The Big Picture: Maddening

[maninahat]

Especially when they are all forms of optional entertainment for American Joes. It isn't as if the average American in this day and age has to hunt or fish. They freely choose to, at the expense of the suffering of blameless animals. Blood sports are obviously the most unpleasant and cruellest of all these sports, but hunting and fishing are still pretty unpleasant. Just because the hunter "respects nature" or "donates to wildlife" or requires "skills" doesn't change the ultimate fact that we, above all, kill animals for the entertainment of it.

If people didn't hunt local animal populations would explode in some areas, not to mention that taking a hands-on approach encourages people to develop a respect for the animals they eat. It's not strictly necessary, no, but factory farms are so far removed from the natural process that by the time we pick up meat at the store it looks nothing like the animal it came from. It's convenient but in many ways it's also dehumanizing. I'm not against super market meat but I'd never want that to be the only option.

Aside from that, if you want wild game the only way to get it is to hunt for it, and meats like venison are some of the healthiest you can eat. Even if you remove the philosophical aspect from hunting and do it for pure pleasure, you still get something you can use. That alone separates it from dog fighting.

But that still doesn't get away from the fact that you don't need to eat either farmed or hunted animals. Yes, there are less cruel ways about getting meat on your plate, but it is still unpleasant and fairly unecessary in a day and age where practically every fungi, nut and vegetable is available to you (and where they are far more economical/efficient to eat over meat).

I also recognise that culling is a necessary process and that hunting is far more pleasant than resorting to mass farms and slaughterhouses, but I doubt that is the reason people go out to hunt in the first place. Above all, outdoorsmen are doing it for the joy of it. If there are benefits to hunting, that it is fortunate, but these benefits are only secondary to why they really do it. That was the vegan's orignal point: the fact that a man who seeks entertainment by hunting or fishing can't shake the fact that he is ultimately doing it at the expense of the animals to some extent, and thus it is hypocritical of Bob not to let that weigh into his argument about how someone who engages in animal cruelty is totally unforgiveable.

 

[MannyDon]

The man was tried convicted and paid his debt to society in jail he does not owe Bob or anyone else on this forum a fucking thing get over yourselves.
And were the hell did people get this ass backwards perception that dogs are nothing more than these cute cuddily emotional blank slates just waiting to be filled with your love and affection. There are many breeds of dogs out there and they all have different temperaments. Here in australia in some states you cant even own some breeds of dog because the breed is considered A dangerous breed.
And in some parts we have a growing feral dog problem because formally domesticated dogs have started gathering in packs and attacking farm animals and in some cases people.
Don't get me wrong I love dogs but in my opinion any dog is just one empty stomach away from doing something nasty to something or someone.

 

[Xentek]

Is this the big picture? Nah, just some rant.

He served his time; not good enough? Then your beef is with the legislator and not with EA or the athlete.

 

[SamStar42]

The whole 'ALL SPORTS GAMES ARE THE SAME' piss me off so much. Mostly because it's by people who don't even fucking PLAY these games, they just state the same things as everyone else because it's nice to be different. Honestly, play FIFA 10 and then FIFA 11. You can fucking notice the difference straight away.

Would be nice to see people play games before judging them.

 

[Saltyk]

Michael Vick tortured and killed animals for sport. Movie Bob owns a hunting and fishing license. There's a difference between eating meat and going out and killing animals for fun. I'm not saying hunting is the worst thing ever, I just don't get out how you can condemn dog-fighting but support hunting. They're both unsavory in my book.

Are you seriously comparing dog fighting to hunting and fishing? When you hunt or fish, you are required to prepare, and wait for extended periods of time. It takes patience, knowledge and skill. Also, both activities are heavily regulated by the government. Hunters are required to have a license and only allowed to hunt during certain times with certain weapons. And if a Game Warden discovers you hunting during the wrong season, or without a license, or any other infraction like having too many kills, be prepared to lose your license and face any number of penalties.

Oh, and hunters and fishermen are known to do more to support wildlife than any other group. They give more money, and their organizations do more to fight to protect wilderness and wildlife than pretty much any other group. Also, every hunter I've ever talked to truly respects and enjoys nature.

