Wednesday, April 14, 2010

[socialactionfoundationforequity:2426 Socioeconomic Impacts of Cross-Border Transport Infrastructure Development in South Asia

Buzz It
Socioeconomic Impacts of Cross-Border Transport Infrastructure
Development in South Asia
http://www.adbi.org/files/2010.04.14.wp211.socioeconomic.transport.infrastructure.pdf

By John Gilbert and Nilanjan Banik

Although the overall economic performance of economies in South Asia
in recent years has been impressive, there is concern that an aging
and increasingly inadequate infrastructure may limit the potential for
further growth and economic development.

A critical infrastructure component is the transportation network, and
there are currently several transportation infrastructure projects in
the South Asia Subregional Economic Cooperation (SASEC) region,
connecting Nepal, eastern India, Bangladesh, and Bhutan.

This paper uses computable general equilibrium (CGE) methods to
address how these infrastructure developments might affect the broader
economy in SASEC, and in particular impact on income distribution and
poverty.

The paper describes a new CGE model for South Asia, covering India,
Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Nepal, and Pakistan, which incorporates
modifications to household structure in order to capture the
implications of reform for changes in intra-household income.

The scenarios that are considered reflect proposed investments in land
transport infrastructure in the SASEC region. These should result in
reductions in the land transport component of international transport
margins, which vary bilaterally by commodity.

We found that all SASEC economies would benefit from the reductions in
terms of aggregate welfare, with the largest gains accruing to India
in absolute terms, but the largest relative gains to Nepal, followed
by Bangladesh and Sri Lanka when the margin reduction is prorated to
intra-South Asian trade rather than just SASEC.

In terms of household level distribution, the picture was mixed, with
clearly pro-poor outcomes in some countries, such as Nepal, but more
ambiguous impacts in others. In terms of potential adjustment costs,
examination of the extent of predicted structural changes suggests
that these would be minor, although somewhat more significant for the
smaller economies in the region.

Download this Paper [ PDF 210.1KB| 26 pages ].

--
Truth resides in every human heart, and one has to search for it there, and to be guided by truth as one sees it. But no one has a right to coerce others to act according to his own view of truth. - Mohandas Gandhi

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "SAFE - Social Action Foundation for Equity" group.
To post to this group, send email to
socialactionfoundationforequity@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
socialactionfoundationforequity+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.co.in/group/socialactionfoundationforequity?hl=en?hl=en-GB

To unsubscribe, reply using "remove me" as the subject.

[socialactionfoundationforequity:2427 India to set up global centre for nuclear security

Buzz It
India to set up global centre for nuclear security
http://igovernment.in/site/india-set-global-centre-nuclear-security-37358

It will conduct research and development of design systems that are
intrinsically safe, secure, proliferation resistant and sustainable

Published on 04/14/2010 - 12:01:03 PM

New Delhi: Underlining New Delhi's "impeccable record" in non-
proliferation, the Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh unveiled an
ambitious plan to set up a global centre for nuclear security in India
and called for "zero tolerance" for those engaged in trafficking of
nuclear materials.

"I am happy to announce on this occasion that we have decided to set
up a Global Centre for Nuclear Energy Partnership in India," Singh
told 47 world leaders gathered at the Nuclear Security Summit.

The new centre will consist of four schools dealing with advanced
nuclear energy system studies, nuclear security, radiation safety, and
the application of radioisotopes and radiation technology in the areas
of healthcare, agriculture and food.

It will conduct research and development of design systems that are
intrinsically safe, secure, proliferation resistant and sustainable.

"We would welcome participation in this venture by your countries, the
IAEA and the world to make this centre's work a success," Singh said.

The world community should join hands to eliminate the risk of
sensitive and valuable materials and technologies falling into hands
of terrorists and illicit traffickers, he said.

There should be zero tolerance for individuals and groups which engage
in illegal trafficking in nuclear items, the Prime Minister stressed.
—iGovernment Bureau

--
Truth resides in every human heart, and one has to search for it there, and to be guided by truth as one sees it. But no one has a right to coerce others to act according to his own view of truth. - Mohandas Gandhi

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "SAFE - Social Action Foundation for Equity" group.
To post to this group, send email to
socialactionfoundationforequity@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
socialactionfoundationforequity+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.co.in/group/socialactionfoundationforequity?hl=en?hl=en-GB

To unsubscribe, reply using "remove me" as the subject.

[socialactionfoundationforequity:2425 [AIDS INDIA] Call for participants - AIDS 2010 Youth-PreConference

Buzz It
--- On Wed, 14/4/10, Joya Banerjee <joya@youthaidscoalition.org> wrote:

From: Joya Banerjee <joya@youthaidscoalition.org>
Subject: [AIDS INDIA] Call for participants - AIDS 2010 Youth-PreConference
To: aids-india@yahoogrous.com
Date: Wednesday, 14 April, 2010, 23:48

Dear Colleagues,

Please send the call for participants for the Vienna YouthForce
Pre-Conference to young people at your organization who will be attending the conference.

If you do not know of any, please do your part to build new
leadership in the AIDS response by sponsoring a young participant.

Please write to Reshma Pattni (reshma@youthaidscoalition.org) for more information on how to sponsor a young leader in need of your support- there are MANY!

I appreciate your assistance in disseminating this announcement!

-------------------
Joya Banerjee
Co-Founder & Advisory Council Member,
Global Youth Coalition on HIV/AIDS
www.youthaidscoalition.org
Master's Candidate '10, Harvard School of Public Health

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Reshma Pattni <Reshma@youthaidscoalition.org>

*JOIN US AT THE AIDS 2010 YOUTHFORCE PRE-CONFERENCE! *

The *Vienna YouthForce* and the Youth Programme of AIDS 2010 are organizing a Youth Pre-Conference on July 14-16, 2010. The Pre-Conference is open to young people attending AIDS 2010 and will consist of informative sessions and skills-building workshops on HIV and AIDS issues ranging from scientific knowledge to effective political advocacy.

Submit your application to vyfpreconf@gmail.com  before May 20, 2010. The form is available here:

http://files.tiggroups.org/94534/VYF_Participant_Application_form_FINAL.doc.word

The 2010 *Youth Pre-Conference* constitutes a 3-days event which aims to provide 300 young delegates with the opportunity to network and connect with their peers prior to AIDS 2010, as well as provide youth attending the Conference with technical information and skills for effective participation.
* *
*What is the Vienna YouthForce? *

The Vienna YouthForce is a collaboration of various youth-led or
youth-serving organizations, currently including: Advocates for Youth,
CHOICE for Youth and Sexuality, Global Youth Coalition on HIV/AIDS (GYCA), UNFPA, World AIDS Campaign, YouAct, Youth R.I.S.E., the Youth Coalition for Sexual and Reproductive Rights (YCSRR) and Y-PEER, supported by the International AIDS Society.

The YouthForce organizes the Youth Pre-Conference of the International AIDS Conferences every two years along with other youth-focused activities.

*Who is covering the costs of the Youth Pre-Conference?*

The United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) is our main sponsor and is also a partner for the Youth Pre-Conference. Other supporters include UNAIDS, UNESCO and aids2031.

*If I'm accepted as a delegate, do I have to pay anything? *

Yes, there is a small registration fee. If you come from a developed
country* you will be asked to kindly contribute 20 or 40 Euros
according to your ability. If you are from a developing country we ask for a contribution of 20 Euros- or, if you cannot afford it, we will waive the fee. With this fee you will be entitled to 4 nights of accommodation, 3 meals per day during the Pre-Conference and the materials for the event.

More information here:
http://files.tiggroups.org/94534/VYF_Participant_Application_form_FINAL.doc.word

*See you in Vienna!*

*Please spread this document within your networks! Thank you for your
support!*

--
Reshma Pattni
Program Director
Global Youth Coalition on HIV/AIDS, a program of TakingITGlobal
reshma@youthaidscoalition.org

www.gyca.org
www.tigweb.org

(T) +1-212-661-6111 ext. 416
33 Flatbush Ave, 5th Floor
Brooklyn, NY, USA
USA
- - - - - - - -

GYCA is a youth-led global network of more than 4,000 young leaders and adult allies working on youth and HIV/AIDS in 150 countries world-wide.

GYCA's mission is to empower young leaders with the skills, knowledge,
resources and opportunities they need to scale up HIV/AIDS interventions amongst their peers.


------------------------------------

_____________________________________
Speak your world with an accent, your own experience!.

An eFORUM for information and communication on HIV/AIDS and related issues made easily accessible to inform practice and policy in India. The views are of the authors. Please feel free to copy the messages. An acknowledgement [Source: AIDS-INDIA eFORUM] would be appreciated.
To Post a message:E-mail to: aids-india@yahoogroups.com

We comply with the 'HONcode' standard for trustworthy health information and global internet governance norms. For further assistance please contact the editor by e-mail: editoreaids@yahoo.com
_____________________________________Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AIDS-INDIA/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AIDS-INDIA/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    AIDS-INDIA-digest@yahoogroups.com
    AIDS-INDIA-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    AIDS-INDIA-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


--
Truth resides in every human heart, and one has to search for it there, and to be guided by truth as one sees it. But no one has a right to coerce others to act according to his own view of truth. - Mohandas Gandhi
 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "SAFE - Social Action Foundation for Equity" group.
To post to this group, send email to
socialactionfoundationforequity@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
socialactionfoundationforequity+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.co.in/group/socialactionfoundationforequity?hl=en?hl=en-GB
 
To unsubscribe, reply using "remove me" as the subject.

[socialactionfoundationforequity:2424 Seminar in Gandhi Bhawan: 17 April, Saturday 0915 hours

Buzz It
--- On Thu, 15/4/10, M Rajivlochan <mrajivlochan@gmail.com> wrote:

From: M Rajivlochan <mrajivlochan@gmail.com>
Subject: Seminar in Gandhi Bhawan: 17 April, Saturday 0915 hours
To: Undisclosed-Recipient@yahoo.com
Date: Thursday, 15 April, 2010, 8:34

Dear friend,

 

In these times when the subject of history is being asked to be more and

more responsive to the demands of the market economy we at the Department

of History, Panjab University decided to bring friends of the subject

together to sit and discuss the issue.

 

Please join us at Gandhi Bhawan, Panjab University on the 17th of April 2010 in the seminar -- HISTORY IN TIMES OF MARKET DEMANDS.

 

Share your views, question those being presented, and suggest ways of handling the demands of a market economy: in general how to make the subject livelier and of interest to society.

 

VENUE:                       Gandhi Bhawan, PU campus.

TIME:                        0900 hours to 1700 hours

 

DATE:                        17th April 2010, Saturday

 

TOPIC of the seminar:        HISTORY IN TIMES OF MARKET DEMANDS

 

INAUGURATION at:             0930 hours by Mr. K P S Gill, IPS

 

KEYNOTE Address:             Professor Salil Mishra, IGNOU

 

VALEDICTORY:                 1600 hours Mr. Ramesh Vinayak, Hindustan Times

 

With best wishes and regards,

 

 

rajiv

=========================

M Rajivlochan

Chairperson

Department of History

Panjab University, Chandigarh

India 160014

o. 91 172 2534623

o. 91 172 2534625

r. 91 172 2721444

m. 91  9417566600

========================

 

Inauguration and Keynote Address                                0930 hours

 

Session   History a Practical Approach                            1030 hours

 

Session   Writing History: immediate and researched   1200 hours

 

Session   Different Aspects of Researched History               1400 hours

 

Session   Learning History                          1515 hours

 

Valedictory                                                   1600 hours   

 


--
Truth resides in every human heart, and one has to search for it there, and to be guided by truth as one sees it. But no one has a right to coerce others to act according to his own view of truth. - Mohandas Gandhi
 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "SAFE - Social Action Foundation for Equity" group.
To post to this group, send email to
socialactionfoundationforequity@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
socialactionfoundationforequity+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.co.in/group/socialactionfoundationforequity?hl=en?hl=en-GB

rec.bicycles.racing - 25 new messages in 4 topics - digest

Buzz It
rec.bicycles.racing
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing?hl=en

rec.bicycles.racing@googlegroups.com

Today's topics:

* Can't We All Just Get Along? - 12 messages, 7 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/09050017eb68aa3a?hl=en
* I don't speak much Dutch but - 5 messages, 4 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/07ad0fc39244f678?hl=en
* P-R perspective - 5 messages, 4 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/465aba640c705c4a?hl=en
* Cancellara can't win Amstel Gold and LBL - 3 messages, 3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/ac61e5eef9a984e6?hl=en

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Can't We All Just Get Along?
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/09050017eb68aa3a?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 12 ==
Date: Tues, Apr 13 2010 11:28 pm
From: "Fred K. Gringioni"

"heather" <clevis@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:82kahbFa9dU1@mid.individual.net...
>
> I got the quote from the seller of the photograph (on eBay), but I went
> and found it for you, even though that restraining order is still in
> effect...
> http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/11/nyregion/squinting-drawing-and-never-forgetting.html?scp=1&sq=vebell&st=cse
>
> yes, I like your quote, and the Eisenhower one too- I hate war too. (I
> know, duh, who doesn't, but still, I do hate it.)


Dumbass -

Eisenhower quotes are awesome to use against the Chickenhawks. It's not like
they can claim that he's some raving liberal. His credentials are
impeccable.

I wish I would've known about this one before the start of the Iraq War.

"Preventive war was an invention of Hitler. Frankly, I would not even listen
to anyone seriously that came and talked about such a thing." President
Dwight David Eisenhower, former commander in chief of the Allied Forces,
WWII - Presidential news conference, 11 August 1954

thanks,

Fred. presented by Gringioni.

== 2 of 12 ==
Date: Wed, Apr 14 2010 12:40 am
From: "H. Fred Kveck"


In article <hq3nau$6mv$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
"Fred K. Gringioni" <kgringioni@hotmail.com> wrote:

> "heather" <clevis@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:82kahbFa9dU1@mid.individual.net...
> >
> > I got the quote from the seller of the photograph (on eBay), but I went
> > and found it for you, even though that restraining order is still in
> > effect...
> > http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/11/nyregion/squinting-drawing-and-never-forge
> > tting.html?scp=1&sq=vebell&st=cse
> >
> > yes, I like your quote, and the Eisenhower one too- I hate war too. (I
> > know, duh, who doesn't, but still, I do hate it.)
>
>
>
>
> Dumbass -
>
> Eisenhower quotes are awesome to use against the Chickenhawks. It's not like
> they can claim that he's some raving liberal. His credentials are
> impeccable.
>
> I wish I would've known about this one before the start of the Iraq War.
>
> "Preventive war was an invention of Hitler. Frankly, I would not even listen
> to anyone seriously that came and talked about such a thing." President
> Dwight David Eisenhower, former commander in chief of the Allied Forces,
> WWII - Presidential news conference, 11 August 1954

That is a good quote. But Eisenhower, in spite of his credentials, is criticized
by so-called conservatives. Actually, anyone can be criticized by them, no matter
their credentials. Example: the Texas school board recently decided that Thomas
Jefferson was no longer important enough to include in their history books.


== 3 of 12 ==
Date: Wed, Apr 14 2010 1:44 am
From: Betty Munro


H. Fred Kveck wrote:
> That is a good quote. But Eisenhower, in spite of his credentials, is criticized
> by so-called conservatives. Actually, anyone can be criticized by them, no matter
> their credentials. Example: the Texas school board recently decided that Thomas
> Jefferson was no longer important enough to include in their history books.

So Jefferson and evolution have something in common. We at rbr will have
to institute regime change in Texas if they do the same to our Ben Franklin.


== 4 of 12 ==
Date: Wed, Apr 14 2010 2:07 am
From: "Fred K. Gringioni"

"H. Fred Kveck" <YOURhoward@h-SHOESbomb.com> wrote in message
news:YOURhoward-
>>
>> Eisenhower quotes are awesome to use against the Chickenhawks. It's not
>> like
>> they can claim that he's some raving liberal. His credentials are
>> impeccable.
>>
>> I wish I would've known about this one before the start of the Iraq War.
>>
>> "Preventive war was an invention of Hitler. Frankly, I would not even
>> listen
>> to anyone seriously that came and talked about such a thing." President
>> Dwight David Eisenhower, former commander in chief of the Allied Forces,
>> WWII - Presidential news conference, 11 August 1954
>
> That is a good quote. But Eisenhower, in spite of his credentials, is
> criticized
> by so-called conservatives. Actually, anyone can be criticized by them, no
> matter
> their credentials.

Dumbass -

Sure they can, but in this case, they come off looking like jackasses. How
would one of the chickenhawks know more about war than Eisenhower?

thanks,

Fred. presented by Gringioni.

== 5 of 12 ==
Date: Wed, Apr 14 2010 2:48 am
From: Fredmaster of Brainerd


On Apr 14, 5:07 am, "Fred K. Gringioni" <kgringi...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
> "H. Fred Kveck" <YOURhow...@h-SHOESbomb.com> wrote in message
> news:YOURhoward-
>
> >> Eisenhower quotes are awesome to use against the Chickenhawks. It's not
> >> like
> >> they can claim that he's some raving liberal. His credentials are
> >> impeccable.
>
> >> I wish I would've known about this one before the start of the Iraq War.
>
> >> "Preventive war was an invention of Hitler. Frankly, I would not even
> >> listen
> >> to anyone seriously that came and talked about such a thing." President
> >> Dwight David Eisenhower, former commander in chief of the Allied Forces,
> >> WWII - Presidential news conference, 11 August 1954
>
> >   That is a good quote. But Eisenhower, in spite of his credentials, is
> > criticized
> > by so-called conservatives. Actually, anyone can be criticized by them, no
> > matter
> > their credentials.
>
> Dumbass -
>
> Sure they can, but in this case, they come off looking like jackasses. How
> would one of the chickenhawks know more about war than Eisenhower?
>
> thanks,
>
> Fred. presented by Gringioni.

