenging assignment, and that they could run up big numbers and probowls and be the subject of this thread...

 

as for your last statement, the Dog fears nothing - but revealing the Dog's team of choice will only serve to have people respond to debatable points by simply making attacks...and then debates such as this get reduced to mudslinging, and although you are itching at the seams to engage in this with the Dog, unfortunately it will not come to pass...as for entertainment...if you are here for any other purpose (i.e., social contact, therapy, lack of self-worth, lonliness...etc...) then you have a significant issue and require immediate assistance from a trained and licensed proffessional - and since you are not here for entertainment, the Dog wonders, will you be so kind as to share with all of us, dear sir, why you are here?

 

lol don't blame me for your poor attempt at conveying a point pup.

He played for several staffs and excelled in all of them. That kind of mutes your point wouldn't you say?

 

If you can possibly say any player was 'the best ever' it would be Lawrence Taylor. No doubt in my mind. There may be doubt in yours, but there's plenty to disagree with in that head of yours.

 

The dog is a pussy who is very ashamed of his weak nfl team. I am here becaue I am a fan of the New York Giants, win or lose. And I am not ashamed to admit that whether we are 12 - 4 or 4 - 12.

I do not waste my time talking trash on MESSAGE BOARDS of NFL teams that I do not appreciate. That's asinine.

If I even considered doing such a thing, I would definately make known my love for the Giants at such websites.

But alas, I have a life and do not do such things.

 

Let me guess that you are an Oakland Raider fan. Yep, that'll do.

 

Numbnuts.

[BIGBLUE01]

lol don't blame me for your poor attempt at conveying a point pup.

He played for several staffs and excelled in all of them. That kind of mutes your point wouldn't you say?

 

If you can possibly say any player was 'the best ever' it would be Lawrence Taylor. No doubt in my mind. There may be doubt in yours, but there's plenty to disagree with in that head of yours.

 

The dog is a pussy who is very ashamed of his weak nfl team. I am here becaue I am a fan of the New York Giants, win or lose. And I am not ashamed to admit that whether we are 12 - 4 or 4 - 12.

I do not waste my time talking trash on MESSAGE BOARDS of NFL teams that I do not appreciate. That's asinine.

If I even considered doing such a thing, I would definately make known my love for the Giants at such websites.

But alas, I have a life and do not do such things.

 

Let me guess that you are an Oakland Raider fan. Yep, that'll do.

 

Numbnuts.

 

 

Dog, Im tryin, really I am!!

[ksm7]

lol don't blame me for your poor attempt at conveying a point pup.

He played for several staffs and excelled in all of them. That kind of mutes your point wouldn't you say?

 

If you can possibly say any player was 'the best ever' it would be Lawrence Taylor. No doubt in my mind. There may be doubt in yours, but there's plenty to disagree with in that head of yours.

 

The dog is a pussy who is very ashamed of his weak nfl team. I am here becaue I am a fan of the New York Giants, win or lose. And I am not ashamed to admit that whether we are 12 - 4 or 4 - 12.

I do not waste my time talking trash on MESSAGE BOARDS of NFL teams that I do not appreciate. That's asinine.

If I even considered doing such a thing, I would definately make known my love for the Giants at such websites.

But alas, I have a life and do not do such things.

 

Let me guess that you are an Oakland Raider fan. Yep, that'll do.

 

Numbnuts.

 

Again, you commented that the Dog earlier stated that Taylor played well for Giant's coaches, which the Dog never said - the Dog was just clarifying that for you...

 

The Dog could possibly say that a number of players in NFL history are in fact the best ever to play, but that would be silly, as it is impossible to say any other way...here is the Dog's perspective, and maybe this will help: many people will argue that Michael Jordan revoltionized basketball, or at least elevated it to another level. They can point to the fact that other teams had to develop schemes to stop him (see the Piston's "Jordan rules"...), and that the Bulls would never have won any championships during that time without him (see when he took his two year hiatus how well they did)...by the rationale of many here, the argument would be that he is the best player ever - the Dog would argue against that, stating that it is impossible, due to the fact that there are a great number of players from various eras in various positions that could claim the same (Chamberlain, Johnson, Bird, Erving, O'neil...etc...)...same holds true here...

 

For further clarification, the Dog is certainly not ashamed of his team of choice, but comes here to discuss Giants football...The Dog has never once said he does not appreciate the Giants...but wouldn't this place be less intriguing if everyone just sat around feeding eachother's optomism and patting eachother on the backs...?