By the way. I don't hunt or fish. I find both to be boring and I refuse to wake up early enough to do either activity.

Are you saying that it doesn't take patience, knowledge or skill to dogfight? I imagine the husbandry and training for the dogs are quite complex and require a lot of time, money and skill. If governments regulated dog-fighting the way they do hunting or fishing, would it be seen as acceptable? Probably not. If Michael Vick gave generously to animal rescue organizations would we see what he had done as ok? I understand how the two things seem different and in many ways they are. I think dog-fighting is probably worse than hunting. But I do feel they are similar enough that when movie bob condemns Michael Vick to what it seemed to me was being permanently ostracized, he's being a little hypocritical if he owns a hunting and fishing license. That's all I'm saying.

Well, I disagree. The differences are pretty stark. Hunters have to seek out and wait for the animals they kill. In fact, most governments condone hunting as it keeps local animal populations in check. case in point, in my state it is legal to hunt deer during certain seasons. Part of the reason for this is that deer don't really have any natural predators. Hunting keeps the population from growing too wild preventing the animals from starving (too many deer not enough food). It also prevents car accidents to an extent. Ever hit a deer? Yeah, that's no bug.

Those that conduct dog fights, purchase the animals and "train" them to attack, and even kill, other dogs. Something that I already mentioned is not in their nature. And what you referred to as training is really just torture (maybe I referred to it as training in my full post, I'm not really sure). I fail to see any skill in dog fighting. Its basically organized animal abuse for entertainment. Anyone who treated their animals in such a manner, would have the police at their door asking questions and probably have Animal Welfare coming for their animals.

Bottom line is that Hunting involves seeking out an animal in the wild. A wild, sometimes dangerous animal, in their natural habitat and killing it. Most hunters eat their kills, too. Hunting serves a number of purposes. Dog fighting involves taking a innocent domestic animal and forcing it to do something that it would never do through torture and abuse. All in the name of "fun" and gambling. In my mind, there is a world of difference between the two.

And I would fight any effort to legalize dog fighting. It is sick and depraved.

Anyway, thanks for sharing your opinion. Didn't mean to come off confrontation, if I did. I can actually understand you not liking either. I'm just trying to point out that hunting is not anywhere near as bad as dog fighting. At least, in my book.

I have to disagree with your arguments about the merits of hunting. I think native populations of animals, if left alone tend to take care of themselves, either through predation or through scarcity of resources and hunting to control the population is by no means the most effective way of preventing traffic accidents. These are secondary consequences of hunting, not the primary reason for it.

Some smaller things: I don't agree with the argument that hunting is better because the animals pose some danger because it is still nowhere near a fair fight. Also, on the idea of dogs being forced to do something unnatural: many modern breeds of dogs were initially bred, as guards, hunters or wardogs, and they are descended from violent wild animals.

I think you have a point about the violence of training. That is definitely a difference between hunting and dog-fighting which makes dog-fighting crueler. The main point I was trying to make however was this: In my mind, hunting and dog-fighting are similar enough that I don't feel comfortable with Movie Bob's level of hostility towards Michael Vick. Movie Bob basically says the worst possible thing about Michael Vick: that he is beyond remdemption. I feel like in order to make such a statement, you need to have all your bases covered. You can't say "animal murder is especially sick" (4:03 in the video), and then go around hunting. I understand that some people see a very real difference, but I guess for me the distinction isn't sharp enough to justify what he said.

I didn't feel confronted, and I hope you haven't either.

I haven't felt confronted. I just like to know that we are both coming at this from a point of mutual respect. Tone doesn't come through in written form too well. And on the internet, the only difference between your best friend and worst enemy is the subject being discussed.
Anyway....

Actually, controlling animal populations that would otherwise explode as they have no natural predators, is the primary reason for hunting. I've heard of plenty of situations where a person could get permission to hunt animals in the off season that were damaging crops. Farmers could ask the government to allow hunters to hunt on their farm for a few days to kill deer that were destroying his crop. There are many animals that that lack any predators today that require hunting to keep them in check. One could argue that the reason this is required is because we previously hunted those predators to extinction or the brink of it. Then again, mountain lions in a major city wouldn't go very well. And even if deer did have a natural predator, we'd probably have to hunt that predator to maintain their population.