Dumbass,

Eisenhower fought on the same side as the Russians.
He was obviously a Commie stooge.

Sincerely,
Fred Palin


== 6 of 12 ==
Date: Wed, Apr 14 2010 6:13 am
From: curtis@the-md-russells.org


On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 00:40:38 -0700, "H. Fred Kveck"
<YOURhoward@h-SHOESbomb.com> wrote:

> That is a good quote. But Eisenhower, in spite of his credentials, is criticized
>by so-called conservatives. Actually, anyone can be criticized by them, no matter
>their credentials. Example: the Texas school board recently decided that Thomas
>Jefferson was no longer important enough to include in their history books.

Trouble reconciling his expressed views with their position that the
founding fathers were all good, dyed-in-the-wool Christians. I sent
one of them a Jefferson version of the New Testament, one with the
miracles excised, and didn't even get a thank you note. What the hell,
I had a spare anyway. I just hope no one got hurt when they burned
it...

Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...


== 7 of 12 ==
Date: Wed, Apr 14 2010 9:43 am
From: "Tom Kunich"


"Fredmaster of Brainerd" <bjweiner@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:78feb66e-da9d-4f40-95e7-dd3aad38444b@y17g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
>
> Eisenhower fought on the same side as the Russians.
> He was obviously a Commie stooge.

Eisenhower as a commander of allied forces always remained completely
neutral. So don't pretend that what he said was the voice of a conservative.
And remember that I was alive then and listened to him on the radio and the
few TV spots he did.


== 8 of 12 ==
Date: Wed, Apr 14 2010 10:11 am
From: "Fred K. Gringioni"

"Tom Kunich" <tkunich@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:erOdnQeNRIE_bVjWnZ2dnUVZ_uydnZ2d@earthlink.com...
> "Fredmaster of Brainerd" <bjweiner@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:78feb66e-da9d-4f40-95e7-dd3aad38444b@y17g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> Eisenhower fought on the same side as the Russians.
>> He was obviously a Commie stooge.
>
> Eisenhower as a commander of allied forces always remained completely
> neutral. So don't pretend that what he said was the voice of a
> conservative.

Dumbass -

That's what made him such a great general and leader. He wasn't an
Ideological Idiot like you.

thanks,

Fred. presented by Gringioni.

== 9 of 12 ==
Date: Wed, Apr 14 2010 11:42 am
From: "Tom Kunich"


"Fred K. Gringioni" <kgringioni@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:hq4t11$521$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>
>
> That's what made him such a great general and leader. He wasn't an
> Ideological Idiot like you.

Are you aware that the government is passing a bill that will allow them to
take over ANY financial institution by claiming that it is in difficulties?

And you claim that I'm an ideologue?


== 10 of 12 ==
Date: Wed, Apr 14 2010 12:41 pm
From: Fredmaster of Brainerd


On Apr 14, 2:42 pm, "Tom Kunich" <tkun...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> "Fred K. Gringioni" <kgringi...@hotmail.com> wrote in messagenews:hq4t11$521$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>
> > That's what made him such a great general and leader. He wasn't an
> > Ideological Idiot like you.
>
> Are you aware that the government is passing a bill that  will allow them to
> take over ANY financial institution by claiming that it is in difficulties?
>
> And you claim that I'm an ideologue?

Can't we all just get along?

All I am saying is give peace a chance.

Sincerely,
V.I. Lennon


== 11 of 12 ==
Date: Wed, Apr 14 2010 12:59 pm
From: Betty Munro


Fred K. Gringioni wrote:
>>> That's what made him such a great general and leader. He wasn't an
>>> Ideological Idiot like you.

Tom Kunich wrote:
>> Are you aware that the government is passing a bill that will allow them to
>> take over ANY financial institution by claiming that it is in difficulties?

Fredmaster of Brainerd wrote:
> All I am saying is give peace a chance.
>
> Sincerely,
> V.I. Lennon

Power to the People, right on

V.I. Lennon


== 12 of 12 ==
Date: Wed, Apr 14 2010 3:29 pm
From: "K. Fred Gauss"


Fredmaster of Brainerd wrote:
> On Apr 14, 2:42 pm, "Tom Kunich" <tkun...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> "Fred K. Gringioni" <kgringi...@hotmail.com> wrote in messagenews:hq4t11$521$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>
>>> That's what made him such a great general and leader. He wasn't an
>>> Ideological Idiot like you.
>> Are you aware that the government is passing a bill that will allow them to
>> take over ANY financial institution by claiming that it is in difficulties?
>>
>> And you claim that I'm an ideologue?
>
> Can't we all just get along?
>
> All I am saying is give peace a chance.
>
> Sincerely,
> V.I. Lennon
>
>

A child of five would understand this. Send someone to fetch a child of
five.

K. Marx

==============================================================================
TOPIC: I don't speak much Dutch but
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/07ad0fc39244f678?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 5 ==
Date: Wed, Apr 14 2010 12:40 am
From: Ryan Cousineau


In article <7mmd97-173.ln1@donald.homeip.net>,
Betty Munro <none@mailinator.com> wrote:

> Henry wrote:
> > just like American is a dialect of English
>
> Flemish is a lot more understandable to Dutch speakers than some
> American dialects are to civilized english speakers.

The English routinely subtitle the Scots. And not just to piss them off.

--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@gmail.com http://www.wiredcola.com/
"In other newsgroups, they killfile trolls."
"In rec.bicycles.racing, we coach them."


== 2 of 5 ==
Date: Wed, Apr 14 2010 12:42 am
From: Ryan Cousineau


In article <7mmd97-173.ln1@donald.homeip.net>,
Betty Munro <none@mailinator.com> wrote:

> Henry wrote:
> > just like American is a dialect of English
>
> Flemish is a lot more understandable to Dutch speakers than some
> American dialects are to civilized english speakers.

Oh yeah, and that also reminded me of this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H7Ef5Aob4cE

--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@gmail.com http://www.wiredcola.com/
"In other newsgroups, they killfile trolls."
"In rec.bicycles.racing, we coach them."


== 3 of 5 ==
Date: Wed, Apr 14 2010 4:47 am
From: "A. Dumas Fred"


Op 14-04-10 9:42, Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H7Ef5Aob4cE

"This isn't real. Right?" Ha ha.


== 4 of 5 ==
Date: Wed, Apr 14 2010 8:37 am
From: "Fred on a stick"


Ryan Cousineau wrote:

>> Henry wrote:
>>> just like American is a dialect of English
>>
>> Flemish is a lot more understandable to Dutch speakers than some
>> American dialects are to civilized english speakers.
>
> The English routinely subtitle the Scots. And not just to piss them
> off.

The French subtitle Quebecois.


== 5 of 5 ==
Date: Wed, Apr 14 2010 9:47 am
From: "Barry"


>> The English routinely subtitle the Scots. And not just to piss them
>> off.

Try listening to Graeme Obree:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/scotland/8570091.stm

==============================================================================
TOPIC: P-R perspective
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/465aba640c705c4a?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 5 ==
Date: Wed, Apr 14 2010 1:47 am
From: Betty Munro


Amit Ghosh wrote:
> i have the benefit of careful observation - you don't.

Save that for the strippers.


== 2 of 5 ==
Date: Wed, Apr 14 2010 6:44 am
From: curtis@the-md-russells.org


On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 20:24:11 -0700 (PDT), Scott
<hendricks_scott@hotmail.com> wrote:

>Like I said, if you had 14 years as a Euro pro, I'd pay attention to
>your opinions. You don't, and I don't.

So why read it if you knew ahead of time that 1) he wasn't a 14 year
Euro pro and 2) you weren't going to pay attention to his opinion? Or
did you paste on your reply without reading his post, which would
explain why you appear to be disagreeing with a pretty vanilla opinion
in the last paragraph that even most Euro pros would agree with?

And until all 14 year Euro pros start agreeing among themselves about
what happened even when they were racing against one another, I don't
see any reason to give any of them special dispensation in their
opinion of what is happening in front of us today, unless they have
their opinion validated over and over in public view. 14 years of
racing brings a unique perspective, but also one that may be unduly
influenced by their own experiences as well.

I also didn't give Barry Bonds much attention when he spoke on
McGwire, and the man has mucho experience on everything except the
coming clean part.

Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...


== 3 of 5 ==
Date: Wed, Apr 14 2010 8:26 am
From: Scott


On Apr 14, 7:44 am, cur...@the-md-russells.org wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 20:24:11 -0700 (PDT), Scott
>
> <hendricks_sc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >Like I said, if you had 14 years as a Euro pro, I'd pay attention to
> >your opinions.  You don't, and I don't.
>
> So why read it if you knew ahead of time that 1) he wasn't a 14 year
> Euro pro and 2) you weren't going to pay attention to his opinion? Or
> did you paste on your reply without reading his post, which would
> explain why you appear to be disagreeing with a pretty vanilla opinion
> in the last paragraph that even most Euro pros would agree with?
>
> And until all 14 year Euro pros start agreeing among themselves about
> what happened even when they were racing against one another, I don't
> see any reason to give any of them special dispensation in their
> opinion of what is happening in front of us today, unless they have
> their opinion validated over and over in public view. 14 years of
> racing brings a unique perspective, but also one that may be unduly
> influenced by their own experiences as well.
>
> I also didn't give Barry Bonds much attention when he spoke on
> McGwire, and the man has mucho experience on everything except the
> coming clean part.
>
> Curtis L. Russell
> Odenton, MD (USA)
> Just someone on two wheels...

just shut up. geez, don't you understand smack talk at all?


== 4 of 5 ==
Date: Wed, Apr 14 2010 9:49 am
From: "A. Dumas Fred"


Op 13-04-10 06:28, Scott wrote:
> I got an interesting perspective on the outcome of Paris-Roubaix from
> a retired Belgian pro, someone who'd won his share of classics...

Jesus fucking christ. Just say who it is already.


== 5 of 5 ==
Date: Wed, Apr 14 2010 1:00 pm
From: Betty Munro


Scott wrote:
>> I got an interesting perspective on the outcome of Paris-Roubaix from
>> a retired Belgian pro, someone who'd won his share of classics...

A. Dumas Fred wrote:
> Jesus fucking christ. Just say who it is already.

Jesus fucking christ was a (cycling) pro ?

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Cancellara can't win Amstel Gold and LBL
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/ac61e5eef9a984e6?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Wed, Apr 14 2010 5:37 am
From: Keith


On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 19:53:28 -0700, "Mexican Low Rider Mafia"
<mexican-low-rider-mafia@mexican-low-rider-mafia.com> wrote:

>It is not possible. Is it?

He can and he will, he can win any one day race and any one-week race
he puts his mind (and legs) to, the real question is whether he can
win a GT one day, more about that here :
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/could-cancellara-win-the-tour-de-france?
- losing 5Kg seems possible, he certainly wouldn't look worse than
Wiggins if he did.


== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Wed, Apr 14 2010 9:22 am
From: "z, fred"


Keith wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 19:53:28 -0700, "Mexican Low Rider Mafia"
> <mexican-low-rider-mafia@mexican-low-rider-mafia.com> wrote:
>
>> It is not possible. Is it?
>
> He can and he will, he can win any one day race and any one-week race
> he puts his mind (and legs) to, the real question is whether he can
> win a GT one day, more about that here :
> http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/could-cancellara-win-the-tour-de-france?
> - losing 5Kg seems possible, he certainly wouldn't look worse than
> Wiggins if he did.

The numbers don't add up.

If he drops to 70 kilos and is 3% (dangerously lean), that leaves him
with 2.1kg of fat. If you add 2.1 to the 4 that his coach says he would
need to lose, that puts him at 6.1 kg of fat out of 76 kg, or 8% body
fat. I doubt that there are any Pro Tour riders as high as 8%. And if he
weighed 180 lbs. 79 kg as listed by Versus or Wiki(probably Versus's
source) and lost a proportional amount of fat and muscle (unlikely to
lose that much muscle), that would have put him at 12.8% fat. No way.


== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Wed, Apr 14 2010 10:09 am
From: "Fred K. Gringioni"

"Keith" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:qidbs550qotptkuf2n7u9enabi9j8o8is6@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 19:53:28 -0700, "Mexican Low Rider Mafia"
> <mexican-low-rider-mafia@mexican-low-rider-mafia.com> wrote:
>
>>It is not possible. Is it?
>
> He can and he will, he can win any one day race and any one-week race
> he puts his mind (and legs) to, the real question is whether he can
> win a GT one day, more about that here :
> http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/could-cancellara-win-the-tour-de-france?
> - losing 5Kg seems possible, he certainly wouldn't look worse than
> Wiggins if he did.

Dumbass -

Please see the thread "Pinging Keith"

thanks,

Fred. presented by Gringioni.

==============================================================================

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "rec.bicycles.racing"
group.

To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing?hl=en

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rec.bicycles.racing+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com

To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/subscribe?hl=en

To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com

==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com/?hl=en

alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets - 25 new messages in 4 topics - digest

Buzz It
alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets?hl=en

alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets@googlegroups.com

Today's topics:

* Rex Is the Linchpin - 12 messages, 3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/2e0f86ae0a398057?hl=en
* Santonio Holmes is a Jet per Randy Lange - 10 messages, 4 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/78871774dda3c9c8?hl=en
* Rumor: Brandon Marshall to Fins... - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/7caaaa28c6340aac?hl=en
* this for a late 5th rounder - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/b0378ac533dd8e8d?hl=en

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Rex Is the Linchpin
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/2e0f86ae0a398057?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 12 ==
Date: Wed, Apr 14 2010 11:05 am
From: MZ


