OldhamSheridan Posted August 16, 2009 Share Posted August 16, 2009 My team won't sign Burress though....we have already fired him off. And you can't compare what Burress did to what Vick did. The two are unbelievably different. Mike Vick forced dogs to fight, and killed the ones that weren't very good. The fact that he scum is not even up for debate. But.... the point is he's rather good at throwing a roundish thing at fast people. (and sport has no morals) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rudemedic Posted August 16, 2009 Share Posted August 16, 2009 My team won't sign Burress though....we have already fired him off. And you can't compare what Burress did to what Vick did. The two are unbelievably different. Mike Vick forced dogs to fight, and killed the ones that weren't very good. The fact that he scum is not even up for debate. Aah so you're a Giants fan are ya? Burress bought a loaded concealed gun who's safety wasn't on (presumably otherwise why would he have shot himself) to a club full of people. He was lucky he didn't kill anyone, being lucky doesn't mean to say your crime wasn't serious. He's still a criminal. Vick had some dog fighting thing, now I will admit I'm not an animal person but I don't see a big difference in bringing a loaded unsafe weapon into a club full of people and having some dogs fight- and neither does the law they both got roughly the same sort of time, (and that's in the US if Burress had done that in this country he'd be looking at 20 years- whereas Vick would get a similar sentence). Maybe you don't like Vick because he's better than Eli or that he's gone to the Eagles. Oh and BTW didn't Toomer beat his wife? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldhamSheridan Posted August 16, 2009 Share Posted August 16, 2009 Oh and BTW didn't Toomer beat his wife? Don't bring up Antonio Pierce either. Not to think of any songs, but I sang it after Ryan Sugden equalised at Blackpoo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_ragg1984 Posted August 16, 2009 Share Posted August 16, 2009 Aah so you're a Giants fan are ya? Burress bought a loaded concealed gun who's safety wasn't on (presumably otherwise why would he have shot himself) to a club full of people. He was lucky he didn't kill anyone, being lucky doesn't mean to say your crime wasn't serious. He's still a criminal. Vick had some dog fighting thing, now I will admit I'm not an animal person but I don't see a big difference in bringing a loaded unsafe weapon into a club full of people and having some dogs fight- and neither does the law they both got roughly the same sort of time, (and that's in the US if Burress had done that in this country he'd be looking at 20 years- whereas Vick would get a similar sentence). Maybe you don't like Vick because he's better than Eli or that he's gone to the Eagles. Oh and BTW didn't Toomer beat his wife? No, I don't like Vick because he forced dogs to fight, and the ones that weren't good enough he tortured, and killed by electrocution, drowning and hanging. No other reason. You don't see me defending Burress, or Pierce, or Toomer (though I wasn't aware he beat his wife, and can't find anything about it after searching online). But torturing and killing defenseless animals if pretty damn bad in my book. And Burress didn't shoot anyone. He could have, but he didn't. And you can't punish someone for something they could have done. Burress' crime wasn't that he took a gun into a nightclub. His crime was that it was unlicensed. How f***ed up is American law? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_ragg1984 Posted August 16, 2009 Share Posted August 16, 2009 Don't bring up Antonio Pierce either. Not to think of any songs, but I sang it after Ryan Sugden equalised at Blackpoo. Would that song be "going down"? Pierce has been cleared of all charges. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldhamSheridan Posted August 16, 2009 Share Posted August 16, 2009 Would that song be "going down"? Pierce has been cleared of all charges. Didn't know he had been cleared. I guess they would have let off Rosemary West over there though. NB. To be honest it isn't an onslaught of the Giants, it's just that they have no moral highground and the only reason they didn't get Vick is that they have a very good quarterback. If they were struggling they'd have been in like Flynn. As would a number of other teams. Well a number of other teams will have been. It's Lee Hughes, the American version. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_ragg1984 Posted August 16, 2009 Share Posted August 16, 2009 (edited) Didn't know he had been cleared. I guess they would have let off Rosemary West over there though. NB. To be honest it isn't an onslaught of the Giants, it's just that they have no moral highground and the only reason they didn't get Vick is that they have a very good quarterback. If they were struggling they'd have been in like Flynn. As would a number of other teams. Well a number of other teams will have been. It's Lee Hughes, the American version. I'm not slagging off the Eagles for signing him. I'm slagging him off for running a dog fighting ring, and killing dogs that couldn't fight very well. It's not taking the moral high ground over the Eagles (although, we did sack out star WR when he committed a serious offense, despite the fact that he would have been fit for the playoffs, and we needed him). Someone was always going to sign him. Fair play to the Eagles. They have just got a very good back up QB. But the fact is, Michael Vick is a horrible **** of a man. And I, as a person (regardless of who I support), can take the moral high ground over him because I never have, and never plan to, committed such a serious crime. Oh, and, as he is now an Eagle (and a horrible ****) when we play them this season, I hope Osi Umenyiora dishes out some serious pain on him. Edited August 16, 2009 by dave_ragg1984 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rudemedic Posted August 16, 2009 Share Posted August 16, 2009 Burress did shoot someone- he shot himself and he was NOT