I remember a simple lesson from an old biology class. The entire class went outside and we started with one "predator" attacking the "prey" as they ran from from side of a small field to the other. And before long, we had half the class as "predators" completely eliminating the "prey". The point was to show how easy an ecosystem can be set out of whack without balance. By doing something like introducing an animal without natural predators to an environment. Something we have done plenty of times.

I can't say I don't understand not wanting to kill an animal. Personally I don't think I could bring myself to actually kill an animal. Or at least, preform the skinning and preparation required to eat the animal afterward.

Have you ever seen dogs confront each other? Generally speaking they bare their teeth, growl, snap, and may bite, but generally it ends with one dog walking away without any blood being shed. That being said, I have seen dogs act in horrible and aggressive ways towards each other. I once saw three Rottweilers killing a smaller dog once. I'll spare you the details of that. But you do have a point that not all dogs are sweet little lap dogs. That doesn't make forcing them to fight for entertainment any less sick.

For the record, I also find cockfighting and bullfighting equally repugnant. The Bullfighting part might surprise you, but I find that sort of "entertainment" disgusting. Whether they kill the animal or not, isn't the point.

 

[Drake_Dercon]

"trying to turn his life around" does not mean "has turned his life around" or even "is turning his life around".

As far as I know, Vick hasn't done anything to redeem himself other than playing a good season. When he starts donating 50% of his salary to charity, does volunteer work at a homeless centre and subsidizes animal shelters, or at least helps the police find and convict other people that do what he did, I will not consider him redeemed.

A second chance means that you use it to do good.

 

[Siege_TF]

This is a bit much.

You got a huge double standard going here. What sets dogs apart from chickens, cows, birds, mice, squirrels, fish, etc. that we kill/eat every single day? They're cuddly? Pffh.

This is a sentiment I've seen a lot in this topic, or at least the last two pages that I've bothered to read.
This is a joke, right? Mens Rea. Look it up. Let's compare Vik to a livestock farmer. Vik has Mens Rea because he killed animals for fun and profit in a cruel manner. A livestock farmer genreally doesn't because he kills animals for profit in a humane manner.

You are aware that there ARE animal cruelty laws, and they apply to livestock, right?
You DO know that if a cow, chicken, mouse, squirrel, fish (well, maybe not fish. I know they're served live in certain places in Japan, but that's Japan for you), etc is treated inhumanely, particularly for fun the person(s) responcible ARE in breach of various laws and liable to receive legal sanction, RIGHT?

This is not opinion, kneejerk reactionism, or bleedig heart sentimentality; two minutes in google would reveal this as fact;

http://www.khou.com/sports/Two-Texa...-with-livestock-animal-cruelty-119038774.html
BENBROOK, Texas?Two Texas high school baseball players accused of sacrificing chickens in a superstitious ritual to end their slump have been charged with cruelty to livestock animals.

Not a dog, or a cat, or some other cute and cuddly animal. Not even someone's pet chicken. Farm Chickens, a handful out of potentially thousands if it's a chicken farm that they took them from.

http://www.seattlepi.com/default/article/Cruelty-laws-apply-to-livestock-lawsuit-says-1300764.php
Under state law, animal cruelty can be charged as a felony. But the law exempts livestock handlers from prosecution so long as their actions are in line with "customary animal husbandry practices."

In other words if you're going to kill something you have the legal obligation to kill it quickly and with minimal pain, and not torture it in the persuit of fun, profit, superstition, etc, etc, eventually finishing it off when it can't fulfill those purposes anymore.

There is no double standard here; that's why Vic went to jail and why livestock farmers don't.

 

[wonkify]

Thanks for this, Bob. Some might find hunting and fishing and being protective of companion animals to be at odds but it isn't.

A day in the field with a trained gun dog leaves a person forever marked with love and respect for them. That's in addition to regard for them as pets.

A millionaire who would expend such effort and planning to run the vile enterprise Vick was engaged in is at the very least a sociopath with a chilling lack of empathy for other living creatures.

A fine face for any product's marketing campaign.

This is a truly despicable human being.