Michael wrote:
> On Apr 14, 12:29 pm, Johnctx <j...@spamtx.net> wrote:
>> Michael wrote:
>>> On Apr 14, 7:22 am, Glenn Greenstein <lexa...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Apr 13, 11:18 pm, Michael <mjd1...@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>>> On Apr 13, 11:11 pm, Glenn Greenstein <lexa...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Apr 13, 9:31 pm, Michael <mjd1...@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Apr 13, 8:21 pm, Tutor <dcat4...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Apr 13, 7:31 pm, Ritchie <ritchie1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Apr 13, 5:55 pm, Glenn Greenstein <lexa...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 13, 4:24 pm, Michael <mjd1...@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 13, 4:09 pm, MZ <m...@nospam.void> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> JetsLife wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Pre Rexosaurus I wonder if WoodyBaum add players with such litanies of
>>>>>>>>>>>>> off-the-field "indiscretions", "transgressions", "bumps in the road"
>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- it's a synonym fest these days with Eldrick leading the charge.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think the Jets add these wild boys because Rex is a wild boy too --
>>>>>>>>>>>>> but in the best of ways. He's a man's man, straight shooting leader.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> He is large and in charge, yet he cares. He supports his players
>>>>>>>>>>>>> personally, supporting them on and off the field. He tells like it
>>>>>>>>>>>>> is, keeps it simple as Faneca e-mailed to Cimini, so whoever comes in
>>>>>>>>>>>>> they just mesh. If they don't -- they hit the Kerry Rhodes.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> In Rex We Trust.
>>>>>>>>>>>> I think you're right. I think Rex's personality can make these things
>>>>>>>>>>>> work. I also think he's had some experience on his last team dealing
>>>>>>>>>>>> with some guys who aren't exactly choir boys. The attitude in Baltimore
>>>>>>>>>>>> is fierce but still professional. They really have an excellent program
>>>>>>>>>>>> there, IMO.
>>>>>>>>>>> I love Rex as the Jets coach and think getting him has been the best
>>>>>>>>>>> thing for the Jets since Sonny Werblin... Still... Rex is the kind of
>>>>>>>>>>> fellow that will come up short or in a bad spot once in a while as a
>>>>>>>>>>> result of his moxy and attitude "writing checks that his body cant
>>>>>>>>>>> cash". As football smart as he is, he cant win 'em all. We were
>>>>>>>>>>> supposed to have a star in Gholson by his statement, and we dont have
>>>>>>>>>>> it yet. Sure, Rex is great with players and can handle guys that
>>>>>>>>>>> other coaches cant, but he cant fix 'em all. I think they bit off
>>>>>>>>>>> more than they can chew with all the problem cases at one time,
>>>>>>>>>>> especially Santonio.
>>>>>>>>>> I really don't get what it is about SH that scares the crap out of
>>>>>>>>>> you. What is he going to do? Shoot Fireman Ed? Give Joe Namath a
>>>>>>>>>> bottle of Glenlivet?- Hide quoted text -
>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>>>>>>>> SH doesn't scare me, I just don't think it was a wise move to bring
>>>>>>>>> him here. He is just your basic POS. I believe the mixture of SH and
>>>>>>>>> NYC life is just an explosion waiting to happen. A tiger never changes
>>>>>>>>> his stripes!- Hide quoted text -
>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>>>>>>> Huge talent. Screwed up head for sure. Low 5th round choice. I
>>>>>>>> guess you would rather have the low 5th rounder, huh? Maybe this will
>>>>>>>> help you and Michael-
>>>>>>>> a list of the Jets 5th rounders since Bill Parcells was coach in 1997:
>>>>>>>> Erik Ainge
>>>>>>>> Jason Pociask
>>>>>>>> Andre Maddox
>>>>>>>> Erik Coleman
>>>>>>>> Matt Walters
>>>>>>>> Windrell Hayes
>>>>>>>> Jermaine Jones
>>>>>>>> Casey Dailey
>>>>>>>> Doug Karczewski
>>>>>>>> Blake Spence
>>>>>>>> Eric Bateman
>>>>>>>> Lamont Burns
>>>>>>>> Raymond Austin
>>>>>>>> Gee, what are the Jets thinking, trading away that 5th round choice (I
>>>>>>>> think 24th in round 5) for Santonio Holmes? Somebody fire Tannenbaum
>>>>>>>> right now! LOL!- Hide quoted text -
>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>>>>>> never mind what it cost as far as draft picks.. what did it cost in
>>>>>>> the way of team reputation and identity ??? you wanna be the junk yard
>>>>>>> jets ??? i dont want to route for criminals.
>>>>>> Maybe ping pong is more your speed Michael.- Hide quoted text -
>>>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>>>> not with criminals and scum bags it isnt... if you think all the
>>>>> players in the nfl are violent, drug users, stupid and criminal you
>>>>> might be a tad bit ignorant on the matter
>>>> Michael. let me ask you this. Have you ever gotten into a fight with
>>>> another person? How about a woman for example. I know this sounds
>>>> stereotypical but in my experience a woman is more willing to punch a
>>>> guy than another man if you piss her off. I say this because it has
>>>> happened to me more than once and they don't hit you once, you get
>>>> hit, kicked, scratched 3 or 4 times before you know you are even in a
>>>> fight. I would bet anything that the woman that Holmes threw the glass
>>>> at became extremely abusive before it got to that point.
>>>> Now here is my point, you don't know the facts, neither do I for that
>>>> matter but you are calling him a violent drug user and a stupid
>>>> criminal. You also are not considering what kind of person you have to
>>>> be to be an NFL player. You have to have violence in you to be
>>>> successful and sometime a person can unwittingly bring that out by
>>>> slapping them or telling them there mother was a whore. That doesn't
>>>> make you a criminal, and for that matter non of the players the Jets
>>>> have brought in are criminals, stupid and immature maybe but not
>>>> criminals. Get over your self righteousness and holyier than thee
>>>> attitude.- Hide quoted text -
>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>> I also wanted to respond to your commentary as far as what it takes to
>>> be a football player in the NFL. No, Glenn... You don't have to be
>>> violent or aggressive. That is kind of a silly characterization. If
>>> you think football is violence, you are ignorant. Not even the most
>>> vicious hitting in football is violence. It is physical, but not
>>> violence. Violence is when a person breaks the rules and used
>>> physical force or physical intimidation to overwhelm another person in
>>> order to get something from them. The victim is not expecting it, nor
>>> have they agreed to participate. In Football, everyone has agreed to
>>> it and expects it. You don't have to be the kind of person that wants
>>> to victimize unsuspecting non participants to knock the shit out of a
>>> qb or wr that also agrees to hit and be hit by the rules on a playing
>>> field. That is not crime or violence. Not even close. You don't need
>>> a criminal mind or a hose of personality defects to be a mad man on
>>> the football field.
>> Football is a boxing match. It is absolutely violence.
>>
>> http://www.merriam-webster.com/netdict/violence
>>
>> Main Entry: vi·o·lence
>> Pronunciation: \ˈvī-lən(t)s, ˈvī-ə-\
>> Function: noun
>> Date: 14th century
>>
>> 1 a : exertion of physical force so as to injure or abuse (as in warfare
>> effecting illegal entry into a house) b : an instance of violent
>> treatment or procedure
>> 2 : injury by or as if by distortion, infringement, or profanation : outrage
>> 3 a : intense, turbulent, or furious and often destructive action or
>> force <the violence of the storm> b : vehement feeling or expression :
>> fervor; also : an instance of such action or feeling c : a clashing or
>> jarring quality : discordance
>> 4 : undue alteration (as of wording or sense in editing a text)- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> ok, teddy atlas and mangini :-)
>
> football is not boxing. boxing is not violence. boxing is brutal
> and physical, but it is not violence. if a boxer went into the
> audience and hit a spectator it would be violence. if a spectator
> threw a bottle at a boxer in the ring it would be violence. what is
> legal and expected in a sport is not what is legal and expected
> outside the sport.

Rules and laws don't make violence violence. That's what rules and laws
were meant to prevent in the first place. IOW, "violence" pre-existed
the rules governing violence. In the case of football, violence is
permitted for the sake of sport. As you even acknowledge, it's an
identical action -- the difference is that one isn't prosecuted whereas
the other is. And that's important here. The players are paid to
perform the same actions that, in another arena, they would get in
trouble for. It's the external environment that's different, not the
action. So I think it's well within their ability and tendencies to
commit violence in the wrong arena.


you DO NOT need to be a person that CAN NOT make
> that distinction in order to box or play football. i'm using this as
> an example because it has been in the popular media... the most
> regularly physical play in a football game is on the line. the most
> power and the most guranateed contact. on every play. do you think
> michael oher is a good football player ??? do you think he's a violent
> person ??? of course he is a good football player and non violent.
> would you say that the jets marty lyons is a violent person ??? i dont
> get why people always figure that football players or other sporting
> types have a built in violent complex. what a player that does
> violence DID NOT have were people/parents/coaches to teach them
> properly. just a screwed up system that let them slide so long as
> they help the team win. you dont have to be lawless animal to play
> ball and excuses should not be made for guys that make trouble all the
> time.


== 2 of 12 ==
Date: Wed, Apr 14 2010 11:19 am
From: Michael


On Apr 14, 1:51 pm, Johnctx <j...@spamtx.net> wrote:
> Michael wrote:
> > On Apr 14, 12:29 pm, Johnctx <j...@spamtx.net> wrote:
> >> Michael wrote:
> >>> On Apr 14, 7:22 am, Glenn Greenstein <lexa...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> On Apr 13, 11:18 pm, Michael <mjd1...@verizon.net> wrote:
> >>>>> On Apr 13, 11:11 pm, Glenn Greenstein <lexa...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> On Apr 13, 9:31 pm, Michael <mjd1...@verizon.net> wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Apr 13, 8:21 pm, Tutor <dcat4...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On Apr 13, 7:31 pm, Ritchie <ritchie1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On Apr 13, 5:55 pm, Glenn Greenstein <lexa...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> On Apr 13, 4:24 pm, Michael <mjd1...@verizon.net> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 13, 4:09 pm, MZ <m...@nospam.void> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> JetsLife wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Pre Rexosaurus I wonder if WoodyBaum add players with such litanies of
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> off-the-field "indiscretions", "transgressions", "bumps in the road"
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- it's a synonym fest these days with Eldrick leading the charge.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I think the Jets add these wild boys because Rex is a wild boy too --
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> but in the best of ways.  He's a man's man, straight shooting leader.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> He is large and in charge, yet he cares.  He supports his players
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> personally, supporting them on and off the field.  He tells like it
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> is, keeps it simple as Faneca e-mailed to Cimini, so whoever comes in
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> they just mesh.  If they don't -- they hit the Kerry Rhodes.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> In Rex We Trust.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> I think you're right.  I think Rex's personality can make these things
> >>>>>>>>>>>> work.  I also think he's had some experience on his last team dealing
> >>>>>>>>>>>> with some guys who aren't exactly choir boys.  The attitude in Baltimore
> >>>>>>>>>>>> is fierce but still professional.  They really have an excellent program
> >>>>>>>>>>>> there, IMO.
> >>>>>>>>>>> I love Rex as the Jets coach and think getting him has been the best
> >>>>>>>>>>> thing for the Jets since Sonny Werblin... Still... Rex is the kind of
> >>>>>>>>>>> fellow that will come up short or in a bad spot once in a while as a
> >>>>>>>>>>> result of his moxy and attitude "writing checks that his body cant
> >>>>>>>>>>> cash".   As football smart as he is, he cant win 'em all.  We were
> >>>>>>>>>>> supposed to have a star in Gholson by his statement, and we dont have
> >>>>>>>>>>> it yet.  Sure, Rex is great with players and can handle guys that
> >>>>>>>>>>> other coaches cant, but he cant fix 'em all.  I think they bit off
> >>>>>>>>>>> more than they can chew with all the problem cases at one time,
> >>>>>>>>>>> especially Santonio.
> >>>>>>>>>> I really don't get what it is about SH that scares the crap out of
> >>>>>>>>>> you. What is he going to do? Shoot Fireman Ed? Give Joe Namath a
> >>>>>>>>>> bottle of Glenlivet?- Hide quoted text -
> >>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text -
> >>>>>>>>> SH doesn't scare me, I just don't think it was a wise move to bring
> >>>>>>>>> him here. He is just your basic POS. I believe the mixture of SH and
> >>>>>>>>> NYC life is just an explosion waiting to happen. A tiger never changes
> >>>>>>>>> his stripes!- Hide quoted text -
> >>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text -
> >>>>>>>> Huge talent.  Screwed up head for sure.  Low 5th round choice.  I
> >>>>>>>> guess you would rather have the low 5th rounder, huh?  Maybe this will
> >>>>>>>> help you and Michael-
> >>>>>>>> a list of the Jets 5th rounders since Bill Parcells was coach in 1997:
> >>>>>>>> Erik Ainge
> >>>>>>>> Jason Pociask
> >>>>>>>> Andre Maddox
> >>>>>>>> Erik Coleman
> >>>>>>>> Matt Walters
> >>>>>>>> Windrell Hayes
> >>>>>>>> Jermaine Jones
> >>>>>>>> Casey Dailey
> >>>>>>>> Doug Karczewski
> >>>>>>>> Blake Spence
> >>>>>>>> Eric Bateman
> >>>>>>>> Lamont Burns
> >>>>>>>> Raymond Austin
> >>>>>>>> Gee, what are the Jets thinking, trading away that 5th round choice (I
> >>>>>>>> think 24th in round 5) for Santonio Holmes?  Somebody fire Tannenbaum
> >>>>>>>> right now!  LOL!- Hide quoted text -
> >>>>>>>> - Show quoted text -
> >>>>>>> never mind what it cost as far as draft picks.. what did it cost in
> >>>>>>> the way of team reputation and identity ??? you wanna be the junk yard
> >>>>>>> jets ??? i dont want to route for criminals.
> >>>>>> Maybe ping pong is more your speed Michael.- Hide quoted text -
> >>>>>> - Show quoted text -
> >>>>> not with criminals and scum bags it isnt...  if you think all the
> >>>>> players in the nfl are violent, drug users, stupid and criminal you
> >>>>> might be a tad bit ignorant on the matter
> >>>> Michael. let me ask you this. Have you ever gotten into a fight with
> >>>> another person? How about a woman for example. I know this sounds
> >>>> stereotypical but in my experience a woman is more willing to punch a
> >>>> guy than another man if you piss her off. I say this because it has
> >>>> happened to me more than once and they don't hit you once, you get
> >>>> hit, kicked, scratched 3 or 4 times before you know you are even in a
> >>>> fight. I would bet anything that the woman that Holmes threw the glass
> >>>> at became extremely abusive before it got to that point.
> >>>> Now here is my point, you don't know the facts, neither do I for that
> >>>> matter but you are calling him a violent drug user and a stupid
> >>>> criminal. You also are not considering what kind of person you have to
> >>>> be to be an NFL player. You have to have violence in you to be
> >>>> successful and sometime a person can unwittingly bring that out by
> >>>> slapping them or telling them there mother was a whore. That doesn't
> >>>> make you a criminal, and for that matter non of the players the Jets
> >>>> have brought in are criminals, stupid and immature maybe but not
> >>>> criminals. Get over your self righteousness and holyier than thee
> >>>> attitude.- Hide quoted text -
> >>>> - Show quoted text -
> >>> I also wanted to respond to your commentary as far as what it takes to
> >>> be a football player in the NFL.  No, Glenn... You don't have to be
> >>> violent or aggressive.  That is kind of a silly characterization.  If
> >>> you think football is violence, you are ignorant. Not even the most
> >>> vicious hitting in football is violence.  It is physical, but not
> >>> violence.  Violence is when a person breaks the rules and used
> >>> physical force or physical intimidation to overwhelm another person in
> >>> order to get something from them.  The victim is not expecting it, nor
> >>> have they agreed to participate.  In Football, everyone has agreed to
> >>> it and expects it.  You don't have to be the kind of person that wants
> >>> to victimize unsuspecting non participants to knock the shit out of a
> >>> qb or wr that also agrees to hit and be hit by the rules on a playing
> >>> field.  That is not crime or violence.  Not even close. You don't need
> >>> a criminal mind or a hose of personality defects to be a mad man on
> >>> the football field.
> >> Football is a boxing match.  It is absolutely violence.
>
> >>http://www.merriam-webster.com/netdict/violence
>
> >> Main Entry: vi·o·lence
> >> Pronunciation: \ˈvī-lən(t)s, ˈvī-ə-\
> >> Function: noun
> >> Date: 14th century
>
> >> 1 a : exertion of physical force so as to injure or abuse (as in warfare
> >> effecting illegal entry into a house) b : an instance of violent
> >> treatment or procedure
> >> 2 : injury by or as if by distortion, infringement, or profanation : outrage
> >> 3 a : intense, turbulent, or furious and often destructive action or
> >> force <the violence of the storm> b : vehement feeling or expression :
> >> fervor; also : an instance of such action or feeling c : a clashing or
> >> jarring quality : discordance
> >> 4 : undue alteration (as of wording or sense in editing a text)- Hide quoted text -
>
> >> - Show quoted text -
>
> > ok, teddy atlas and mangini :-)
>
> >  football is not boxing.  boxing is not violence.   boxing is brutal
> > and physical, but it is not violence.  
>
> I will just let this stand.  When I write the coffee table book "Crazy
> Quotes by Michael"  it will be # 2 after you wrote how Napoleon beat the
> Russians.


my coffee table history book will include john c's account of how the
spencer would have saved thousands if only it was not rejected by the
army.

> if a boxer went into the

> > audience and hit a spectator it would be violence.  if a spectator
> > threw a bottle at a boxer in the ring it would be violence.  what is
> > legal and expected in a sport is not what is legal and expected
> > outside the sport.  you DO NOT need to be a person that CAN NOT make
> > that distinction in order to box or play football.  i'm using this as
> > an example because it has been in the popular media... the most
> > regularly physical play in a football game is on the line.  the most
> > power and the most guranateed contact.  on every play.  do you think
> > michael oher is a good football player ??? do you think he's a violent
> > person ??? of course he is a good football player and non violent.
> > would you say that the jets marty lyons is a violent person ??? i dont
> > get why people always figure that football players or other sporting
> > types have a built in violent complex.  what a player that does
> > violence DID NOT have were people/parents/coaches to teach them
> > properly.  just a screwed up system that let them slide so long as
> > they help the team win.   you dont have to be lawless animal to play
> > ball and excuses should not be made for guys that make trouble all the
> > time.
>
> Michael, you are flying down an alley 100 MPH by yourself.
>
> If you play football you generally are a violent person unless of course
> you are Adam Vinatierri or Vernon Gholston.  You probably aren't a law
> breaker but what you do on the field requires violence. Watch what
> Braylon Edwards does when he blocks, what a boxer does, what a rugby
> player, or a wrestler does. You can call it contact but when you throw
> your body into another human being when running full blast it isn''t
> called the waltz.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

john.. there are violent people in all sports... there are violent
people that dont play any sports. there are non violent people that
box and play football. bruce smith said he liked football becayse "he
could really kick the shit out of somone and not get arrested".
michael strahan said he never played angry... he always played focused
with a professional mindset. here you have one guy expressing an
understanding of what is legal and what was not. then you have
another guy expressing a non violent mind set while on the field.
while bruce smith's statement sounds like that of a vioent man, it
also sounds like the statement of a man that knows play from
violence.

for the sake of getting past semantics, lets remove the word
"violence" where ever I have written it and substitute it with
"criminal violence". And past that I'll say for sure... You dont have
to be a violent criminal to play football and football as an
occupation or as a sport is not any reason to make excuses for a
football player to take up criminal violence. for every knuckle head
ball player in the nfl or college that pops off, there are hundreds...
thousands that dont.