 

And why is it that everyone wants to say that it is OK for people to have their opinions on these topics, so long as the opinions are the same - that Taylor is the best player in the NFL, but nobody likes when someone makes an argument to support a differing opinion? Ahh, life would be so boring in the world that you want to create...The Dog will see you in another thread later, when you trail after begging for information about the Dog's favorite NFL team, so that you can take mindless jabs at them when backed into a corner...The Dog will be sure to leave a trail of breadcrumbs for you to follow...

[ksm7]

lol don't blame me for your poor attempt at conveying a point pup.

He played for several staffs and excelled in all of them. That kind of mutes your point wouldn't you say?

 

If you can possibly say any player was 'the best ever' it would be Lawrence Taylor. No doubt in my mind. There may be doubt in yours, but there's plenty to disagree with in that head of yours.

 

The dog is a pussy who is very ashamed of his weak nfl team. I am here becaue I am a fan of the New York Giants, win or lose. And I am not ashamed to admit that whether we are 12 - 4 or 4 - 12.

I do not waste my time talking trash on MESSAGE BOARDS of NFL teams that I do not appreciate. That's asinine.

If I even considered doing such a thing, I would definately make known my love for the Giants at such websites.

But alas, I have a life and do not do such things.

 

Let me guess that you are an Oakland Raider fan. Yep, that'll do.

 

Numbnuts.

 

Again, you commented that the Dog earlier stated that Taylor played well for Giant's coaches, which the Dog never said - the Dog was just clarifying that for you...

 

The Dog could possibly say that a number of players in NFL history are in fact the best ever to play, but that would be silly, as it is impossible to say any other way...here is the Dog's perspective, and maybe this will help: many people will argue that Michael Jordan revoltionized basketball, or at least elevated it to another level. They can point to the fact that other teams had to develop schemes to stop him (see the Piston's "Jordan rules"...), and that the Bulls would never have won any championships during that time without him (see when he took his two year hiatus how well they did)...by the rationale of many here, the argument would be that he is the best player ever - the Dog would argue against that, stating that it is impossible, due to the fact that there are a great number of players from various eras in various positions that could claim the same (Chamberlain, Johnson, Bird, Erving, O'neil...etc...)...same holds true here...

 

For further clarification, the Dog is certainly not ashamed of his team of choice, but comes here to discuss Giants football...The Dog has never once said he does not appreciate the Giants...but wouldn't this place be less intriguing if everyone just sat around feeding eachother's optomism and patting eachother on the backs...?

 

And why is it that everyone wants to say that it is OK for people to have their opinions on these topics, so long as the opinions are the same - that Taylor is the best player in the NFL, but nobody likes when someone makes an argument to support a differing opinion? Ahh, life would be so boring in the world that you want to create...The Dog will see you in another thread later, when you trail after begging for information about the Dog's favorite NFL team, so that you can take mindless jabs at them when backed into a corner...The Dog will be sure to leave a trail of breadcrumbs for you to follow...

[BIGBLUE01]

Again, you commented that the Dog earlier stated that Taylor played well for Giant's coaches, which the Dog never said - the Dog was just clarifying that for you...

 

The Dog could possibly say that a number of players in NFL history are in fact the best ever to play, but that would be silly, as it is impossible to say any other way...here is the Dog's perspective, and maybe this will help: many people will argue that Michael Jordan revoltionized basketball, or at least elevated it to another level. They can point to the fact that other teams had to develop schemes to stop him (see the Piston's "Jordan rules"...), and that the Bulls would never have won any championships during that time without him (see when he took his two year hiatus how well they did)...by the rationale of many here, the argument would be that he is the best player ever - the Dog would argue against that, stating that it is impossible, due to the fact that there are a great number of players from various eras in various positions that could claim the same (Chamberlain, Johnson, Bird, Erving, O'neil...etc...)...same holds true here...

 

For further clarification, the Dog is certainly not ashamed of his team of choice, but comes here to discuss Giants football...The Dog has never once said he does not appreciate the Giants...but wouldn't this place be less intriguing if everyone just sat around feeding eachother's optomism and patting eachother on the backs...?

 

And why is it that everyone wants to say that it is OK for people to have their opinions on these topics, so long as the opinions are the same - that Taylor is the best player in the NFL, but nobody likes when someone makes an argument to support a differing opinion? Ahh, life would be so boring in the world that you want to create...The Dog will see you in another thread later, when you trail after begging for information about the Dog's favorite NFL team, so that you can take mindless jabs at them when backed into a corner...The Dog will be sure to leave a trail of breadcrumbs for you to follow...