 

[Argatroph]

The evil that Vick brought about was still counting against the Falcon's salary cap while he was in prison putting a damper on the amount of quality players we can bring in. Matty Ice is amazing and we've built a sound offense with turner, gonzo, and white but our D is weak. until that gets bolstered 2nd round playoff will be out stopping point

 

[mew4ever23]

I agree with you about the Madden series in general bob - It's disgraceful that EA's be able to get away with releasing the same game with an updated roster for as long as they have been, and anyone actually buying this garbage should be ashamed of themselves.

However, I think that people up in arms about this guy being on the cover are making a mountain out of a molehill. It's just a lackluster sports title that everyone will forget about when they release next year's edition, and I know you said you didn't want to hear this bob, but dammit, I think you need to: He served his time. He paid his debt to society. The fact that you would have him chucked under a bus for something he did years ago, and has since payed for, quite frankly, strikes me as vindictive.

 

[Battenbergcake]

He can die in a damn fire.

Surely being devoured by a cloud of flaming winged piranha's would be much more becoming of Vicks.

 

[Susan Arendt]

He can die in a damn fire.

Surely being devoured by a cloud of flaming winged piranha's would be much more becoming of Vicks.

Someone's been watching old James Cameron movies.

 

[wekill]

although yes i do agree with you that we should not allow him to get to be on the cover of a game or even be still in the NFL
saying this kinda stuff on the internet is going to lose you the video series
just be careful i know im not the first person to post and this will probably be ignored but try to stick to your comics and movies, leave the games to the rest of us.

 

[emeraldrafael]

Snip

1) If we want to hold evidence against Ben like its the word of God, then I see no reason the same shouldnt be extended to the Pats. I'm sorry, if that makes me a bad person, but if there's going to be bias, may as well spread it around. And the fact that you are pointing them out, and purposely so (because there's obviously something wrong if no other coaches publicly do it), you are still cheating, and its still illegal. BUt the Pats got a slap on the wrist for it. Fairness in punishment, and Goodel just does not do it.

2) The Steelers opened three and one last year behind leftwich. And the game that Dixon did start he lost. Hence why they got leftwich.

And actually, Dixon was injured for most of the games that Ben was out, and the game He (leftwich) was out (against the Ravens, fourth game in, and when Ben should have come back, because the Ravens and the Steelers is like... is like... Id ont know, Brazil vs whoever is number two in the world at soccer. Its like Detroit Vs Chicago, or Montreal Vs Boston. Its the Yankees vs Philly. it brings ratings, and would have been perfect for the league's supposed money woes) the steelers lost. So no, the steelers went 0-1 with Batch and Dixon. They went 3-0 with Leftwich.

3) Brady hasnt been as good since his accident, and its highly noticable. He had Moss, but because he cant take some teasing and had a hissy fit, Moss was gotten rid of. And who really did the Steelers have? Ward's old, and he had a horrible season. Mendenhal doesnt fit the game that Ben likes to play, and was hampered (He's a runner, Bens a Passer). There was really no one there, and the Steelers were lucky they had started against weaker teams early on to get that 3-1 record. And as I said, Brady's great, because he has a great team around him (the Pats have been good for more then just last season, and its not all Brady. The Steelers have been almost dependant on both Ben and Troy. Without them, that offense and Defense quickly falls). Put him on a team like, say... the Browns, or... the Broncos, and he wouldnt look so good. Ben is just better. He's all purpose, and he's tougher. He's a guy you can build a franchise around and not worry about your pocket protection. He does it all and he doesnt crumble under the pressure. Sure, he throws the occasion interception, or will miss the player, but that game isnt built for Ben. The Rooneys want to run a running game, and this is a passing league.

I'm not saying he's not a good QB. Or that he's not one that you couldnt build something around. But he's no where near as good as people like to say he is, and he doesnt deserve at least one of his rings (though you could probably debate that with Ben's first ring against Seattle, depending on what you want to believe and how much conspiracy you want to talk about). Especially after his accident, he only went further down. RIght now, He'd probably be my third or fouth pick for a QB, with the three players above him being:

1) Ben Roethlisberger
2) Aaron Rodgers
3) Joe Flacco/Michael Vick (I dont care what you say, the man runs a dman good game, and his wildcats are game breaking winners. You cant even begin to debate that, just looking at his numbers).