== 3 of 12 ==
Date: Wed, Apr 14 2010 12:00 pm
From: Michael


On Apr 14, 2:05 pm, MZ <m...@nospam.void> wrote:
> Michael wrote:
> > On Apr 14, 12:29 pm, Johnctx <j...@spamtx.net> wrote:
> >> Michael wrote:
> >>> On Apr 14, 7:22 am, Glenn Greenstein <lexa...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> On Apr 13, 11:18 pm, Michael <mjd1...@verizon.net> wrote:
> >>>>> On Apr 13, 11:11 pm, Glenn Greenstein <lexa...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> On Apr 13, 9:31 pm, Michael <mjd1...@verizon.net> wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Apr 13, 8:21 pm, Tutor <dcat4...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On Apr 13, 7:31 pm, Ritchie <ritchie1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On Apr 13, 5:55 pm, Glenn Greenstein <lexa...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> On Apr 13, 4:24 pm, Michael <mjd1...@verizon.net> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 13, 4:09 pm, MZ <m...@nospam.void> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> JetsLife wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Pre Rexosaurus I wonder if WoodyBaum add players with such litanies of
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> off-the-field "indiscretions", "transgressions", "bumps in the road"
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- it's a synonym fest these days with Eldrick leading the charge.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I think the Jets add these wild boys because Rex is a wild boy too --
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> but in the best of ways.  He's a man's man, straight shooting leader.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> He is large and in charge, yet he cares.  He supports his players
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> personally, supporting them on and off the field.  He tells like it
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> is, keeps it simple as Faneca e-mailed to Cimini, so whoever comes in
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> they just mesh.  If they don't -- they hit the Kerry Rhodes.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> In Rex We Trust.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> I think you're right.  I think Rex's personality can make these things
> >>>>>>>>>>>> work.  I also think he's had some experience on his last team dealing
> >>>>>>>>>>>> with some guys who aren't exactly choir boys.  The attitude in Baltimore
> >>>>>>>>>>>> is fierce but still professional.  They really have an excellent program
> >>>>>>>>>>>> there, IMO.
> >>>>>>>>>>> I love Rex as the Jets coach and think getting him has been the best
> >>>>>>>>>>> thing for the Jets since Sonny Werblin... Still... Rex is the kind of
> >>>>>>>>>>> fellow that will come up short or in a bad spot once in a while as a
> >>>>>>>>>>> result of his moxy and attitude "writing checks that his body cant
> >>>>>>>>>>> cash".   As football smart as he is, he cant win 'em all.  We were
> >>>>>>>>>>> supposed to have a star in Gholson by his statement, and we dont have
> >>>>>>>>>>> it yet.  Sure, Rex is great with players and can handle guys that
> >>>>>>>>>>> other coaches cant, but he cant fix 'em all.  I think they bit off
> >>>>>>>>>>> more than they can chew with all the problem cases at one time,
> >>>>>>>>>>> especially Santonio.
> >>>>>>>>>> I really don't get what it is about SH that scares the crap out of
> >>>>>>>>>> you. What is he going to do? Shoot Fireman Ed? Give Joe Namath a
> >>>>>>>>>> bottle of Glenlivet?- Hide quoted text -
> >>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text -
> >>>>>>>>> SH doesn't scare me, I just don't think it was a wise move to bring
> >>>>>>>>> him here. He is just your basic POS. I believe the mixture of SH and
> >>>>>>>>> NYC life is just an explosion waiting to happen. A tiger never changes
> >>>>>>>>> his stripes!- Hide quoted text -
> >>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text -
> >>>>>>>> Huge talent.  Screwed up head for sure.  Low 5th round choice.  I
> >>>>>>>> guess you would rather have the low 5th rounder, huh?  Maybe this will
> >>>>>>>> help you and Michael-
> >>>>>>>> a list of the Jets 5th rounders since Bill Parcells was coach in 1997:
> >>>>>>>> Erik Ainge
> >>>>>>>> Jason Pociask
> >>>>>>>> Andre Maddox
> >>>>>>>> Erik Coleman
> >>>>>>>> Matt Walters
> >>>>>>>> Windrell Hayes
> >>>>>>>> Jermaine Jones
> >>>>>>>> Casey Dailey
> >>>>>>>> Doug Karczewski
> >>>>>>>> Blake Spence
> >>>>>>>> Eric Bateman
> >>>>>>>> Lamont Burns
> >>>>>>>> Raymond Austin
> >>>>>>>> Gee, what are the Jets thinking, trading away that 5th round choice (I
> >>>>>>>> think 24th in round 5) for Santonio Holmes?  Somebody fire Tannenbaum
> >>>>>>>> right now!  LOL!- Hide quoted text -
> >>>>>>>> - Show quoted text -
> >>>>>>> never mind what it cost as far as draft picks.. what did it cost in
> >>>>>>> the way of team reputation and identity ??? you wanna be the junk yard
> >>>>>>> jets ??? i dont want to route for criminals.
> >>>>>> Maybe ping pong is more your speed Michael.- Hide quoted text -
> >>>>>> - Show quoted text -
> >>>>> not with criminals and scum bags it isnt...  if you think all the
> >>>>> players in the nfl are violent, drug users, stupid and criminal you
> >>>>> might be a tad bit ignorant on the matter
> >>>> Michael. let me ask you this. Have you ever gotten into a fight with
> >>>> another person? How about a woman for example. I know this sounds
> >>>> stereotypical but in my experience a woman is more willing to punch a
> >>>> guy than another man if you piss her off. I say this because it has
> >>>> happened to me more than once and they don't hit you once, you get
> >>>> hit, kicked, scratched 3 or 4 times before you know you are even in a
> >>>> fight. I would bet anything that the woman that Holmes threw the glass
> >>>> at became extremely abusive before it got to that point.
> >>>> Now here is my point, you don't know the facts, neither do I for that
> >>>> matter but you are calling him a violent drug user and a stupid
> >>>> criminal. You also are not considering what kind of person you have to
> >>>> be to be an NFL player. You have to have violence in you to be
> >>>> successful and sometime a person can unwittingly bring that out by
> >>>> slapping them or telling them there mother was a whore. That doesn't
> >>>> make you a criminal, and for that matter non of the players the Jets
> >>>> have brought in are criminals, stupid and immature maybe but not
> >>>> criminals. Get over your self righteousness and holyier than thee
> >>>> attitude.- Hide quoted text -
> >>>> - Show quoted text -
> >>> I also wanted to respond to your commentary as far as what it takes to
> >>> be a football player in the NFL.  No, Glenn... You don't have to be
> >>> violent or aggressive.  That is kind of a silly characterization.  If
> >>> you think football is violence, you are ignorant. Not even the most
> >>> vicious hitting in football is violence.  It is physical, but not
> >>> violence.  Violence is when a person breaks the rules and used
> >>> physical force or physical intimidation to overwhelm another person in
> >>> order to get something from them.  The victim is not expecting it, nor
> >>> have they agreed to participate.  In Football, everyone has agreed to
> >>> it and expects it.  You don't have to be the kind of person that wants
> >>> to victimize unsuspecting non participants to knock the shit out of a
> >>> qb or wr that also agrees to hit and be hit by the rules on a playing
> >>> field.  That is not crime or violence.  Not even close. You don't need
> >>> a criminal mind or a hose of personality defects to be a mad man on
> >>> the football field.
> >> Football is a boxing match.  It is absolutely violence.
>
> >>http://www.merriam-webster.com/netdict/violence
>
> >> Main Entry: vi·o·lence
> >> Pronunciation: \ˈvī-lən(t)s, ˈvī-ə-\
> >> Function: noun
> >> Date: 14th century
>
> >> 1 a : exertion of physical force so as to injure or abuse (as in warfare
> >> effecting illegal entry into a house) b : an instance of violent
> >> treatment or procedure
> >> 2 : injury by or as if by distortion, infringement, or profanation : outrage
> >> 3 a : intense, turbulent, or furious and often destructive action or
> >> force <the violence of the storm> b : vehement feeling or expression :
> >> fervor; also : an instance of such action or feeling c : a clashing or
> >> jarring quality : discordance
> >> 4 : undue alteration (as of wording or sense in editing a text)- Hide quoted text -
>
> >> - Show quoted text -
>
> > ok, teddy atlas and mangini :-)
>
> >  football is not boxing.  boxing is not violence.   boxing is brutal
> > and physical, but it is not violence.  if a boxer went into the
> > audience and hit a spectator it would be violence.  if a spectator
> > threw a bottle at a boxer in the ring it would be violence.  what is
> > legal and expected in a sport is not what is legal and expected
> > outside the sport.
>
> Rules and laws don't make violence violence.  That's what rules and laws
> were meant to prevent in the first place.  IOW, "violence" pre-existed
> the rules governing violence.  In the case of football, violence is
> permitted for the sake of sport.  As you even acknowledge, it's an
> identical action -- the difference is that one isn't prosecuted whereas
> the other is.  And that's important here.  The players are paid to
> perform the same actions that, in another arena, they would get in
> trouble for.  It's the external environment that's different, not the
> action.  So I think it's well within their ability and tendencies to
> commit violence in the wrong arena.


mark... is football now or was it ever an activity where unwilling and
unknowing participants were preyed on by others ??? do they allow
guns on the fied ??? can the physical contact continue after the
whistle ??? would you get the win if you strangle the QB ??? if you
want a bigger contract, can you use force on another guy in the locker
room and take his necklace, ring or wallet ??? Are there doctors ready
on the field in case of injury ??? Do they have security at games ???
Cameras ??? Football is not violence. If you dont like what I define
as violence, than say it is not criminal violence. Not in it's spirit
and not in physical practice. Get rid of the reffs, spectators,
cameras, doctors, allow weapons and let several guys go after one guy
for money, mallice, revenge or social prestige and it will a violent
sport.


>    you DO NOT need to be a person that CAN NOT make
>
>
>
> > that distinction in order to box or play football.  i'm using this as
> > an example because it has been in the popular media... the most
> > regularly physical play in a football game is on the line.  the most
> > power and the most guranateed contact.  on every play.  do you think
> > michael oher is a good football player ??? do you think he's a violent
> > person ??? of course he is a good football player and non violent.
> > would you say that the jets marty lyons is a violent person ??? i dont
> > get why people always figure that football players or other sporting
> > types have a built in violent complex.  what a player that does
> > violence DID NOT have were people/parents/coaches to teach them
> > properly.  just a screwed up system that let them slide so long as
> > they help the team win.   you dont have to be lawless animal to play
> > ball and excuses should not be made for guys that make trouble all the
> > time.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

== 4 of 12 ==
Date: Wed, Apr 14 2010 12:28 pm
From: MZ


Michael wrote:
> On Apr 14, 2:05 pm, MZ <m...@nospam.void> wrote:
>> Michael wrote:
>>> On Apr 14, 12:29 pm, Johnctx <j...@spamtx.net> wrote:
>>>> Michael wrote:
>>>>> On Apr 14, 7:22 am, Glenn Greenstein <lexa...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Apr 13, 11:18 pm, Michael <mjd1...@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Apr 13, 11:11 pm, Glenn Greenstein <lexa...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Apr 13, 9:31 pm, Michael <mjd1...@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Apr 13, 8:21 pm, Tutor <dcat4...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 13, 7:31 pm, Ritchie <ritchie1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 13, 5:55 pm, Glenn Greenstein <lexa...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 13, 4:24 pm, Michael <mjd1...@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 13, 4:09 pm, MZ <m...@nospam.void> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> JetsLife wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Pre Rexosaurus I wonder if WoodyBaum add players with such litanies of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> off-the-field "indiscretions", "transgressions", "bumps in the road"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- it's a synonym fest these days with Eldrick leading the charge.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think the Jets add these wild boys because Rex is a wild boy too --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but in the best of ways. He's a man's man, straight shooting leader.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He is large and in charge, yet he cares. He supports his players
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> personally, supporting them on and off the field. He tells like it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is, keeps it simple as Faneca e-mailed to Cimini, so whoever comes in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they just mesh. If they don't -- they hit the Kerry Rhodes.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In Rex We Trust.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think you're right. I think Rex's personality can make these things
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> work. I also think he's had some experience on his last team dealing
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with some guys who aren't exactly choir boys. The attitude in Baltimore
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is fierce but still professional. They really have an excellent program
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> there, IMO.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I love Rex as the Jets coach and think getting him has been the best
>>>>>>>>>>>>> thing for the Jets since Sonny Werblin... Still... Rex is the kind of
>>>>>>>>>>>>> fellow that will come up short or in a bad spot once in a while as a
>>>>>>>>>>>>> result of his moxy and attitude "writing checks that his body cant
>>>>>>>>>>>>> cash". As football smart as he is, he cant win 'em all. We were
>>>>>>>>>>>>> supposed to have a star in Gholson by his statement, and we dont have
>>>>>>>>>>>>> it yet. Sure, Rex is great with players and can handle guys that
>>>>>>>>>>>>> other coaches cant, but he cant fix 'em all. I think they bit off
>>>>>>>>>>>>> more than they can chew with all the problem cases at one time,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> especially Santonio.
>>>>>>>>>>>> I really don't get what it is about SH that scares the crap out of
>>>>>>>>>>>> you. What is he going to do? Shoot Fireman Ed? Give Joe Namath a
>>>>>>>>>>>> bottle of Glenlivet?- Hide quoted text -
>>>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>>>>>>>>>> SH doesn't scare me, I just don't think it was a wise move to bring
>>>>>>>>>>> him here. He is just your basic POS. I believe the mixture of SH and
>>>>>>>>>>> NYC life is just an explosion waiting to happen. A tiger never changes
>>>>>>>>>>> his stripes!- Hide quoted text -
>>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>>>>>>>>> Huge talent. Screwed up head for sure. Low 5th round choice. I
>>>>>>>>>> guess you would rather have the low 5th rounder, huh? Maybe this will
>>>>>>>>>> help you and Michael-
>>>>>>>>>> a list of the Jets 5th rounders since Bill Parcells was coach in 1997:
>>>>>>>>>> Erik Ainge
>>>>>>>>>> Jason Pociask
>>>>>>>>>> Andre Maddox
>>>>>>>>>> Erik Coleman
>>>>>>>>>> Matt Walters
>>>>>>>>>> Windrell Hayes
>>>>>>>>>> Jermaine Jones
>>>>>>>>>> Casey Dailey
>>>>>>>>>> Doug Karczewski
>>>>>>>>>> Blake Spence
>>>>>>>>>> Eric Bateman
>>>>>>>>>> Lamont Burns
>>>>>>>>>> Raymond Austin
>>>>>>>>>> Gee, what are the Jets thinking, trading away that 5th round choice (I
>>>>>>>>>> think 24th in round 5) for Santonio Holmes? Somebody fire Tannenbaum
>>>>>>>>>> right now! LOL!- Hide quoted text -
>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>>>>>>>> never mind what it cost as far as draft picks.. what did it cost in
>>>>>>>>> the way of team reputation and identity ??? you wanna be the junk yard
>>>>>>>>> jets ??? i dont want to route for criminals.
>>>>>>>> Maybe ping pong is more your speed Michael.- Hide quoted text -
>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>>>>>> not with criminals and scum bags it isnt... if you think all the
>>>>>>> players in the nfl are violent, drug users, stupid and criminal you
>>>>>>> might be a tad bit ignorant on the matter
>>>>>> Michael. let me ask you this. Have you ever gotten into a fight with
>>>>>> another person? How about a woman for example. I know this sounds
>>>>>> stereotypical but in my experience a woman is more willing to punch a
>>>>>> guy than another man if you piss her off. I say this because it has
>>>>>> happened to me more than once and they don't hit you once, you get
>>>>>> hit, kicked, scratched 3 or 4 times before you know you are even in a
>>>>>> fight. I would bet anything that the woman that Holmes threw the glass
>>>>>> at became extremely abusive before it got to that point.
>>>>>> Now here is my point, you don't know the facts, neither do I for that
>>>>>> matter but you are calling him a violent drug user and a stupid
>>>>>> criminal. You also are not considering what kind of person you have to
>>>>>> be to be an NFL player. You have to have violence in you to be
>>>>>> successful and sometime a person can unwittingly bring that out by
>>>>>> slapping them or telling them there mother was a whore. That doesn't
>>>>>> make you a criminal, and for that matter non of the players the Jets
>>>>>> have brought in are criminals, stupid and immature maybe but not
>>>>>> criminals. Get over your self righteousness and holyier than thee
>>>>>> attitude.- Hide quoted text -
>>>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>>>> I also wanted to respond to your commentary as far as what it takes to
>>>>> be a football player in the NFL. No, Glenn... You don't have to be
>>>>> violent or aggressive. That is kind of a silly characterization. If
>>>>> you think football is violence, you are ignorant. Not even the most
>>>>> vicious hitting in football is violence. It is physical, but not
>>>>> violence. Violence is when a person breaks the rules and used
>>>>> physical force or physical intimidation to overwhelm another person in
>>>>> order to get something from them. The victim is not expecting it, nor
>>>>> have they agreed to participate. In Football, everyone has agreed to
>>>>> it and expects it. You don't have to be the kind of person that wants
>>>>> to victimize unsuspecting non participants to knock the shit out of a
>>>>> qb or wr that also agrees to hit and be hit by the rules on a playing
>>>>> field. That is not crime or violence. Not even close. You don't need
>>>>> a criminal mind or a hose of personality defects to be a mad man on
>>>>> the football field.
>>>> Football is a boxing match. It is absolutely violence.
>>>> http://www.merriam-webster.com/netdict/violence
>>>> Main Entry: vi·o·lence
>>>> Pronunciation: \ˈvī-lən(t)s, ˈvī-ə-\
>>>> Function: noun
>>>> Date: 14th century
>>>> 1 a : exertion of physical force so as to injure or abuse (as in warfare
>>>> effecting illegal entry into a house) b : an instance of violent
>>>> treatment or procedure
>>>> 2 : injury by or as if by distortion, infringement, or profanation : outrage
>>>> 3 a : intense, turbulent, or furious and often destructive action or
>>>> force <the violence of the storm> b : vehement feeling or expression :
>>>> fervor; also : an instance of such action or feeling c : a clashing or
>>>> jarring quality : discordance
>>>> 4 : undue alteration (as of wording or sense in editing a text)- Hide quoted text -
>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>> ok, teddy atlas and mangini :-)
>>> football is not boxing. boxing is not violence. boxing is brutal
>>> and physical, but it is not violence. if a boxer went into the
>>> audience and hit a spectator it would be violence. if a spectator
>>> threw a bottle at a boxer in the ring it would be violence. what is
>>> legal and expected in a sport is not what is legal and expected
>>> outside the sport.
>> Rules and laws don't make violence violence. That's what rules and laws
>> were meant to prevent in the first place. IOW, "violence" pre-existed
>> the rules governing violence. In the case of football, violence is
>> permitted for the sake of sport. As you even acknowledge, it's an
>> identical action -- the difference is that one isn't prosecuted whereas
>> the other is. And that's important here. The players are paid to
>> perform the same actions that, in another arena, they would get in
>> trouble for. It's the external environment that's different, not the
>> action. So I think it's well within their ability and tendencies to
>> commit violence in the wrong arena.
>
>
> mark... is football now or was it ever an activity where unwilling and
> unknowing participants were preyed on by others ??? do they allow
> guns on the fied ??? can the physical contact continue after the
> whistle ??? would you get the win if you strangle the QB ??? if you
> want a bigger contract, can you use force on another guy in the locker
> room and take his necklace, ring or wallet ??? Are there doctors ready
> on the field in case of injury ??? Do they have security at games ???
> Cameras ??? Football is not violence.