 

Then say who it is...............hehe.

[randoff]

Again, you commented that the Dog earlier stated that Taylor played well for Giant's coaches...

the Dog is certainly not ashamed of his team of choice, but comes here to discuss Giants football...The Dog has never once said he does not appreciate the Giants...but wouldn't this place be less intriguing if everyone just sat around feeding eachother's optomism and patting eachother on the backs...? .....the Dog's favorite NFL team, so that you can take mindless jabs at them when backed into a corner...The Dog will be sure to leave a trail of breadcrumbs for you to follow...

 

the Dog fears nothing - but revealing the Dog's team of choice will only serve to have people respond to debatable points by simply making attacks...

 

The Doff (or Doof as you like to call me...very cute) has a few questions and concerns. Wait, first let's get this straight...the Doff is NOT coming to anybody's 'rescue' or 'patting' a man on his 'back', but if the Dog fears nothing and this is 'just entertanment...why would it even matter if you stated that your favorite team (for example) is the 49ers? The Doff thinks that a chat MAY go like this: (mind you this is ONLY an example, the Doff does not get off on picking on people):

 

BigBlue: Hey Dog, what team is your favorite?

The Dog: BibBlue(it's what you've called him...entertanment...'wink wink') my favorite team is the 49ers, but the Dog is here to discuss Giants football.

BigBlue: Aww man you're a __________! (fill in the blank)

 

The Doffs question is IF this is entertanment or the Dog has 'no fear'.....why would it matter IF the Dog told what his favorite team is? Now is the Doff to assume that the Dog 'fears' attacks?

[ksm7]

the Dog fears nothing - but revealing the Dog's team of choice will only serve to have people respond to debatable points by simply making attacks...

 

The Doff (or Doof as you like to call me...very cute) has a few questions and concerns. Wait, first let's get this straight...the Doff is NOT coming to anybody's 'rescue' or 'patting' a man on his 'back', but if the Dog fears nothing and this is 'just entertanment...why would it even matter if you stated that your favorite team (for example) is the 49ers? The Doff thinks that a chat MAY go like this: (mind you this is ONLY an example, the Doff does not get off on picking on people):

 

BigBlue: Hey Dog, what team is your favorite?

The Dog: BibBlue(it's what you've called him...entertanment...'wink wink') my favorite team is the 49ers, but the Dog is here to discuss Giants football.

BigBlue: Aww man you're a __________! (fill in the blank)

 

The Doffs question is IF this is entertanment or the Dog has 'no fear'.....why would it matter IF the Dog told what his favorite team is? Now is the Doff to assume that the Dog 'fears' attacks?

 

Let's clarify a few menutia type issues: first, the Dog does not ever recall refering to you as the "doof"...that is not the Dog's style...and as for "bibblue," the Dog must have a type-o in the mix...

 

the entertainment value drops when threads deteriorate into silly mudslinging - the Dog has noted that in the past, when fans of other teams come to discuss items (and the Dog does admit, that quite often they come with intention of mudslinging themselves), then nothing of value occures - take badegg, a cowboy's fan that came to discuss in many cases valid points - a specific example had to do with manning, and thread ended up being a sries of pictures of romo dropping the snap...very uninteresting to the Dog...now, take the example of the discussion occuring over taylor being the best ever - if everyone was aware of the Dog's team of choice, it would now be a dead issue, as it would deteriorate into attacks on that team...again, very limiting...

 

you appear to stick to debatable points - why is it you have a difficult time following this line of thinking?

[Nesta]

Again, you commented that the Dog earlier stated that Taylor played well for Giant's coaches, which the Dog never said - the Dog was just clarifying that for you...

 

The Dog could possibly say that a number of players in NFL history are in fact the best ever to play, but that would be silly, as it is impossible to say any other way...here is the Dog's perspective, and maybe this will help: many people will argue that Michael Jordan revoltionized basketball, or at least elevated it to another level. They can point to the fact that other teams had to develop schemes to stop him (see the Piston's "Jordan rules"...), and that the Bulls would never have won any championships during that time without him (see when he took his two year hiatus how well they did)...by the rationale of many here, the argument would be that he is the best player ever - the Dog would argue against that, stating that it is impossible, due to the fact that there are a great number of players from various eras in various positions that could claim the same (Chamberlain, Johnson, Bird, Erving, O'neil...etc...)...same holds true here...