going to be fit for the playoffs (quite hard when you can't walk having shot yourself somewhere on a lower limb). You as a Giants fan seemed to be taking the moral high ground (although I'll admit now that perhaps this isn't your intention) over the Eagles signing someone with a criminal past. Well over 50% of the NFL teams have someone on their team who has a bit of previous- from smuggling to shooting to drugs to wife beating etc. so I find it quite hard for anyone who claims to be an NFL fan to start claiming the moral high ground. Oh and didn't Burress get charged with reckless endangerment- i.e. he was stupid enough to bring an unsafe gun into a very public and crowded place. The point I was making is that Vick although being a bit of doesn't mean that he can't throw a football a long way and you could be the biggest in the world but if you have that sort of talent and aren't in prision to use it then some professional sports team will hire you. They did with Lee Hughes, they are doing with Vick, they will do with Burress and anyone else in the future. When that much money is involved morals often go out of the window. Maybe if sports teams employed a code of ethics that they won't hire anyone who has an adult criminal record then some of the deplorable behaviour we see from professional sportsmen will not be as common but on that day Satan will be driving a snow plough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_ragg1984 Posted August 16, 2009 Share Posted August 16, 2009 Burress did shoot someone- he shot himself and he was NOT going to be fit for the playoffs (quite hard when you can't walk having shot yourself somewhere on a lower limb). You as a Giants fan seemed to be taking the moral high ground (although I'll admit now that perhaps this isn't your intention) over the Eagles signing someone with a criminal past. Well over 50% of the NFL teams have someone on their team who has a bit of previous- from smuggling to shooting to drugs to wife beating etc. so I find it quite hard for anyone who claims to be an NFL fan to start claiming the moral high ground. Oh and didn't Burress get charged with reckless endangerment- i.e. he was stupid enough to bring an unsafe gun into a very public and crowded place. The point I was making is that Vick although being a bit of doesn't mean that he can't throw a football a long way and you could be the biggest in the world but if you have that sort of talent and aren't in prision to use it then some professional sports team will hire you. They did with Lee Hughes, they are doing with Vick, they will do with Burress and anyone else in the future. When that much money is involved morals often go out of the window. Maybe if sports teams employed a code of ethics that they won't hire anyone who has an adult criminal record then some of the deplorable behaviour we see from professional sportsmen will not be as common but on that day Satan will be driving a snow plough. Burress could have been fit for the playoffs. He had 6 weeks to get fit for the first round of the playoffs, which could have happened....except for the fact that he was suspended instantly so they didn't even try to get him fit. Just looked up the Burress charges..."criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, and a single count of reckless endangerment in the second degree". Thought it was just the first one. The point I was making is that Michael Vick is a scumbag. Whether or not other NFL players are similarly scum is not, and never was the issue. I have never stated on here that Vick shouldn't be allowed to play, as that was not the point that I was making. Just simply, I can't stand the guy and he is scum....I am struggling to understand how it ever became a debate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rudemedic Posted August 16, 2009 Share Posted August 16, 2009 Burress could have been fit for the playoffs. He had 6 weeks to get fit for the first round of the playoffs, which could have happened....except for the fact that he was suspended instantly so they didn't even try to get him fit. Just looked up the Burress charges..."criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, and a single count of reckless endangerment in the second degree". Thought it was just the first one. The point I was making is that Michael Vick is a scumbag. Whether or not other NFL players are similarly scum is not, and never was the issue. I have never stated on here that Vick shouldn't be allowed to play, as that was not the point that I was making. Just simply, I can't stand the guy and he is scum....I am struggling to understand how it ever became a debate. I seriously doubt Burress would have been fit for the play-offs as he only had 6 weeks- maybe for the superbowl which would have been at least 4 weeks later. I don't disagree that Vick is scum but it was very hard to see that you weren't saying he shouldn't be allowed to play, or the reason why you dislike him so much when there are some comparable people around in the world of sport who you don't hate as much. Personally it might be a moot point anyway as like with Lee Hughes being out of a sport for so long will no doubt affect his ability to perform at the level he was once at- can't imagine its all that easy to do the same sort of training he needs whilst being banged up, so although he may have signed for Philly he may spend a long time on their bench. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_ragg1984 Posted August 16, 2009 Share Posted August 16, 2009 I seriously doubt Burress would have been fit for the play-offs as he only had 6 weeks- maybe for the superbowl which would have been at least 4 weeks later. I don't disagree that Vick is scum but it was very hard to see that you weren't saying he shouldn't be allowed to play, or the reason why you dislike him so much when there are some comparable people around in the world of sport who you don't hate as much. Personally it might be a moot point anyway as like with Lee Hughes being out of a sport for so long will no doubt affect his ability to perform at the level he was once at- can't imagine its all that easy to do the same sort of training he needs whilst being banged up, so although he may have signed for Philly he may spend a long time on their bench. It's not, because I quite clearly never said it. And the reason I mentioned it was that this is a thread about the NFL and I had just read it in the NFL news. I mentioned that he had signed for the Eagles (because its pretty newsworthy), I also mentioned that I think the guy is scum (because I do). Maybe this time next year when Donte Stallworth signs for someone, I will post a similar thing. And, as it says on here, the Doctor treating Burress said it would keep him out for at least 4-6 weeks. The first playoff game was exactly 6 weeks later, so they could have made the effort to get him back. But we didn't. And I don't believe for one second it's because we are morally better than the Eagles...it's because all season he had been acting like a giant arse and it was the straw that broke the camels back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OAFCMIKE Posted September 3, 2009 Author Share Posted September 3, 2009 I've just heard that Sky haven't signed up the rights for this season yet. Anyone know the craic? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldhamSheridan Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 I've just heard that Sky haven't signed up the rights for this season yet. Anyone know the craic? Channel 5 have got a Sunday night game, but nothing on Sky or ESPN yet. It's got to be something to do with ESPN throwing a spanner int eh works for it to be at this stage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 (edited) World economy situation is causing Sky to more picky about how much they spend on everything. Personally kind of hope no one end up showing it. Can drop my sky subscription and just use Gamepass I just hope games are not split between Sky and ESPN. That is the worse deal possible for us sky subscribers Edited September 3, 2009 by oafc0000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_ragg1984 Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 I've just heard that Sky haven't signed up the rights for this season yet. Anyone know the craic? Looks like the deal hasn't been done to show it....yet. For the opening Sunday of the season, between 6pm-12am, the schedule for Sky Sports 3 says TBC. That would suggest they are still in talks, but leaving the slot open. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldhamSheridan Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 Looks like the deal hasn't been done to show it....yet. For the opening Sunday of the season, between 6pm-12am, the schedule for Sky Sports 3 says TBC. That would suggest they are still in talks, but leaving the slot open. You'd think ESPN would have it at the drop of a hat, but maybe they're limited to what they can get whilst on the Sky platform. No NFL on Sky Sports and I'll be dropping it straight off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 No NFL on Sky Sports and I'll be dropping it straight off. Same here.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_ragg1984 Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 You'd think ESPN would have it at the drop of a hat, but maybe they're limited to what they can get whilst on the Sky platform. No NFL on Sky Sports and I'll be dropping it straight off. It's all about money. Apparently Sky average 40,000 viewers in total for the Sunday night games. Thats not loads, but I think it cost about (cant remember exactly) £6m a year. I think ESPN will be cautious with the rights they buy up, and not spend over the odds. I think we could end up with Sky/ESPN sharing the rights. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 I think we could end up with Sky/ESPN sharing the rights. which would result in two subscriptions for me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_ragg1984 Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 which would result in two subscriptions for me That would depend on the blackout restrictions on Gamepass HD for me. If we could get the games on there instead it would be ok. hopefully, if the deal is changed, then the restrictions are changed too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OAFCMIKE Posted September 5, 2009 Author Share Posted September 5, 2009 (edited) Some good news after a horrendous start to the weekend. Sky have signed a three-year deal. http://www.nfluk.com/news/sky-sports-to-sh...ive_040909.html I think it means 6pm and 9pm on Sky with the late game on Five and Monday Night on ESPN although I may be wrong.. No red button though. Edited September 5, 2009 by OAFCMIKE Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nava Posted September 5, 2009 Share Posted September 5, 2009 Some good news after a horrendous start to the weekend. Sky have signed a three-year deal. http://www.nfluk.com/news/sky-sports-to-sh...ive_040909.html I think it means 6pm and 9pm on Sky with the late game on Five and Monday Night on ESPN although I may be wrong.. No red button though. Good news! I usually manage to watch the Bronco's games through live feeds that always appear on their boards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldhamSheridan Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 (edited) Good news! I usually manage to watch the Bronco's games through live feeds that always appear on their boards. Where's 'Latics' that Alabama* fan. We need college football to slide in here and there on this thread. On the really bright side Penn State won 31-7, so all is well. *I beleive they're supposed to be half decent this year. Edited September 6, 2009 by OldhamSheridan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 NCAA Football is pretty good, loads of action more mistakes. Watched my first season last year, go Red Raiders - they did over North Dakota 38-13 in front of 47,000 people this weekend. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorrro Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 MSU won 44-3. Boo-ya. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.