Michael, your qualifiers don't change things. If two guys in a bar
agree to go outside and duke it out, is it no longer "violence"? Would
you not consider someone who makes a habit of doing that a "violent" person?


> If you dont like what I define
> as violence, than say it is not criminal violence. Not in it's spirit
> and not in physical practice. Get rid of the reffs, spectators,
> cameras, doctors, allow weapons and let several guys go after one guy
> for money, mallice, revenge or social prestige and it will a violent
> sport.

The "criminal" aspect of it only describes whether or not politicans
have deemed it to be illegal. It doesn't change anything about the
activity. I think the point that people are making here is that it's a
violent sport and so it's not a reach to think that some of these
players may have the propensity to engage in violence off the football
field too. Probably more often than your average pencil pusher who gets
a hangnail making photocopies.


== 5 of 12 ==
Date: Wed, Apr 14 2010 12:46 pm
From: Glenn Greenstein


On Apr 14, 3:00 pm, Michael <mjd1...@verizon.net> wrote:
> On Apr 14, 2:05 pm, MZ <m...@nospam.void> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Michael wrote:
> > > On Apr 14, 12:29 pm, Johnctx <j...@spamtx.net> wrote:
> > >> Michael wrote:
> > >>> On Apr 14, 7:22 am, Glenn Greenstein <lexa...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>> On Apr 13, 11:18 pm, Michael <mjd1...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > >>>>> On Apr 13, 11:11 pm, Glenn Greenstein <lexa...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>>>> On Apr 13, 9:31 pm, Michael <mjd1...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > >>>>>>> On Apr 13, 8:21 pm, Tutor <dcat4...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>> On Apr 13, 7:31 pm, Ritchie <ritchie1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>> On Apr 13, 5:55 pm, Glenn Greenstein <lexa...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>> On Apr 13, 4:24 pm, Michael <mjd1...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 13, 4:09 pm, MZ <m...@nospam.void> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> JetsLife wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Pre Rexosaurus I wonder if WoodyBaum add players with such litanies of
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> off-the-field "indiscretions", "transgressions", "bumps in the road"
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- it's a synonym fest these days with Eldrick leading the charge.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> I think the Jets add these wild boys because Rex is a wild boy too --
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> but in the best of ways.  He's a man's man, straight shooting leader.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> He is large and in charge, yet he cares.  He supports his players
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> personally, supporting them on and off the field.  He tells like it
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> is, keeps it simple as Faneca e-mailed to Cimini, so whoever comes in
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> they just mesh.  If they don't -- they hit the Kerry Rhodes.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> In Rex We Trust.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> I think you're right.  I think Rex's personality can make these things
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> work.  I also think he's had some experience on his last team dealing
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> with some guys who aren't exactly choir boys.  The attitude in Baltimore
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> is fierce but still professional.  They really have an excellent program
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> there, IMO.
> > >>>>>>>>>>> I love Rex as the Jets coach and think getting him has been the best
> > >>>>>>>>>>> thing for the Jets since Sonny Werblin... Still... Rex is the kind of
> > >>>>>>>>>>> fellow that will come up short or in a bad spot once in a while as a
> > >>>>>>>>>>> result of his moxy and attitude "writing checks that his body cant
> > >>>>>>>>>>> cash".   As football smart as he is, he cant win 'em all.  We were
> > >>>>>>>>>>> supposed to have a star in Gholson by his statement, and we dont have
> > >>>>>>>>>>> it yet.  Sure, Rex is great with players and can handle guys that
> > >>>>>>>>>>> other coaches cant, but he cant fix 'em all.  I think they bit off
> > >>>>>>>>>>> more than they can chew with all the problem cases at one time,
> > >>>>>>>>>>> especially Santonio.
> > >>>>>>>>>> I really don't get what it is about SH that scares the crap out of
> > >>>>>>>>>> you. What is he going to do? Shoot Fireman Ed? Give Joe Namath a
> > >>>>>>>>>> bottle of Glenlivet?- Hide quoted text -
> > >>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text -
> > >>>>>>>>> SH doesn't scare me, I just don't think it was a wise move to bring
> > >>>>>>>>> him here. He is just your basic POS. I believe the mixture of SH and
> > >>>>>>>>> NYC life is just an explosion waiting to happen. A tiger never changes
> > >>>>>>>>> his stripes!- Hide quoted text -
> > >>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text -
> > >>>>>>>> Huge talent.  Screwed up head for sure.  Low 5th round choice.  I
> > >>>>>>>> guess you would rather have the low 5th rounder, huh?  Maybe this will
> > >>>>>>>> help you and Michael-
> > >>>>>>>> a list of the Jets 5th rounders since Bill Parcells was coach in 1997:
> > >>>>>>>> Erik Ainge
> > >>>>>>>> Jason Pociask
> > >>>>>>>> Andre Maddox
> > >>>>>>>> Erik Coleman
> > >>>>>>>> Matt Walters
> > >>>>>>>> Windrell Hayes
> > >>>>>>>> Jermaine Jones
> > >>>>>>>> Casey Dailey
> > >>>>>>>> Doug Karczewski
> > >>>>>>>> Blake Spence
> > >>>>>>>> Eric Bateman
> > >>>>>>>> Lamont Burns
> > >>>>>>>> Raymond Austin
> > >>>>>>>> Gee, what are the Jets thinking, trading away that 5th round choice (I
> > >>>>>>>> think 24th in round 5) for Santonio Holmes?  Somebody fire Tannenbaum
> > >>>>>>>> right now!  LOL!- Hide quoted text -
> > >>>>>>>> - Show quoted text -
> > >>>>>>> never mind what it cost as far as draft picks.. what did it cost in
> > >>>>>>> the way of team reputation and identity ??? you wanna be the junk yard
> > >>>>>>> jets ??? i dont want to route for criminals.
> > >>>>>> Maybe ping pong is more your speed Michael.- Hide quoted text -
> > >>>>>> - Show quoted text -
> > >>>>> not with criminals and scum bags it isnt...  if you think all the
> > >>>>> players in the nfl are violent, drug users, stupid and criminal you
> > >>>>> might be a tad bit ignorant on the matter
> > >>>> Michael. let me ask you this. Have you ever gotten into a fight with
> > >>>> another person? How about a woman for example. I know this sounds
> > >>>> stereotypical but in my experience a woman is more willing to punch a
> > >>>> guy than another man if you piss her off. I say this because it has
> > >>>> happened to me more than once and they don't hit you once, you get
> > >>>> hit, kicked, scratched 3 or 4 times before you know you are even in a
> > >>>> fight. I would bet anything that the woman that Holmes threw the glass
> > >>>> at became extremely abusive before it got to that point.
> > >>>> Now here is my point, you don't know the facts, neither do I for that
> > >>>> matter but you are calling him a violent drug user and a stupid
> > >>>> criminal. You also are not considering what kind of person you have to
> > >>>> be to be an NFL player. You have to have violence in you to be
> > >>>> successful and sometime a person can unwittingly bring that out by
> > >>>> slapping them or telling them there mother was a whore. That doesn't
> > >>>> make you a criminal, and for that matter non of the players the Jets
> > >>>> have brought in are criminals, stupid and immature maybe but not
> > >>>> criminals. Get over your self righteousness and holyier than thee
> > >>>> attitude.- Hide quoted text -
> > >>>> - Show quoted text -
> > >>> I also wanted to respond to your commentary as far as what it takes to
> > >>> be a football player in the NFL.  No, Glenn... You don't have to be
> > >>> violent or aggressive.  That is kind of a silly characterization.  If
> > >>> you think football is violence, you are ignorant. Not even the most
> > >>> vicious hitting in football is violence.  It is physical, but not
> > >>> violence.  Violence is when a person breaks the rules and used
> > >>> physical force or physical intimidation to overwhelm another person in
> > >>> order to get something from them.  The victim is not expecting it, nor
> > >>> have they agreed to participate.  In Football, everyone has agreed to
> > >>> it and expects it.  You don't have to be the kind of person that wants
> > >>> to victimize unsuspecting non participants to knock the shit out of a
> > >>> qb or wr that also agrees to hit and be hit by the rules on a playing
> > >>> field.  That is not crime or violence.  Not even close. You don't need
> > >>> a criminal mind or a hose of personality defects to be a mad man on
> > >>> the football field.
> > >> Football is a boxing match.  It is absolutely violence.
>
> > >>http://www.merriam-webster.com/netdict/violence
>
> > >> Main Entry: vi·o·lence
> > >> Pronunciation: \ˈvī-lən(t)s, ˈvī-ə-\
> > >> Function: noun
> > >> Date: 14th century
>
> > >> 1 a : exertion of physical force so as to injure or abuse (as in warfare
> > >> effecting illegal entry into a house) b : an instance of violent
> > >> treatment or procedure
> > >> 2 : injury by or as if by distortion, infringement, or profanation : outrage
> > >> 3 a : intense, turbulent, or furious and often destructive action or
> > >> force <the violence of the storm> b : vehement feeling or expression :
> > >> fervor; also : an instance of such action or feeling c : a clashing or
> > >> jarring quality : discordance
> > >> 4 : undue alteration (as of wording or sense in editing a text)- Hide quoted text -
>
> > >> - Show quoted text -
>
> > > ok, teddy atlas and mangini :-)
>
> > >  football is not boxing.  boxing is not violence.   boxing is brutal
> > > and physical, but it is not violence.  if a boxer went into the
> > > audience and hit a spectator it would be violence.  if a spectator
> > > threw a bottle at a boxer in the ring it would be violence.  what is
> > > legal and expected in a sport is not what is legal and expected
> > > outside the sport.
>
> > Rules and laws don't make violence violence.  That's what rules and laws
> > were meant to prevent in the first place.  IOW, "violence" pre-existed
> > the rules governing violence.  In the case of football, violence is
> > permitted for the sake of sport.  As you even acknowledge, it's an
> > identical action -- the difference is that one isn't prosecuted whereas
> > the other is.  And that's important here.  The players are paid to
> > perform the same actions that, in another arena, they would get in
> > trouble for.  It's the external environment that's different, not the
> > action.  So I think it's well within their ability and tendencies to
> > commit violence in the wrong arena.
>
> mark... is football now or was it ever an activity where unwilling and
> unknowing participants were preyed on by others ???  do they allow
> guns on the fied ??? can the physical contact continue after the
> whistle ???  would you get the win if  you strangle the QB ??? if you
> want a bigger contract, can you use force on another guy in the locker
> room and take his necklace, ring or wallet ??? Are there doctors ready
> on the field in case of injury ??? Do they have security at games ???
> Cameras ??? Football is not violence.  If you dont like what I define
> as violence, than say it is not criminal violence.  Not in it's spirit
> and not in physical practice.  Get rid of the reffs, spectators,
> cameras, doctors, allow weapons and let several guys go after one guy
> for money, mallice, revenge or social prestige and it will a violent
> sport.
>
> >    you DO NOT need to be a person that CAN NOT make
>
> > > that distinction
>
> ...
>
> read more »

Michael, it's becoming obvious you speak a different language than the
rest of us. Violence is not defined as a criminal act in most peoples
minds, it just is part of a criminal act but is is also possible to
commit a criminal act without violence. How many people were injured
by violence in the Enron crimes?


== 6 of 12 ==
Date: Wed, Apr 14 2010 12:46 pm
From: Michael


On Apr 14, 3:28 pm, MZ <m...@nospam.void> wrote:
> Michael wrote:
> > On Apr 14, 2:05 pm, MZ <m...@nospam.void> wrote:
> >> Michael wrote:
> >>> On Apr 14, 12:29 pm, Johnctx <j...@spamtx.net> wrote:
> >>>> Michael wrote:
> >>>>> On Apr 14, 7:22 am, Glenn Greenstein <lexa...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> On Apr 13, 11:18 pm, Michael <mjd1...@verizon.net> wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Apr 13, 11:11 pm, Glenn Greenstein <lexa...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On Apr 13, 9:31 pm, Michael <mjd1...@verizon.net> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On Apr 13, 8:21 pm, Tutor <dcat4...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> On Apr 13, 7:31 pm, Ritchie <ritchie1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 13, 5:55 pm, Glenn Greenstein <lexa...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 13, 4:24 pm, Michael <mjd1...@verizon.net> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 13, 4:09 pm, MZ <m...@nospam.void> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> JetsLife wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Pre Rexosaurus I wonder if WoodyBaum add players with such litanies of
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> off-the-field "indiscretions", "transgressions", "bumps in the road"
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- it's a synonym fest these days with Eldrick leading the charge.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think the Jets add these wild boys because Rex is a wild boy too --
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but in the best of ways.  He's a man's man, straight shooting leader.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He is large and in charge, yet he cares.  He supports his players
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> personally, supporting them on and off the field.  He tells like it
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is, keeps it simple as Faneca e-mailed to Cimini, so whoever comes in
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they just mesh.  If they don't -- they hit the Kerry Rhodes.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In Rex We Trust.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think you're right.  I think Rex's personality can make these things
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> work.  I also think he's had some experience on his last team dealing
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> with some guys who aren't exactly choir boys.  The attitude in Baltimore
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> is fierce but still professional.  They really have an excellent program
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> there, IMO.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I love Rex as the Jets coach and think getting him has been the best
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> thing for the Jets since Sonny Werblin... Still... Rex is the kind of
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> fellow that will come up short or in a bad spot once in a while as a
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> result of his moxy and attitude "writing checks that his body cant
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> cash".   As football smart as he is, he cant win 'em all.  We were
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> supposed to have a star in Gholson by his statement, and we dont have
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> it yet.  Sure, Rex is great with players and can handle guys that
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> other coaches cant, but he cant fix 'em all.  I think they bit off
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> more than they can chew with all the problem cases at one time,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> especially Santonio.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> I really don't get what it is about SH that scares the crap out of
> >>>>>>>>>>>> you. What is he going to do? Shoot Fireman Ed? Give Joe Namath a
> >>>>>>>>>>>> bottle of Glenlivet?- Hide quoted text -
> >>>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text -
> >>>>>>>>>>> SH doesn't scare me, I just don't think it was a wise move to bring
> >>>>>>>>>>> him here. He is just your basic POS. I believe the mixture of SH and
> >>>>>>>>>>> NYC life is just an explosion waiting to happen. A tiger never changes
> >>>>>>>>>>> his stripes!- Hide quoted text -
> >>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text -
> >>>>>>>>>> Huge talent.  Screwed up head for sure.  Low 5th round choice.  I
> >>>>>>>>>> guess you would rather have the low 5th rounder, huh?  Maybe this will
> >>>>>>>>>> help you and Michael-
> >>>>>>>>>> a list of the Jets 5th rounders since Bill Parcells was coach in 1997:
> >>>>>>>>>> Erik Ainge
> >>>>>>>>>> Jason Pociask
> >>>>>>>>>> Andre Maddox
> >>>>>>>>>> Erik Coleman
> >>>>>>>>>> Matt Walters
> >>>>>>>>>> Windrell Hayes
> >>>>>>>>>> Jermaine Jones
> >>>>>>>>>> Casey Dailey
> >>>>>>>>>> Doug Karczewski
> >>>>>>>>>> Blake Spence
> >>>>>>>>>> Eric Bateman
> >>>>>>>>>> Lamont Burns
> >>>>>>>>>> Raymond Austin
> >>>>>>>>>> Gee, what are the Jets thinking, trading away that 5th round choice (I
> >>>>>>>>>> think 24th in round 5) for Santonio Holmes?  Somebody fire Tannenbaum
> >>>>>>>>>> right now!  LOL!- Hide quoted text -
> >>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text -
> >>>>>>>>> never mind what it cost as far as draft picks.. what did it cost in
> >>>>>>>>> the way of team reputation and identity ??? you wanna be the junk yard
> >>>>>>>>> jets ??? i dont want to route for criminals.
> >>>>>>>> Maybe ping pong is more your speed Michael.- Hide quoted text -
> >>>>>>>> - Show quoted text -
> >>>>>>> not with criminals and scum bags it isnt...  if you think all the
> >>>>>>> players in the nfl are violent, drug users, stupid and criminal you
> >>>>>>> might be a tad bit ignorant on the matter
> >>>>>> Michael. let me ask you this. Have you ever gotten into a fight with
> >>>>>> another person? How about a woman for example. I know this sounds
> >>>>>> stereotypical but in my experience a woman is more willing to punch a
> >>>>>> guy than another man if you piss her off. I say this because it has
> >>>>>> happened to me more than once and they don't hit you once, you get
> >>>>>> hit, kicked, scratched 3 or 4 times before you know you are even in a
> >>>>>> fight. I would bet anything that the woman that Holmes threw the glass
> >>>>>> at became extremely abusive before it got to that point.
> >>>>>> Now here is my point, you don't know the facts, neither do I for that
> >>>>>> matter but you are calling him a violent drug user and a stupid
> >>>>>> criminal. You also are not considering what kind of person you have to
> >>>>>> be to be an NFL player. You have to have violence in you to be
> >>>>>> successful and sometime a person can unwittingly bring that out by
> >>>>>> slapping them or telling them there mother was a whore. That doesn't
> >>>>>> make you a criminal, and for that matter non of the players the Jets
> >>>>>> have brought in are criminals, stupid and immature maybe but not
> >>>>>> criminals. Get over your self righteousness and holyier than thee
> >>>>>> attitude.- Hide quoted text -
> >>>>>> - Show quoted text -
> >>>>> I also wanted to respond to your commentary as far as what it takes to
> >>>>> be a football player in the NFL.  No, Glenn... You don't have to be
> >>>>> violent or aggressive.  That is kind of a silly characterization.  If
> >>>>> you think football is violence, you are ignorant. Not even the most
> >>>>> vicious hitting in football is violence.  It is physical, but not
> >>>>> violence.  Violence is when a person breaks the rules and used
> >>>>> physical force or physical intimidation to overwhelm another person in
> >>>>> order to get something from them.  The victim is not expecting it, nor
> >>>>> have they agreed to participate.  In Football, everyone has agreed to
> >>>>> it and expects it.  You don't have to be the kind of person that wants
> >>>>> to victimize unsuspecting non participants to knock the shit out of a
> >>>>> qb or wr that also agrees to hit and be hit by the rules on a playing
> >>>>> field.  That is not crime or violence.  Not even close. You don't need
> >>>>> a criminal mind or a hose of personality defects to be a mad man on
> >>>>> the football field.
> >>>> Football is a boxing match.  It is absolutely violence.
> >>>>http://www.merriam-webster.com/netdict/violence
> >>>> Main Entry: vi·o·lence
> >>>> Pronunciation: \ˈvī-lən(t)s, ˈvī-ə-\
> >>>> Function: noun
> >>>> Date: 14th century
> >>>> 1 a : exertion of physical force so as to injure or abuse (as in warfare
> >>>> effecting illegal entry into a house) b : an instance of violent
> >>>> treatment or procedure
> >>>> 2 : injury by or as if by distortion, infringement, or profanation : outrage
> >>>> 3 a : intense, turbulent, or furious and often destructive action or
> >>>> force <the violence of the storm> b : vehement feeling or expression :
> >>>> fervor; also : an instance of such action or feeling c : a clashing or
> >>>> jarring quality : discordance
> >>>> 4 : undue alteration (as of wording or sense in editing a text)- Hide quoted text -
> >>>> - Show quoted text -
> >>> ok, teddy atlas and mangini :-)
> >>>  football is not boxing.  boxing is not violence.   boxing is brutal
> >>> and physical, but it is not violence.  if a boxer went into the
> >>> audience and hit a spectator it would be violence.  if a spectator
> >>> threw a bottle at a boxer in the ring it would be violence.  what is
> >>> legal and expected in a sport is not what is legal and expected
> >>> outside the sport.
> >> Rules and laws don't make violence violence.  That's what rules and laws
> >> were meant to prevent in the first place.  IOW, "violence" pre-existed
> >> the rules governing violence.  In the case of football, violence is
> >> permitted for the sake of sport.  As you even acknowledge, it's an
> >> identical action -- the difference is that one isn't prosecuted whereas
> >> the other is.  And that's important here.  The players are paid to
> >> perform the same actions that, in another arena, they would get in
> >> trouble for.  It's the external environment that's different, not the
> >> action.  So I think it's well within their ability and tendencies to
> >> commit violence in the wrong arena.
>
> > mark... is football now or was it ever an activity where unwilling and
> > unknowing participants were preyed on by others ???  do they allow
> > guns on the fied ??? can the physical contact continue after the
> > whistle ???  would you get the win if  you strangle the QB ??? if you
> > want a bigger contract, can you use force on another guy in the locker
> > room and take his necklace, ring or wallet ??? Are there doctors ready
> > on the field in case of injury ??? Do they have security at games ???
> > Cameras ??? Football is not violence.
>
> Michael, your qualifiers don't change things.  If two guys in a bar
> agree to go outside and duke it out, is it no longer "violence"?  Would
> you not consider someone who makes a habit of doing that a "violent" person?