Snip

She had DTF written on something like an ID card when she walked in. Thats not lying, or exaggerating. Thats fact, its been proven by eye witness accounts and by records. ALso, Ben treated her very well, and most of her "evidence" is heresay. She at first didnt even wnat to contribute herself to a rape test kit and used the "but I'm nineteen, a small town girl" defense in her favor to play on heart strings. And what are you saying he used violence against her? Ben's a saint, I've met the guy, and somewhat know the guy because I know people he sparringly associates with. Local talent types. Ben did nothing (as was proven, since it didnt even go to court, in either case, and with both cases having barely enough evidence scraped up to even be called a case), and did no harass her. In my (and most other minds that arent clearly retarded or have something against the guy) mind, he's innocent, and never committed. Would you say the same for the Likes of Brady if he was in the same spot? Would BOB say the same about brady if Brady was caught doing what Ben SUPPOSEDLY did, what Vick DID do, or if he was just profoundly STUPID like Plexico? Oh, and its James Harrison that beats his wife, not Ben (though the way I heard, she didnt want his baby baptized or something. I dont know, to be honest, I tune out on Harrison, cause I just dont like him as a person. As a player though, he's the man at what he does). Get your steelers right.

See above for why the steelers offense did well. Leftwich is Ben lite. He's the back up they should have, and the back up they need. Not this Dixon *****, who cant even win a fucking game. The kid (and I'll admit it, he's a kid, and without playing experience in the real game) just has no potential of any calibur when you compare to Ben, and the American Conference eats him alive. His division eats him alive. Dixon will never be able to outplay the likes of Brady, Flacco, even Sanchez (and thats low). he'd have a tough time going against the kid who QBs Cleveland (I wanna say his name is McCoy).

Lets look at some of the other competiton too.

Rodgers - well... He runs a style Similar to Bens really. Thats why I like the guy. So yeah, He would be my number two choice, just cause his mistakes a bit higher then Bens, though if someone said they wanted him number one over all, I wouldnt argue. Its almost really a tie between the two.

Manning, Peyton - He's in a fast decline. Look at the Colts this year. They are built around him, and they were only 10-6, in a pathetically weak division. THey were the only team in their division to even peak over .500. Its small wonder why they make it. Its honestly hard to say who's better between him and his little bro Eli.

Manning, Eli - He has his good days, but hten he has his bad days. and they are BAD. I dont know, I'd go for Eli over Peyton with hardly a second thought, but he'd have to straighten his ship rather quickly if he expects to stay around and compete with he likes of the AFC. And the big boys would just bounce him around like a Pinball.

Romo - I know, you didnt mention him, but he was a popular guy people liked to compare ben to and say Ben was worse. He's garbage. Well, he's hype too, but he's garbage. His little 0-6 (I think) streak proves that.

Brady - I've already said my piece. You take him out of the Pats, the Pats could still perform in an at least 10+ win season (and a 12+ if you go to 18 games). He's good, but he's been declining since his accident, and he's losing that calm he had. You can still see it in Ben, cause he's just got a constant smile on his face. With Brady, he's losing it. he's becoming more serious, more "old". He's gonna crack, and when he does, he's gonna break and crumble. Brady's heading for an emotion pitfall, and there's no telling what kinda effect that will take on his play (it will be Negative, you just dont know how long it will last). And I want someone who can last, and do more then Brady does. Besides, the guy gets bounced around by teams like the Ravens, Steelers, and appearantly the Jets. And he just cant break the grab, or escape the trap.

Brees - you're telling me you have Reggie Bush on your team and you still cant produce yearly? Oh no, I dont care if you won your superbowl the season before last. you crumbled in a game against a team that if it werent for the division leader rule didnt have any business in the playoffs and by all rights should not have been there. You get to go sit in the corner, and you can come back when you show yourself much more clearly.

Also Drew, you'd better right a nice big Thank You card to Old Man Favre, because if he didnt decide to go all gunslinger, you wouldnt even HAVE that superbowl ring you own right now. Who Dat indeed.