 

For further clarification, the Dog is certainly not ashamed of his team of choice, but comes here to discuss Giants football...The Dog has never once said he does not appreciate the Giants...but wouldn't this place be less intriguing if everyone just sat around feeding eachother's optomism and patting eachother on the backs...?

 

And why is it that everyone wants to say that it is OK for people to have their opinions on these topics, so long as the opinions are the same - that Taylor is the best player in the NFL, but nobody likes when someone makes an argument to support a differing opinion? Ahh, life would be so boring in the world that you want to create...The Dog will see you in another thread later, when you trail after begging for information about the Dog's favorite NFL team, so that you can take mindless jabs at them when backed into a corner...The Dog will be sure to leave a trail of breadcrumbs for you to follow...

 

Chase your tail pup.

 

You don't have to state that LT played well for the Giants. That's a given.

The dog most certainly IS ashamed of his team, otherwise the dog would have no problem revealing that factoid.

Pussy. Shameful pussy.

[randoff]

Let's clarify a few menutia type issues: first, the Dog does not ever recall refering to you as the "doof"...that is not the Dog's style...and as for "bibblue," the Dog must have a type-o in the mix...

 

the entertainment value drops when threads deteriorate into silly mudslinging - the Dog has noted that in the past, when fans of other teams come to discuss items (and the Dog does admit, that quite often they come with intention of mudslinging themselves), then nothing of value occures - take badegg, a cowboy's fan that came to discuss in many cases valid points - a specific example had to do with manning, and thread ended up being a sries of pictures of romo dropping the snap...very uninteresting to the Dog...now, take the example of the discussion occuring over taylor being the best ever - if everyone was aware of the Dog's team of choice, it would now be a dead issue, as it would deteriorate into attacks on that team...again, very limiting...

 

you appear to stick to debatable points - why is it you have a difficult time following this line of thinking?

Let the Doff state that it's very possible that the Dog made a typographical error here...You see randoof, this is what happens when you join the show late......the Doff can also point out that actually it says 'Randoof'. But that's neither here or there. But the Doff fully understands now and that is why communication here is a key component in getting points across that make sense. The Doff can understand the 'mudslinging' that occurs here. Bad Egg has a minor history on these boards. And you'd hafta admit that the Romo farks are funny even if you are not a Giants fan

[ksm7]

Let the Doff state that it's very possible that the Dog made a typographical error here...You see randoof, this is what happens when you join the show late......the Doff can also point out that actually it says 'Randoof'. But that's neither here or there. But the Doff fully understands now and that is why communication here is a key component in getting points across that make sense. The Doff can understand the 'mudslinging' that occurs here. Bad Egg has a minor history on these boards. And you'd hafta admit that the Romo farks are funny even if you are not a Giants fan

 

The Dog has enjoyed all of the farks...an unfortunate part of message board communication is that typographical errors are a frequent mishap...until the Dog is able to implement voice-to-text technology, it may continue to be a plague...

[ksm7]

Chase your tail pup.

 

You don't have to state that LT played well for the Giants. That's a given.

The dog most certainly IS ashamed of his team, otherwise the dog would have no problem revealing that factoid.

Pussy. Shameful pussy.

 

The Dog thought you were done with communication...if possible, please tell the Dog what good will come from knowing the Dog's team of choice when discussing Giant football here?

[BIGBLUE01]

Let's clarify a few menutia type issues: first, the Dog does not ever recall refering to you as the "doof"...that is not the Dog's style...and as for "bibblue," the Dog must have a type-o in the mix...

 

the entertainment value drops when threads deteriorate into silly mudslinging - the Dog has noted that in the past, when fans of other teams come to discuss items (and the Dog does admit, that quite often they come with intention of mudslinging themselves), then nothing of value occures - take badegg, a cowboy's fan that came to discuss in many cases valid points - a specific example had to do with manning, and thread ended up being a sries of pictures of romo dropping the snap...very uninteresting to the Dog...now, take the example of the discussion occuring over taylor being the best ever - if everyone was aware of the Dog's team of choice, it would now be a dead issue, as it would deteriorate into attacks on that team...again, very limiting...

 

you appear to stick to debatable points - why is it you have a difficult time following this line of thinking?

 

Heres a question, why do you feel that a MB is a place where everything has to be stated as if we were in class or something? The mudslinging comes from being a rival, kinda like if you go to a game in your opponents stadium, there is trash talking goin on. Why do you feel that if someone does say, "your team sucks!" that they are not quite being intellectual enough?? What do YOU have to prove?