Mark... Do you understand that there is a difference between a contest
and an assault ???

> >  If you dont like what I define
> > as violence, than say it is not criminal violence.  Not in it's spirit
> > and not in physical practice.  Get rid of the reffs, spectators,
> > cameras, doctors, allow weapons and let several guys go after one guy
> > for money, mallice, revenge or social prestige and it will a violent
> > sport.
>
> The "criminal" aspect of it only describes whether or not politicans
> have deemed it to be illegal.  It doesn't change anything about the
> activity.  I think the point that people are making here is that it's a
> violent sport and so it's not a reach to think that some of these
> players may have the propensity to engage in violence off the football
> field too.  Probably more often than your average pencil pusher who gets
> a hangnail making photocopies.

Yep... And it is just fine if ball players do criminal violence.
We'll let it slide cause that is their nature. Who cares... Lets get
'em on the team. Ball players are all animals anyway. The more
violent the better. Like Paul Crewe said in the Longest Yard. "You
got any with five stars"


== 7 of 12 ==
Date: Wed, Apr 14 2010 12:48 pm
From: Glenn Greenstein


On Apr 14, 1:17 pm, Michael <mjd1...@verizon.net> wrote:
> On Apr 14, 12:44 pm, Glenn Greenstein <lexa...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Apr 14, 11:23 am, Michael <mjd1...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> > > On Apr 14, 7:22 am, Glenn Greenstein <lexa...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Apr 13, 11:18 pm, Michael <mjd1...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Apr 13, 11:11 pm, Glenn Greenstein <lexa...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Apr 13, 9:31 pm, Michael <mjd1...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > On Apr 13, 8:21 pm, Tutor <dcat4...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > On Apr 13, 7:31 pm, Ritchie <ritchie1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > On Apr 13, 5:55 pm, Glenn Greenstein <lexa...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > On Apr 13, 4:24 pm, Michael <mjd1...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > On Apr 13, 4:09 pm, MZ <m...@nospam.void> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > JetsLife wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Pre Rexosaurus I wonder if WoodyBaum add players with such litanies of
> > > > > > > > > > > > > off-the-field "indiscretions", "transgressions", "bumps in the road"
> > > > > > > > > > > > > -- it's a synonym fest these days with Eldrick leading the charge.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > I think the Jets add these wild boys because Rex is a wild boy too --
> > > > > > > > > > > > > but in the best of ways.  He's a man's man, straight shooting leader.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > He is large and in charge, yet he cares.  He supports his players
> > > > > > > > > > > > > personally, supporting them on and off the field.  He tells like it
> > > > > > > > > > > > > is, keeps it simple as Faneca e-mailed to Cimini, so whoever comes in
> > > > > > > > > > > > > they just mesh.  If they don't -- they hit the Kerry Rhodes.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > In Rex We Trust.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > I think you're right.  I think Rex's personality can make these things
> > > > > > > > > > > > work.  I also think he's had some experience on his last team dealing
> > > > > > > > > > > > with some guys who aren't exactly choir boys.  The attitude in Baltimore
> > > > > > > > > > > > is fierce but still professional.  They really have an excellent program
> > > > > > > > > > > > there, IMO.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > I love Rex as the Jets coach and think getting him has been the best
> > > > > > > > > > > thing for the Jets since Sonny Werblin... Still... Rex is the kind of
> > > > > > > > > > > fellow that will come up short or in a bad spot once in a while as a
> > > > > > > > > > > result of his moxy and attitude "writing checks that his body cant
> > > > > > > > > > > cash".   As football smart as he is, he cant win 'em all.  We were
> > > > > > > > > > > supposed to have a star in Gholson by his statement, and we dont have
> > > > > > > > > > > it yet.  Sure, Rex is great with players and can handle guys that
> > > > > > > > > > > other coaches cant, but he cant fix 'em all.  I think they bit off
> > > > > > > > > > > more than they can chew with all the problem cases at one time,
> > > > > > > > > > > especially Santonio.
>
> > > > > > > > > > I really don't get what it is about SH that scares the crap out of
> > > > > > > > > > you. What is he going to do? Shoot Fireman Ed? Give Joe Namath a
> > > > > > > > > > bottle of Glenlivet?- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > SH doesn't scare me, I just don't think it was a wise move to bring
> > > > > > > > > him here. He is just your basic POS. I believe the mixture of SH and
> > > > > > > > > NYC life is just an explosion waiting to happen. A tiger never changes
> > > > > > > > > his stripes!- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > Huge talent.  Screwed up head for sure.  Low 5th round choice.  I
> > > > > > > > guess you would rather have the low 5th rounder, huh?  Maybe this will
> > > > > > > > help you and Michael-
>
> > > > > > > > a list of the Jets 5th rounders since Bill Parcells was coach in 1997:
>
> > > > > > > > Erik Ainge
> > > > > > > > Jason Pociask
> > > > > > > > Andre Maddox
> > > > > > > > Erik Coleman
> > > > > > > > Matt Walters
> > > > > > > > Windrell Hayes
> > > > > > > > Jermaine Jones
> > > > > > > > Casey Dailey
> > > > > > > > Doug Karczewski
> > > > > > > > Blake Spence
> > > > > > > > Eric Bateman
> > > > > > > > Lamont Burns
> > > > > > > > Raymond Austin
>
> > > > > > > > Gee, what are the Jets thinking, trading away that 5th round choice (I
> > > > > > > > think 24th in round 5) for Santonio Holmes?  Somebody fire Tannenbaum
> > > > > > > > right now!  LOL!- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > never mind what it cost as far as draft picks.. what did it cost in
> > > > > > > the way of team reputation and identity ??? you wanna be the junk yard
> > > > > > > jets ??? i dont want to route for criminals.
>
> > > > > > Maybe ping pong is more your speed Michael.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > > not with criminals and scum bags it isnt...  if you think all the
> > > > > players in the nfl are violent, drug users, stupid and criminal you
> > > > > might be a tad bit ignorant on the matter
>
> > > > Michael. let me ask you this. Have you ever gotten into a fight with
> > > > another person? How about a woman for example. I know this sounds
> > > > stereotypical but in my experience a woman is more willing to punch a
> > > > guy than another man if you piss her off. I say this because it has
> > > > happened to me more than once and they don't hit you once, you get
> > > > hit, kicked, scratched 3 or 4 times before you know you are even in a
> > > > fight. I would bet anything that the woman that Holmes threw the glass
> > > > at became extremely abusive before it got to that point.
> > > > Now here is my point, you don't know the facts, neither do I for that
> > > > matter but you are calling him a violent drug user and a stupid
> > > > criminal. You also are not considering what kind of person you have to
> > > > be to be an NFL player. You have to have violence in you to be
> > > > successful and sometime a person can unwittingly bring that out by
> > > > slapping them or telling them there mother was a whore. That doesn't
> > > > make you a criminal, and for that matter non of the players the Jets
> > > > have brought in are criminals, stupid and immature maybe but not
> > > > criminals. Get over your self righteousness and holyier than thee
> > > > attitude.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > I also wanted to respond to your commentary as far as what it takes to
> > > be a football player in the NFL.  No, Glenn... You don't have to be
> > > violent or aggressive.  That is kind of a silly characterization.  If
> > > you think football is violence, you are ignorant. Not even the most
> > > vicious hitting in football is violence.  It is physical, but not
> > > violence.  Violence is when a person breaks the rules and used
> > > physical force or physical intimidation to overwhelm another person in
> > > order to get something from them.  The victim is not expecting it, nor
> > > have they agreed to participate.  In Football, everyone has agreed to
> > > it and expects it.  You don't have to be the kind of person that wants
> > > to victimize unsuspecting non participants to knock the shit out of a
> > > qb or wr that also agrees to hit and be hit by the rules on a playing
> > > field.  That is not crime or violence.  Not even close. You don't need
> > > a criminal mind or a hose of personality defects to be a mad man on
> > > the football field.
>
> > IMO you are confusing violence with intimidation.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> there is intimidation in football.  there is also intimidation in
> business... intimidation can be a component of violence, but
> intimidation on the playing fied is not violence

But you define violence as intimidation.


== 8 of 12 ==
Date: Wed, Apr 14 2010 12:49 pm
From: Michael


On Apr 14, 3:46 pm, Glenn Greenstein <lexa...@hotmail.com> wrote:

<SNIP>

> Michael, it's becoming obvious you speak a different language than the
> rest of us.

yes...

== 9 of 12 ==
Date: Wed, Apr 14 2010 12:57 pm
From: MZ


Michael wrote:
> On Apr 14, 3:28 pm, MZ <m...@nospam.void> wrote:
>> Michael, your qualifiers don't change things. If two guys in a bar
>> agree to go outside and duke it out, is it no longer "violence"? Would
>> you not consider someone who makes a habit of doing that a "violent" person?
>
> Mark... Do you understand that there is a difference between a contest
> and an assault ???

So what's a bar fight? A contest or an assault?


>>> If you dont like what I define
>>> as violence, than say it is not criminal violence. Not in it's spirit
>>> and not in physical practice. Get rid of the reffs, spectators,
>>> cameras, doctors, allow weapons and let several guys go after one guy
>>> for money, mallice, revenge or social prestige and it will a violent
>>> sport.
>> The "criminal" aspect of it only describes whether or not politicans
>> have deemed it to be illegal. It doesn't change anything about the
>> activity. I think the point that people are making here is that it's a
>> violent sport and so it's not a reach to think that some of these
>> players may have the propensity to engage in violence off the football
>> field too. Probably more often than your average pencil pusher who gets
>> a hangnail making photocopies.
>
> Yep... And it is just fine if ball players do criminal violence.
> We'll let it slide cause that is their nature. Who cares... Lets get
> 'em on the team. Ball players are all animals anyway. The more
> violent the better. Like Paul Crewe said in the Longest Yard. "You
> got any with five stars"

If someone does their time, I have no problem with employers allowing
them back to work. That's what the rules say. If you don't like it,
then your problem is with the NFL rules committee, not the New York Jets.


== 10 of 12 ==
Date: Wed, Apr 14 2010 1:11 pm
From: Michael


On Apr 14, 3:57 pm, MZ <m...@nospam.void> wrote:
> Michael wrote:
> > On Apr 14, 3:28 pm, MZ <m...@nospam.void> wrote:
> >> Michael, your qualifiers don't change things.  If two guys in a bar
> >> agree to go outside and duke it out, is it no longer "violence"?  Would
> >> you not consider someone who makes a habit of doing that a "violent" person?
>
> > Mark... Do you understand that there is a difference between a contest
> > and an assault ???
>
> So what's a bar fight?  A contest or an assault?

A contest and a game that does not have to take place. A fight
requires two willing participants. I would never lose a fight because
I would not get involved in one. If a guy in a bar challanged me, I'd
leave. If he struk me, it would not have just lost a fight. I would
have just been assaulted. Criminals employ professional violence.
They dont say "put up your dukes". They dont want to "fight" you.
They want to subdue you as unfairly as is possible.


> >>>  If you dont like what I define
> >>> as violence, than say it is not criminal violence.  Not in it's spirit
> >>> and not in physical practice.  Get rid of the reffs, spectators,
> >>> cameras, doctors, allow weapons and let several guys go after one guy
> >>> for money, mallice, revenge or social prestige and it will a violent
> >>> sport.
> >> The "criminal" aspect of it only describes whether or not politicans
> >> have deemed it to be illegal.  It doesn't change anything about the
> >> activity.  I think the point that people are making here is that it's a
> >> violent sport and so it's not a reach to think that some of these
> >> players may have the propensity to engage in violence off the football
> >> field too.  Probably more often than your average pencil pusher who gets
> >> a hangnail making photocopies.
>
> > Yep... And it is just fine if ball players do criminal violence.
> > We'll let it slide cause that is their nature.  Who cares... Lets get
> > 'em on the team.  Ball players are all animals anyway.  The more
> > violent the better.  Like Paul Crewe said in the Longest Yard.  "You
> > got any with five stars"
>
> If someone does their time, I have no problem with employers allowing
> them back to work.  That's what the rules say.  If you don't like it,
> then your problem is with the NFL rules committee, not the New York Jets.- Hide quoted text -


Mark... I agree. If you do your time, you can come to work. If
you fuck up and continue to fuck up it is understandable that an
employer passes on a destructive influence.


== 11 of 12 ==
Date: Wed, Apr 14 2010 1:16 pm
From: MZ


Michael wrote:
> On Apr 14, 3:57 pm, MZ <m...@nospam.void> wrote:
>> Michael wrote:
>>> On Apr 14, 3:28 pm, MZ <m...@nospam.void> wrote:
>>>> Michael, your qualifiers don't change things. If two guys in a bar
>>>> agree to go outside and duke it out, is it no longer "violence"? Would
>>>> you not consider someone who makes a habit of doing that a "violent" person?
>>> Mark... Do you understand that there is a difference between a contest
>>> and an assault ???
>> So what's a bar fight? A contest or an assault?
>
> A contest and a game that does not have to take place. A fight
> requires two willing participants. I would never lose a fight because
> I would not get involved in one. If a guy in a bar challanged me, I'd
> leave. If he struk me, it would not have just lost a fight. I would
> have just been assaulted. Criminals employ professional violence.
> They dont say "put up your dukes". They dont want to "fight" you.
> They want to subdue you as unfairly as is possible.