Vick - Oh yeah, I did just go there. He's a great wild cat QB, and he played himself a fantastic season. In fact, after talking with someone, I would whole heartedly agree that if he went in every game, and continued his numbers like he did, that man is easily MVP status. However that wild cat is a dangerous weapon, and I wouldnt want to play that kinda game. you're good, I'll admit it, and there's no debating. You've got the numbers, the experience, you've got it all. But that risk, well, see Brett Favre above.

Rivers - Cause his name somehow still seems to be in the running. He's... just no. No no no, go back to the chargers, I dont want to see you. You're a liability, and you will hinder any chance there could be. Just go, and quickly, before you contamenate the rest of my team.

The Defense is a whole other matter. Just like it is on the Pats. And Troy was injured and not up to his talent for a good portion of the year. Plus his play is dependent on the position. Put him in Safety, and he's a monster who will wreck your life. That can be seen just when you watch the game where he jumped the ENTIRE defensive line and pretty much drove the QB down in such a display of awesomeness the Gods themselves would later sing ballads to his achievement (oka, thats a bit much, but still). Put him in his other position, and he's... not so much. He just doesnt get the same options and randomness, which is where he excels. James Harrison is also a big component of their defense, as he's a tank, and isnt afraid to get right up in your face and then send it straight to the turf. The Style play he plays isnt "allowed" currently, but thats just so Goodel can get his 18 game season and for that, it has to look "safe". You watch, if he gets it, plays will get brutal again, and Harrison will shine, only then he'll be worse, cause you'll see him doing it in 18 games, and not his 16 he has going now.

And the Steelers running game wasnt stunning by any means last season. Also, who will you switch to? Batch and Dixon both suck, and they are so clearly numbers 2 and 3 (or hell, even number 3 and 4 with Leftwich, and numbers 4 and 5 if you want to convert Randel El and bring that back [though thats something you dont do for more then maybe a game, and even thats abit much]). If they're centering wasnt there, that line would (and did) crumble (though to give credit, their backup center is a very competent replacement).

Bill Makes that team, not Tom. Mike can say what he wants to, but Ben implements, and overrides. Ben knows better. Ben Plays better. Theres been many a games that Ben has won for his team by going against Mike's decision, while Brady will follow Bill.

 

[Ashley Norris]

How about instead of abusing Michael Vick you do segments on how many legal wars your country has been in lately or other stuff you know nothing about hmm. How does someone with stupid view get to be on the same site as people like Extra Credits who try to move things forward and not backwards?

Michael Vick can have 10,000 dog fights(not that I condone that) and I'd still put him on the front of the new madden game because football is football he isn?t going to be hosting a dog show. How about you try and make more helpful videos and sound like you got some positive brain cells.

I didn't realise Escapist Magazine let personal attacks on people be posted on there sites... I guess no more Extra Credits for me then.

 

[Clockwork Scarecrow.]

While I wouldn't call him a "waste of human life" he's still a dick.

Also fuck EA Sports.

 

[Marowit]

Having a voice, and taking a stand - Bob I tip my hat to you sir.

 

[captainwalrus]

snip

1. I'm not holding evidence against either Ben or Belichick as 'the world of God'. I'm saying the evidence isn't there for either one of them. Plus, the Patriots lost a first round draft pick, Belichick got fined, and the organization got fined, too. They didn't get a slap on the wrist.

2. No. The Steelers went 3-1 with Dixon and Batch. Evidence enclosed:

Leftwich: http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/profile?playerId=4465 (notice lack of any significant playing time, whatsoever)
Dixon: http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/profile?playerId=11390 (Started game one, injured game two)
Batch: http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/profile?playerId=1490 (Filled in for Dixon until Ben returned)

And their competition was hardly weak. They won against the Falcons and Bucs and were extremely close to beating the Ravens. The only 'weak' team they faced was the Titans, and they still opened the season pretty strong. Hell, I remember a bunch of commentators predicting that the Steelers would start 0-4, because they had one of the toughest opening schedules of any team in the league, and all without Ben. But that didn't happen, because the Steelers defense and Dixon/Batch were able to carry the team.

3. Brady had his best season since his 2007 50 TD season in 2010. No lie. Look at the stats and watch the games. He went 30-35 TDs and 4 INTs. He was consistently on target and drilling through opposing defenses like butter.