So bar fights, with two willing participants, aren't criminal? It's not
illegal? Cops don't arrest the participants?


== 12 of 12 ==
Date: Wed, Apr 14 2010 1:25 pm
From: Michael


On Apr 14, 4:16 pm, MZ <m...@nospam.void> wrote:
> Michael wrote:
> > On Apr 14, 3:57 pm, MZ <m...@nospam.void> wrote:
> >> Michael wrote:
> >>> On Apr 14, 3:28 pm, MZ <m...@nospam.void> wrote:
> >>>> Michael, your qualifiers don't change things.  If two guys in a bar
> >>>> agree to go outside and duke it out, is it no longer "violence"?  Would
> >>>> you not consider someone who makes a habit of doing that a "violent" person?
> >>> Mark... Do you understand that there is a difference between a contest
> >>> and an assault ???
> >> So what's a bar fight?  A contest or an assault?
>
> > A contest and a game that does not have to take place.  A fight
> > requires two willing participants.  I would never lose a fight because
> > I would not get involved in one.  If a guy in a bar challanged me, I'd
> > leave.  If he struk me, it would not have just lost a fight. I would
> > have just been assaulted.  Criminals employ professional violence.
> > They dont say "put up  your dukes".  They dont want to "fight" you.
> > They want to subdue you as unfairly as is possible.
>
> So bar fights, with two willing participants, aren't criminal?  It's not
> illegal?  Cops don't arrest the participants?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

yes, it is illegal... arrests are made, and some times they are not.
unless there is serious injury, two participants in a bar fight never
see the inside of a court room. if one of the idiots gets out of hand
and continues to beat the piss out of the other who is no longer an
active participant, then agrivated battery charges are the usual
result.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Santonio Holmes is a Jet per Randy Lange
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/78871774dda3c9c8?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 10 ==
Date: Wed, Apr 14 2010 11:08 am
From: MZ


Johnctx wrote:
> MZ wrote:
>> Johnctx wrote:
>>> MZ wrote:
>>>> Johnctx wrote:
>>>>>> I forget... Did Justin Miller end up going to jail for punching a
>>>>>> woman in the face, or did he use his status as a football player
>>>>>> to get out of what the rest of us would have faced?
>>>>>
>>>>> In fairness to him that story from day one sounded like BS. He gets
>>>>> in a punch up with a guy & woman gets pushed punch or tangled up.
>>>>> She calls the cops and they are locking up Justin Miller. She then
>>>>> gets in front of the media for a few minutes the next day letting
>>>>> everyone knows she works for Obama. The charges disappeared, maybe
>>>>> be cause of the presidential race, or maybe she was full of baloney.
>>>>>
>>>>> Either way proof again that noting happens after midnight but
>>>>> hardly proof he is a bad guy.
>>>>
>>>> There were witnesses.
>>>
>>> The witnesses were the guy involved in the fight, his friend, and
>>> their dates. It was the girl claiming to be Obama's personal
>>> secretary or office manager who filed the charges.
>>
>> There were witnesses that saw that she was hurt pretty bad afterwards.
>> Maybe she threw herself down a flight of stairs?
>
> She got hit. He claims he was trying to hit the guy she was with and
> the guy ducked. When the first report came my visceral reaction once she
> started talking to the media & mentioning Obama was:
>
> a. She stared a fight that her guy friend got sucked into and Miller's
> story was true.
>
> b. She swung at Miller & he clocked her.
>
> The case disappeared and got dropped so she either backed away because
> of Obama or she was lying which is hardly conclusive. I have a heavy
> bias against big mouth women. Women generally have more common sense so
> when they are involved in a fight outside a bar in my experience they
> are usually the problem.
>
> I think the two of us went round & round on this when it happened.

Yeah, and I said he was still a criminal because he was violent (my
definition, not Michael's). Sometimes people's "bad luck" comes from
the situations that they put themselves in and the confrontations that
they usually escalate.


== 2 of 10 ==
Date: Wed, Apr 14 2010 12:17 pm
From: Johnctx


MZ wrote:
> Johnctx wrote:
>> MZ wrote:
>>> Johnctx wrote:
>>>> MZ wrote:
>>>>> Johnctx wrote:
>>>>>>> I forget... Did Justin Miller end up going to jail for punching a
>>>>>>> woman in the face, or did he use his status as a football player
>>>>>>> to get out of what the rest of us would have faced?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In fairness to him that story from day one sounded like BS. He
>>>>>> gets in a punch up with a guy & woman gets pushed punch or tangled
>>>>>> up. She calls the cops and they are locking up Justin Miller.
>>>>>> She then gets in front of the media for a few minutes the next day
>>>>>> letting everyone knows she works for Obama. The charges
>>>>>> disappeared, maybe be cause of the presidential race, or maybe she
>>>>>> was full of baloney.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Either way proof again that noting happens after midnight but
>>>>>> hardly proof he is a bad guy.
>>>>>
>>>>> There were witnesses.
>>>>
>>>> The witnesses were the guy involved in the fight, his friend, and
>>>> their dates. It was the girl claiming to be Obama's personal
>>>> secretary or office manager who filed the charges.
>>>
>>> There were witnesses that saw that she was hurt pretty bad
>>> afterwards. Maybe she threw herself down a flight of stairs?
>>
>> She got hit. He claims he was trying to hit the guy she was with and
>> the guy ducked. When the first report came my visceral reaction once
>> she started talking to the media & mentioning Obama was:
>>
>> a. She stared a fight that her guy friend got sucked into and Miller's
>> story was true.
>>
>> b. She swung at Miller & he clocked her.
>>
>> The case disappeared and got dropped so she either backed away because
>> of Obama or she was lying which is hardly conclusive. I have a heavy
>> bias against big mouth women. Women generally have more common sense
>> so when they are involved in a fight outside a bar in my experience
>> they are usually the problem.
>>
>> I think the two of us went round & round on this when it happened.
>
> Yeah, and I said he was still a criminal because he was violent (my
> definition, not Michael's). Sometimes people's "bad luck" comes from
> the situations that they put themselves in and the confrontations that
> they usually escalate.

I would not label hitting a staffer of Obama a criminal act.

:)

If he threw the first punch he was a criminal. If he didn't it is self
-defense. It is easy as I approach 50 to say again, nothing good
happens after midnight, but nothing really does.


== 3 of 10 ==
Date: Wed, Apr 14 2010 12:24 pm
From: Michael


On Apr 14, 3:17 pm, Johnctx <j...@spamtx.net> wrote:
> MZ wrote:
> > Johnctx wrote:
> >> MZ wrote:
> >>> Johnctx wrote:
> >>>> MZ wrote:
> >>>>> Johnctx wrote:
> >>>>>>> I forget... Did Justin Miller end up going to jail for punching a
> >>>>>>> woman in the face, or did he use his status as a football player
> >>>>>>> to get out of what the rest of us would have faced?
>
> >>>>>> In fairness to him that story from day one sounded like BS. He
> >>>>>> gets in a punch up with a guy & woman gets pushed punch or tangled
> >>>>>> up.  She calls the cops and they are locking up Justin Miller.  
> >>>>>> She then gets in front of the media for a few minutes the next day
> >>>>>> letting everyone knows she works for Obama.  The charges
> >>>>>> disappeared, maybe be cause of the presidential race, or maybe she
> >>>>>> was full of baloney.
>
> >>>>>> Either way proof again that noting happens after midnight but
> >>>>>> hardly proof he is a bad guy.
>
> >>>>> There were witnesses.
>
> >>>> The witnesses were the guy involved in the fight, his friend, and
> >>>> their dates. It was the girl claiming to be Obama's personal
> >>>> secretary or office manager who filed the charges.
>
> >>> There were witnesses that saw that she was hurt pretty bad
> >>> afterwards. Maybe she threw herself down a flight of stairs?
>
> >> She got hit.  He claims he was trying to hit the guy she was with and
> >> the guy ducked. When the first report came my visceral reaction once
> >> she started talking to the media & mentioning Obama was:
>
> >> a. She stared a fight that her guy friend got sucked into and Miller's
> >> story was true.
>
> >> b. She swung at Miller & he clocked her.
>
> >> The case disappeared and got dropped so she either backed away because
> >> of Obama or she was lying which is hardly conclusive. I have a heavy
> >> bias against big mouth women.  Women generally have more common sense
> >> so when they are involved in a fight outside a bar in my experience
> >> they are usually the problem.
>
> >> I think the two of us went round & round on this when it happened.
>
> > Yeah, and I said he was still a criminal because he was violent (my
> > definition, not Michael's).  Sometimes people's "bad luck" comes from
> > the situations that they put themselves in and the confrontations that
> > they usually escalate.
>
> I would not label hitting a staffer of Obama a criminal act.
>
> :)
>
> If he threw the first punch he was a criminal.  If he didn't it is self
> -defense.  It is easy as I approach 50 to say again, nothing good
> happens after midnight, but nothing really does.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

actually... in many states you don't have to wait to be struck. if a
person is menacing you without contact and you warn them, you can
legally hit them first if they refuse to back off. menacing would
include coming into a persons space abruptly, violent gestures and
verbal threats.


== 4 of 10 ==
Date: Wed, Apr 14 2010 12:26 pm
From: Johnny Morongo


buRford wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 11:40:08 -0400, MZ <mark@nospam.void> wrote:
>> their off-field behavior or their world view on politics.
>>
>> I hear Pennington's a trotskyite.
>
> Not possible... if I recall Chad's heavily into Rodeo's & bucking bulls. Hard to picture
> a Trostskyite rodeo clown ;)
> (Sorry to mention clown, for those with the phobia).

Clown = Burford? Me thinketh that the lady doth protest too much.
You, sir, are a well know clown and jester, on a par with Will Somers.


== 5 of 10 ==
Date: Wed, Apr 14 2010 12:31 pm
From: MZ


Michael wrote:
> On Apr 14, 3:17 pm, Johnctx <j...@spamtx.net> wrote:
>> MZ wrote:
>>> Johnctx wrote:
>>>> MZ wrote:
>>>>> Johnctx wrote:
>>>>>> MZ wrote:
>>>>>>> Johnctx wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I forget... Did Justin Miller end up going to jail for punching a
>>>>>>>>> woman in the face, or did he use his status as a football player
>>>>>>>>> to get out of what the rest of us would have faced?
>>>>>>>> In fairness to him that story from day one sounded like BS. He
>>>>>>>> gets in a punch up with a guy & woman gets pushed punch or tangled
>>>>>>>> up. She calls the cops and they are locking up Justin Miller.
>>>>>>>> She then gets in front of the media for a few minutes the next day
>>>>>>>> letting everyone knows she works for Obama. The charges
>>>>>>>> disappeared, maybe be cause of the presidential race, or maybe she
>>>>>>>> was full of baloney.
>>>>>>>> Either way proof again that noting happens after midnight but
>>>>>>>> hardly proof he is a bad guy.
>>>>>>> There were witnesses.
>>>>>> The witnesses were the guy involved in the fight, his friend, and
>>>>>> their dates. It was the girl claiming to be Obama's personal
>>>>>> secretary or office manager who filed the charges.
>>>>> There were witnesses that saw that she was hurt pretty bad
>>>>> afterwards. Maybe she threw herself down a flight of stairs?
>>>> She got hit. He claims he was trying to hit the guy she was with and
>>>> the guy ducked. When the first report came my visceral reaction once
>>>> she started talking to the media & mentioning Obama was:
>>>> a. She stared a fight that her guy friend got sucked into and Miller's
>>>> story was true.
>>>> b. She swung at Miller & he clocked her.
>>>> The case disappeared and got dropped so she either backed away because
>>>> of Obama or she was lying which is hardly conclusive. I have a heavy
>>>> bias against big mouth women. Women generally have more common sense
>>>> so when they are involved in a fight outside a bar in my experience
>>>> they are usually the problem.
>>>> I think the two of us went round & round on this when it happened.
>>> Yeah, and I said he was still a criminal because he was violent (my
>>> definition, not Michael's). Sometimes people's "bad luck" comes from
>>> the situations that they put themselves in and the confrontations that
>>> they usually escalate.
>> I would not label hitting a staffer of Obama a criminal act.
>>
>> :)
>>
>> If he threw the first punch he was a criminal. If he didn't it is self
>> -defense. It is easy as I approach 50 to say again, nothing good
>> happens after midnight, but nothing really does.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> actually... in many states you don't have to wait to be struck. if a
> person is menacing you without contact and you warn them, you can
> legally hit them first if they refuse to back off. menacing would
> include coming into a persons space abruptly, violent gestures and
> verbal threats.

You guys are so willing to give Miller the benefit of the doubt, but
Santonio is as good as guilty for virtually the same scenario. I don't
get it.


== 6 of 10 ==
Date: Wed, Apr 14 2010 12:55 pm
From: Michael


On Apr 14, 3:31 pm, MZ <m...@nospam.void> wrote:
> Michael wrote:
> > On Apr 14, 3:17 pm, Johnctx <j...@spamtx.net> wrote:
> >> MZ wrote:
> >>> Johnctx wrote:
> >>>> MZ wrote:
> >>>>> Johnctx wrote:
> >>>>>> MZ wrote:
> >>>>>>> Johnctx wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> I forget... Did Justin Miller end up going to jail for punching a
> >>>>>>>>> woman in the face, or did he use his status as a football player
> >>>>>>>>> to get out of what the rest of us would have faced?
> >>>>>>>> In fairness to him that story from day one sounded like BS. He
> >>>>>>>> gets in a punch up with a guy & woman gets pushed punch or tangled
> >>>>>>>> up.  She calls the cops and they are locking up Justin Miller.  
> >>>>>>>> She then gets in front of the media for a few minutes the next day
> >>>>>>>> letting everyone knows she works for Obama.  The charges
> >>>>>>>> disappeared, maybe be cause of the presidential race, or maybe she
> >>>>>>>> was full of baloney.
> >>>>>>>> Either way proof again that noting happens after midnight but
> >>>>>>>> hardly proof he is a bad guy.
> >>>>>>> There were witnesses.
> >>>>>> The witnesses were the guy involved in the fight, his friend, and
> >>>>>> their dates. It was the girl claiming to be Obama's personal
> >>>>>> secretary or office manager who filed the charges.
> >>>>> There were witnesses that saw that she was hurt pretty bad
> >>>>> afterwards. Maybe she threw herself down a flight of stairs?
> >>>> She got hit.  He claims he was trying to hit the guy she was with and
> >>>> the guy ducked. When the first report came my visceral reaction once
> >>>> she started talking to the media & mentioning Obama was:
> >>>> a. She stared a fight that her guy friend got sucked into and Miller's
> >>>> story was true.
> >>>> b. She swung at Miller & he clocked her.
> >>>> The case disappeared and got dropped so she either backed away because
> >>>> of Obama or she was lying which is hardly conclusive. I have a heavy
> >>>> bias against big mouth women.  Women generally have more common sense
> >>>> so when they are involved in a fight outside a bar in my experience
> >>>> they are usually the problem.
> >>>> I think the two of us went round & round on this when it happened.
> >>> Yeah, and I said he was still a criminal because he was violent (my
> >>> definition, not Michael's).  Sometimes people's "bad luck" comes from
> >>> the situations that they put themselves in and the confrontations that
> >>> they usually escalate.
> >> I would not label hitting a staffer of Obama a criminal act.
>
> >> :)
>
> >> If he threw the first punch he was a criminal.  If he didn't it is self
> >> -defense.  It is easy as I approach 50 to say again, nothing good
> >> happens after midnight, but nothing really does.- Hide quoted text -
>
> >> - Show quoted text -
>
> > actually... in many states you don't have to wait to be struck.  if a
> > person is menacing you without contact and you warn them, you can
> > legally hit them first if they refuse to back off.  menacing would
> > include coming into a persons space abruptly, violent gestures and
> > verbal threats.
>
> You guys are so willing to give Miller the benefit of the doubt, but
> Santonio is as good as guilty for virtually the same scenario.  I don't
> get it.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I'd give most people the benefit of the doubt after one incident.
Santonio appears to be trouble waiting to happen. Again and again and
again... Dont you find it the least bit compelling that such a skilled
player get's walking papers for a fifth round pick in return. And,
no... Not just to send the a message to the lady killer.