Moss requested a trade. Neither Brady nor the Patriots forced him out. And the Patriots had a pretty terrible team around Brady last year. I already said this, and I'll say it again. They had no vertical passing game whatsover and their best receivers were a slot receiver and two rookie TEs. They had one of the worst pass defenses in the NFL. On every offensive possession, Brady had to put points up on the board because the Pats defense couldn't be relied upon to stop any offense. That's why you always see the Pats scoring 30+ points a game. The Steelers, on the other hand, reliably stopped opposing offenses. They won consistently, while averaging ~20 points a game. Roethlisberger just had to take care of the ball and eat clock time. The Pats depended on Brady much more than the Steelers depended on Ben.

You could argue that Belichick's system is made so that any QB can step into Brady's role, but I can't see any counter-evidence for how that's different from the Steelers. Dixon and Batch, as I've already shown you, led the team to 3-1 against good teams. All they had to do was score a couple of touchdowns and take care of the ball, while the defense just ate up the competition.

On another note, Peyton Manning is not declining, yet. You can't take a streak of 3-4 bad games and say he's declining, especially since he was amazing for the other 12-13 games. If there was ever a team that relied on just one person, it's the Colts. Manning had no consistency at WR besides Wayne. Clark got injured, leaving an undrafted nobody to take his place,. The O-line is atrocious and they had a rotating committee of suck at RB. And the only bright spot on the Colts defense is the pass rush. The secondary is terrible and their run defense is even worse. Really, it's only because of Manning that the Colts got to 10-6, seeing as everyone else was either injured or terrible.

On another note, Tony Romo. He's a good QB. I like how you dismissed his other 5-6 years in the league and focused on this one year where everything fell apart for the Cowboys. Is he clutch? No. But he's a consistent producer, and the fact that the Cowboys have been consistent playoff contenders is largely because of Romo's good QB play. He's not garbage.

 

[Pendragon8]

I don?t know about all of you but I say we as geeks with computer go to that online vote for who should be on the cover, pick the least of all the sports evils (i.e. the "sports star" who is guilty of the most understandable and least sever crime if necessary) and have an entire community sign in/on to that vote and all vote for that one guy who is decidedly NOT micheal vick. With this entire community standing as one behind the least evil/easiest to put up with player on the cover there?s NO WAY vick gets on the cover.
P.S. No it's not a typo that micheal vicks name has no capitals its total and complete intent as I don?t think he deserves to have his name capitalized.

 

[emeraldrafael]

snip

1. I'm not holding evidence against either Ben or Belichick as 'the world of God'. I'm saying the evidence isn't there for either one of them. Plus, the Patriots lost a first round draft pick, Belichick got fined, and the organization got fined, too. They didn't get a slap on the wrist.

2. No. The Steelers went 3-1 with Dixon and Batch. Evidence enclosed:

Leftwich: http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/profile?playerId=4465 (notice lack of any significant playing time, whatsoever)
Dixon: http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/profile?playerId=11390 (Started game one, injured game two)
Batch: http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/profile?playerId=1490 (Filled in for Dixon until Ben returned)

And their competition was hardly weak. They won against the Falcons and Bucs and were extremely close to beating the Ravens. The only 'weak' team they faced was the Titans, and they still opened the season pretty strong. Hell, I remember a bunch of commentators predicting that the Steelers would start 0-4, because they had one of the toughest opening schedules of any team in the league, and all without Ben. But that didn't happen, because the Steelers defense and Dixon/Batch were able to carry the team.

3. Brady had his best season since his 2007 50 TD season in 2010. Moss requested a trade. Neither Brady nor the Patriots forced him out. And the Patriots had a pretty terrible team around Brady last year. I already said this, and I'll say it again. They had no vertical passing game whatsover and their best receivers were a slot receiver and two rookie TEs. They had one of the worst pass defenses in the NFL. On every offensive possession, Brady had to put points up on the board because the Pats defense couldn't be relied upon to stop any offense. That's why you always see the Pats scoring 30+ points a game. The Steelers, on the other hand, reliably stopped opposing offenses. They won consistently, while averaging ~20 points a game. Roethlisberger just had to take care of the ball and eat clock time. The Pats depended on Brady much more than the Steelers depended on Ben.

You could argue that Belichick's system is made so that any QB can step into Brady's role, but I can't see any counter-evidence for how that's different from the Steelers. Dixon and Batch, as I've already shown you, led the team to 3-1 against good teams. All they had to do was score a couple of touchdowns and take care of the ball, while the defense just ate up the competition.

On another note, Peyton Manning is not declining, yet. You can't take a streak of 3-4 bad games and say he's declining, especially since he was amazing for the other 12-13 games. If there was ever a team that relied on just one person, it's the Colts. Manning had no consistency at WR besides Wayne. Clark got injured, leaving an undrafted nobody to take his place,. The O-line is atrocious and they had a rotating committee of suck at RB. And the only bright spot on the Colts defense is the pass rush. The secondary is terrible and their run defense is even worse. Really, it's only because of Manning that the Colts got to 10-6, seeing as everyone else was either injured or terrible.

On another note, Tony Romo. He's a good QB. I like how you dismissed his other 5-6 years in the league and focused on this one year where everything fell apart for the Cowboys. Is he clutch? No. But he's a consistent producer, and the fact that the Cowboys have been consistent playoff contenders is largely because of Romo's good QB play. He's not garbage.

1) Yeah, thats a weak punishment. Meanwhile, The steelers of the 70s were alleged steroid abusers before the rule was there, and people want to take their four rings from them, even though they're clearly in the grandfather clause, and that was a decade defined by steroid abuse. All players involved should have taken a severe pay cut, Bill fired, and a ring taken away, as well as the Pats organization fined more then paltry $250k. Thats what, the profits of one game for them (obviously its not, but still, thats nothing to the pats, even then). And one draft pick, and a 31st pick in the first round, after retaining their 10th pick in the first round. Thats a light punishment, especially since Belichick should have been suspended, possibly fired. Taking away their 31st pick in the first round do more damage to the organization in the end my fucking ass. Goodel.... couldnt even run a fucking soup kitchen.

2) Look at Dixon's Stats. Those are PISS poor.
Batch is worse. I dont know how does ESPN's stats, but Leftwich played more then whats portrayed. I may not be as devoted as I am to the Pens, but I am a decent Steelers fan. And he made the big plays. I remember listening to them all at least, if not watching them.

Also, the Bucs were a weak team But they had an easy schedule. For the most part, they played against weak teams. Except for Detroit, and with the exception of the last game against the Saints (though at that point, it was a rest your stars point), they lost to every team of major talent.

The Falcons run a pathetic game in comparison to the Steelers defense, and were easily stalled out by it. And as we've established, the Titans are weak. The Ravens were their only touch competition when you put it on a team against team, style against style comparison.

3) Fine, I'll conceed. its a difference of opinions, and its a much farther down the line look I take. Though I'm rather sure the 41-14 Win against Miami, the 36-7 win against the Bears, the 45-3 win against the jets, the 23-20 win against the Ravens, the 34-3 win against Buffalo, the 38-7 win against Miami (again), the 45-24 win against Detroit, and the 28-18 win again the Vikings are all rather exemplary marks in favor of a strong defense, simply cause with that much scoring on their part, its a lot of time and chances for the other team to start with hte ball and run their plays. And unless you want to tell me that brady only threw to three people the entire season (actually... thats rather plausible I suppose), there's more offensive talent there, and I'm sure its not all brady running it himself.

Meanwhile, outside of their second game against the Ravens, the Steelers lost all their games to play off bound teams and only averaged 22 points a game. ANd it should be noted, that every game that Ben wasnt in (besides Tampa, but they were no where near ready to take a team like Pittsburgh with their plays and styles) they Steelers didnt win by more then 8 pts. And even lost by 3 against the Ravens (though, they are a tough team, anyone would admit).

Yes, But manning isnt good in the clutch, and he's not as good as people like to talk him up to be when they want to compare. if brady is as good as he is becuase he carries his team, Manning should be expected to as well. And beat every team they were expected to (except for their first game with the Texans. And the first Jacksonville game. Their schedule was stacked to be easy. His performances have slowly been decreasing, especially playoffs.

Again, its all about the rings. Romo cant carry you through playoffs, then its wasting. You need someone to get you through, and to get a ring. Not someone to just get you there.