== 7 of 10 ==
Date: Wed, Apr 14 2010 1:02 pm
From: MZ


Michael wrote:
> On Apr 14, 3:31 pm, MZ <m...@nospam.void> wrote:
>> Michael wrote:
>>> On Apr 14, 3:17 pm, Johnctx <j...@spamtx.net> wrote:
>>>> MZ wrote:
>>>>> Johnctx wrote:
>>>>>> MZ wrote:
>>>>>>> Johnctx wrote:
>>>>>>>> MZ wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Johnctx wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> I forget... Did Justin Miller end up going to jail for punching a
>>>>>>>>>>> woman in the face, or did he use his status as a football player
>>>>>>>>>>> to get out of what the rest of us would have faced?
>>>>>>>>>> In fairness to him that story from day one sounded like BS. He
>>>>>>>>>> gets in a punch up with a guy & woman gets pushed punch or tangled
>>>>>>>>>> up. She calls the cops and they are locking up Justin Miller.
>>>>>>>>>> She then gets in front of the media for a few minutes the next day
>>>>>>>>>> letting everyone knows she works for Obama. The charges
>>>>>>>>>> disappeared, maybe be cause of the presidential race, or maybe she
>>>>>>>>>> was full of baloney.
>>>>>>>>>> Either way proof again that noting happens after midnight but
>>>>>>>>>> hardly proof he is a bad guy.
>>>>>>>>> There were witnesses.
>>>>>>>> The witnesses were the guy involved in the fight, his friend, and
>>>>>>>> their dates. It was the girl claiming to be Obama's personal
>>>>>>>> secretary or office manager who filed the charges.
>>>>>>> There were witnesses that saw that she was hurt pretty bad
>>>>>>> afterwards. Maybe she threw herself down a flight of stairs?
>>>>>> She got hit. He claims he was trying to hit the guy she was with and
>>>>>> the guy ducked. When the first report came my visceral reaction once
>>>>>> she started talking to the media & mentioning Obama was:
>>>>>> a. She stared a fight that her guy friend got sucked into and Miller's
>>>>>> story was true.
>>>>>> b. She swung at Miller & he clocked her.
>>>>>> The case disappeared and got dropped so she either backed away because
>>>>>> of Obama or she was lying which is hardly conclusive. I have a heavy
>>>>>> bias against big mouth women. Women generally have more common sense
>>>>>> so when they are involved in a fight outside a bar in my experience
>>>>>> they are usually the problem.
>>>>>> I think the two of us went round & round on this when it happened.
>>>>> Yeah, and I said he was still a criminal because he was violent (my
>>>>> definition, not Michael's). Sometimes people's "bad luck" comes from
>>>>> the situations that they put themselves in and the confrontations that
>>>>> they usually escalate.
>>>> I would not label hitting a staffer of Obama a criminal act.
>>>> :)
>>>> If he threw the first punch he was a criminal. If he didn't it is self
>>>> -defense. It is easy as I approach 50 to say again, nothing good
>>>> happens after midnight, but nothing really does.- Hide quoted text -
>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>> actually... in many states you don't have to wait to be struck. if a
>>> person is menacing you without contact and you warn them, you can
>>> legally hit them first if they refuse to back off. menacing would
>>> include coming into a persons space abruptly, violent gestures and
>>> verbal threats.
>> You guys are so willing to give Miller the benefit of the doubt, but
>> Santonio is as good as guilty for virtually the same scenario. I don't
>> get it.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> I'd give most people the benefit of the doubt after one incident.
> Santonio appears to be trouble waiting to happen. Again and again and
> again...

I guess I'm not familiar enough with his history of violence.


> Dont you find it the least bit compelling that such a skilled
> player get's walking papers for a fifth round pick in return. And,
> no... Not just to send the a message to the lady killer.

Yes, I find it very questionable. I found it questionable when Moss was
traded for only a 4th. I find it questionable that Denver got so much
for Marshall. A lot of times, my predictions about trade value are way
off. And so you have to ask what the contributing factors are. I think
PR is a big one in this case. Not so much sending a message to Ben, but
rather, sending a message to fans. They think that this will atone for
the Ben stuff too.


== 8 of 10 ==
Date: Wed, Apr 14 2010 1:18 pm
From: Michael


On Apr 14, 4:02 pm, MZ <m...@nospam.void> wrote:
> Michael wrote:
> > On Apr 14, 3:31 pm, MZ <m...@nospam.void> wrote:
> >> Michael wrote:
> >>> On Apr 14, 3:17 pm, Johnctx <j...@spamtx.net> wrote:
> >>>> MZ wrote:
> >>>>> Johnctx wrote:
> >>>>>> MZ wrote:
> >>>>>>> Johnctx wrote:
> >>>>>>>> MZ wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> Johnctx wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> I forget... Did Justin Miller end up going to jail for punching a
> >>>>>>>>>>> woman in the face, or did he use his status as a football player
> >>>>>>>>>>> to get out of what the rest of us would have faced?
> >>>>>>>>>> In fairness to him that story from day one sounded like BS. He
> >>>>>>>>>> gets in a punch up with a guy & woman gets pushed punch or tangled
> >>>>>>>>>> up.  She calls the cops and they are locking up Justin Miller.  
> >>>>>>>>>> She then gets in front of the media for a few minutes the next day
> >>>>>>>>>> letting everyone knows she works for Obama.  The charges
> >>>>>>>>>> disappeared, maybe be cause of the presidential race, or maybe she
> >>>>>>>>>> was full of baloney.
> >>>>>>>>>> Either way proof again that noting happens after midnight but
> >>>>>>>>>> hardly proof he is a bad guy.
> >>>>>>>>> There were witnesses.
> >>>>>>>> The witnesses were the guy involved in the fight, his friend, and
> >>>>>>>> their dates. It was the girl claiming to be Obama's personal
> >>>>>>>> secretary or office manager who filed the charges.
> >>>>>>> There were witnesses that saw that she was hurt pretty bad
> >>>>>>> afterwards. Maybe she threw herself down a flight of stairs?
> >>>>>> She got hit.  He claims he was trying to hit the guy she was with and
> >>>>>> the guy ducked. When the first report came my visceral reaction once
> >>>>>> she started talking to the media & mentioning Obama was:
> >>>>>> a. She stared a fight that her guy friend got sucked into and Miller's
> >>>>>> story was true.
> >>>>>> b. She swung at Miller & he clocked her.
> >>>>>> The case disappeared and got dropped so she either backed away because
> >>>>>> of Obama or she was lying which is hardly conclusive. I have a heavy
> >>>>>> bias against big mouth women.  Women generally have more common sense
> >>>>>> so when they are involved in a fight outside a bar in my experience
> >>>>>> they are usually the problem.
> >>>>>> I think the two of us went round & round on this when it happened.
> >>>>> Yeah, and I said he was still a criminal because he was violent (my
> >>>>> definition, not Michael's).  Sometimes people's "bad luck" comes from
> >>>>> the situations that they put themselves in and the confrontations that
> >>>>> they usually escalate.
> >>>> I would not label hitting a staffer of Obama a criminal act.
> >>>> :)
> >>>> If he threw the first punch he was a criminal.  If he didn't it is self
> >>>> -defense.  It is easy as I approach 50 to say again, nothing good
> >>>> happens after midnight, but nothing really does.- Hide quoted text -
> >>>> - Show quoted text -
> >>> actually... in many states you don't have to wait to be struck.  if a
> >>> person is menacing you without contact and you warn them, you can
> >>> legally hit them first if they refuse to back off.  menacing would
> >>> include coming into a persons space abruptly, violent gestures and
> >>> verbal threats.
> >> You guys are so willing to give Miller the benefit of the doubt, but
> >> Santonio is as good as guilty for virtually the same scenario.  I don't
> >> get it.- Hide quoted text -
>
> >> - Show quoted text -
>
> > I'd give most people the benefit of the doubt after one incident.
> > Santonio appears to be trouble waiting to happen.  Again and again and
> > again...
>
> I guess I'm not familiar enough with his history of violence.
>
> > Dont you find it the least bit compelling that such a skilled
> > player get's walking papers for a fifth round pick in return.  And,
> > no... Not just to send the a message to the lady killer.
>
> Yes, I find it very questionable.  I found it questionable when Moss was
> traded for only a 4th.  I find it questionable that Denver got so much
> for Marshall.  A lot of times, my predictions about trade value are way
> off.  And so you have to ask what the contributing factors are.  I think
> PR is a big one in this case.  Not so much sending a message to Ben, but
> rather, sending a message to fans.  They think that this will atone for
> the Ben stuff too.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I hope at the end of next season you are all breaking my balls because
Santonio played great and acted like a man.


== 9 of 10 ==
Date: Wed, Apr 14 2010 1:45 pm
From: Johnctx


MZ wrote:
> Michael wrote:
>> On Apr 14, 3:17 pm, Johnctx <j...@spamtx.net> wrote:
>>> MZ wrote:
>>>> Johnctx wrote:
>>>>> MZ wrote:
>>>>>> Johnctx wrote:
>>>>>>> MZ wrote:
>>>>>>>> Johnctx wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> I forget... Did Justin Miller end up going to jail for punching a
>>>>>>>>>> woman in the face, or did he use his status as a football player
>>>>>>>>>> to get out of what the rest of us would have faced?
>>>>>>>>> In fairness to him that story from day one sounded like BS. He
>>>>>>>>> gets in a punch up with a guy & woman gets pushed punch or tangled
>>>>>>>>> up. She calls the cops and they are locking up Justin Miller.
>>>>>>>>> She then gets in front of the media for a few minutes the next day
>>>>>>>>> letting everyone knows she works for Obama. The charges
>>>>>>>>> disappeared, maybe be cause of the presidential race, or maybe she
>>>>>>>>> was full of baloney.
>>>>>>>>> Either way proof again that noting happens after midnight but
>>>>>>>>> hardly proof he is a bad guy.
>>>>>>>> There were witnesses.
>>>>>>> The witnesses were the guy involved in the fight, his friend, and
>>>>>>> their dates. It was the girl claiming to be Obama's personal
>>>>>>> secretary or office manager who filed the charges.
>>>>>> There were witnesses that saw that she was hurt pretty bad
>>>>>> afterwards. Maybe she threw herself down a flight of stairs?
>>>>> She got hit. He claims he was trying to hit the guy she was with and
>>>>> the guy ducked. When the first report came my visceral reaction once
>>>>> she started talking to the media & mentioning Obama was:
>>>>> a. She stared a fight that her guy friend got sucked into and Miller's
>>>>> story was true.
>>>>> b. She swung at Miller & he clocked her.
>>>>> The case disappeared and got dropped so she either backed away because
>>>>> of Obama or she was lying which is hardly conclusive. I have a heavy
>>>>> bias against big mouth women. Women generally have more common sense
>>>>> so when they are involved in a fight outside a bar in my experience
>>>>> they are usually the problem.
>>>>> I think the two of us went round & round on this when it happened.
>>>> Yeah, and I said he was still a criminal because he was violent (my
>>>> definition, not Michael's). Sometimes people's "bad luck" comes from
>>>> the situations that they put themselves in and the confrontations that
>>>> they usually escalate.
>>> I would not label hitting a staffer of Obama a criminal act.
>>>
>>> :)
>>>
>>> If he threw the first punch he was a criminal. If he didn't it is self
>>> -defense. It is easy as I approach 50 to say again, nothing good
>>> happens after midnight, but nothing really does.- Hide quoted text -
>>>
>>> - Show quoted text -
>>
>> actually... in many states you don't have to wait to be struck. if a
>> person is menacing you without contact and you warn them, you can
>> legally hit them first if they refuse to back off. menacing would
>> include coming into a persons space abruptly, violent gestures and
>> verbal threats.
>
> You guys are so willing to give Miller the benefit of the doubt, but
> Santonio is as good as guilty for virtually the same scenario. I don't
> get it.

Huh? Not me, I wasn't worried about what he did. Some pot, possibly
hit his girlfriend, but maybe she over reacted. I am skeptical about
the DA's case whenever it is a celebrity.


== 10 of 10 ==
Date: Wed, Apr 14 2010 1:47 pm
From: Johnctx


> I hope at the end of next season you are all breaking my balls because
> Santonio played great and acted like a man.

I can guarantee the first part.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Rumor: Brandon Marshall to Fins...
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/7caaaa28c6340aac?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Wed, Apr 14 2010 11:12 am
From: MZ


Heywood Jablome wrote:
> On Apr 14, 9:24 am, buRford <buRf...@buR.ford.com> wrote:
>> For 2010 2nd-rounder & 2011 2nd-rounder.
>>
>> So, in a sense, Tanny's aggressive offseason has pushed the Fins to upgrade at WR.
>> Marshall *may* be a bit better than Holmes, or may not... BUT, we gave a 5th, and they've
>> given two #2s, possibly weakening the fins. They may not have been so quick to part with
>> those high draft picks, if not for Holmes becoming a Jet. So that's two possibly talented
>> players taken out of the mix for the fins. Marshall vs Holmes is a wash.
>> Just a thought.
>
>
> LOL, marshall "may" be a "bit" better than holmes?? Marshall vs holmes
> is a wash?? Uhh, not quite
>
> Marshall
> 2007: 102 receptions, 1,325 yards, 7 tds
> 2008: 104 receptions, 1,265 yards, 6 tds
> 2009: 101 receptions, 1,120 yards, 10 tds
>
> Holmes:
> 2007: 52 receptions, 942 yards, 8 tds
> 2008: 55 receptions, 821 yards, 5 tds
> 2009: 79 receptions, 1,248 yards, 5 tds
>
> 3 year average
>
> Marshall: 102 receptions, 1,236 yards, 8 tds
> Holmes: 62 receptions, 1,003 yards, 6 tds
>
> Theyre not a wash. When holmes catches 100 balls for 3 straight years
> then maybe we can talk. And oh yea, marhsall is 6'4 230, holmes is
> 5'11.

Welker's a midget and is better than both.

Cotchery is a better receiver than Braylon, but Braylon's bigger. Size
doesn't really matter.

But Marshall is a lot better than Holmes. But I also think he'd piss
off Michael more than Holmes.


== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Wed, Apr 14 2010 1:30 pm
From: Michael


On Apr 14, 2:12 pm, MZ <m...@nospam.void> wrote:
> Heywood Jablome wrote:
> > On Apr 14, 9:24 am, buRford <buRf...@buR.ford.com> wrote:
> >> For 2010 2nd-rounder & 2011 2nd-rounder.
>
> >> So, in a sense, Tanny's aggressive offseason has pushed the Fins to upgrade at WR.
> >> Marshall *may* be a bit better than Holmes, or may not... BUT, we gave a 5th, and they've
> >> given two #2s, possibly weakening the fins.  They may not have been so quick to part with
> >> those high draft picks, if not for Holmes becoming a Jet.  So that's two possibly talented
> >> players taken out of the mix for the fins.  Marshall vs Holmes is a wash.
> >> Just a thought.
>
> > LOL, marshall "may" be a "bit" better than holmes?? Marshall vs holmes
> > is a wash?? Uhh, not quite
>
> > Marshall
> > 2007: 102 receptions, 1,325 yards, 7 tds
> > 2008: 104 receptions, 1,265 yards, 6 tds
> > 2009: 101 receptions, 1,120 yards, 10 tds
>
> > Holmes:
> > 2007: 52 receptions, 942 yards, 8 tds
> > 2008: 55 receptions, 821 yards, 5 tds
> > 2009: 79 receptions, 1,248 yards, 5 tds
>
> > 3 year average
>
> > Marshall: 102 receptions, 1,236 yards, 8 tds
> > Holmes: 62 receptions, 1,003 yards, 6 tds
>
> > Theyre not a wash. When holmes catches 100 balls for 3 straight years
> > then maybe we can talk. And oh yea, marhsall is 6'4 230, holmes is
> > 5'11.
>
> Welker's a midget and is better than both.
>
> Cotchery is a better receiver than Braylon, but Braylon's bigger.  Size
> doesn't really matter.
>
> But Marshall is a lot better than Holmes.  But I also think he'd piss
> off Michael more than Holmes.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I'd much rather have Marshall than Holmes.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: this for a late 5th rounder
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/b0378ac533dd8e8d?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Wed, Apr 14 2010 11:42 am
From: Hammer


On Apr 14, 12:02 pm, Grinch <oldna...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 06:41:38 -0700 (PDT), Tutor <dcat4...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=AlD.LPrjCujhMLdKweDPRQtDubYF?sl...
>
> >"As good friend, Steelers fan and statistical analyst Dutch Wydo
> >pointed out shortly after Holmes was dealt Sunday, Holmes was one of
> >the best receivers in the league at truly moving the chains.
>
> >Last year, Holmes accounted for 63 first downs out of his 79
> >receptions. That 79.7 percent mark of creating a first down was the
> >second highest among the NFL's top 50 pass catchers (the San Diego
> >Chargers' Vincent Jackson(notes) was first at a stunning 85.3 percent
> >of his 68 catches).
>
> >Even if you take away Holmes' five touchdowns (touchdowns count as
> >first downs), he was a master of creating a fresh set of downs. To
> >break that down further, there were only seven of the top 50 in the
> >league who topped the 75 percent mark. By comparison, the NFL's
> >leading receiver, Wes Welker(notes), created 71 first downs. But
> >Welker did that on 123 receptions, meaning that only 57.7 percent of
> >his catches went for first downs"
>
> >What Holmes provided was a quick receiver who never quit on plays even
> >as they broke down. His willingness to work to get open all the way to
> >the last moment can't be overstated. When combined with
> >Roethlisberger's pump-faking, extend-the-play-to-the-last-second
> >style, Holmes' ability was maximized.
>
> This we get for 12 games for a late fifth rounder. There's one year
> left on his contract and he's suspended for the first four games of
> it.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I'm hoping we get him for 15 games this year.


==============================================================================

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets"
group.

To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets?hl=en

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com

To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/subscribe?hl=en

To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com

==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com/?hl=en

gsk

https://secure.shareit.com/shareit/checkout.html?PRODUCT[300429992]=1&languageid=1&stylefrom=300429992&backlink=http%3A%2F%2Fforexguide.blogspot.com&cookies=1¤cies=USD&pts=VISA,MASTERCARD,AMEX,DC