Time to face fact

[Harlan Huckleby]

I don't know about the valid argument part, since it's a private forum of another - Madtown - Harlan has only the rights Madtown chooses to allow. But, as a purveyor of incessant crap - including inane videos and bad photoshopping - I fully realize that the best response to bilge you don't like is to just ignore it and move on.

I never questioned the perogative of Madtown to have rules and standards, that is a straw man that keeps popping up.

You have greater free speech if standards are enforced uniformly, rather than heat-of-the-moment response. I prefer greater free speech.

[Patler]

Pickett at nose is not a bad thing versus a running team. They will miss Raji's pass rush. Of all the hot teams the Texans and 49ers are the teams I would want to have to start Pickett over Raji against.

I wonder if they can locate Howard Green in time for tonight's game?

[mraynrand]

I never questioned the perogative of Madtown to have rules and standards, that is a straw man that keeps popping up.

You have greater free speech if standards are enforced uniformly, rather than heat-of-the-moment response. I prefer greater free speech.

It's the only issue, whether Madtown has standards or not, your free speech here is limited by his whims. In other words, you really have no free speech here, as you seem to imagine it.

[Harlan Huckleby]

It's the only issue, whether Madtown has standards or not, your free speech here is limited by his whims. In other words, you really have no free speech here, as you seem to imagine it.

So free speech here is decided by the chemical surges in that nut job's head? That does sound scary. Free Speech is always a relative term, here, there and everywhere. In fact I would say the limits of free speech at packerrats is well understood, and therefore I would call this a relatively relaxed and free forum. I think what happened in this particular cock-up is that officer Zool jumped the gun and deleted a post to teach me a lesson - he is part of the robust club that finds me distasteful.

[ND72]

I understand that I am a newbie so my opinion doesn't mean much. But I didn't find Harlan's clip offensive and he has made a valid argument.

You're right, you're opinion doesn't mean much. . I have, what, 3,500+ posts, and neither does mine....WELCOME!

[wist43]

But I didn't find Harlan's clip offensive and he has made a valid argument.

Don't ever say that again!!

[mraynrand]

It is late Sunday night and I am not facing fact

[King Friday]

The only fact I'm seeing is that the AFC sucks monkey balls.

[pbmax]

I am facing Nortwest.

[HowardRoark]

But, as a purveyor of incessant crap -.

New job?

[Kiwon]

A-Rod's 6 TDs should raise spirits some.

[mraynrand]

New job?

If I could sell my bullshit, I'd be a millionaire

[ThunderDan]

If you watch the replay closely Luck's head actual goes toward Perry at the hit. The physics of which dictate that Perry didn't hit the QB's head.

From Peter King's Monday Morning Quarterback Column:

7. I think you can chase your tail with a lot of these borderline hits that get defensive players flagged and fined, particularly for hits on the quarterback. But I have to comment on the hit on Andrew Luck that got Green Bay linebacker Nick Perry a 15-yard penalty and a $15,000 fine. Perry got the penalty and fine because he hit Luck with his helmet first on his body, and a defender can't contact a quarterback with the helmet first.

A terrible rule in the first place, because a tackler keeping his head up and hitting a ballcarrier below the shoulders is the textbook way to tackle; for a defender to have to consciously keep his head to the side of a quarterback's torso is unreasonable.

The NFL told Perry he led with the crown of his helmet, but I've watched this play over and over, and he didn't lead with the crown of the helmet -- he had his head straight-up, his facemask contacting Luck first. There are dangerous plays in football, and the league is smart to be vigilant about getting rid of them. This, however, should not be considered a dangerous play, but rather one with the defender tackling the quarterback the way he should.



Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...#ixzz29OMQsgM7

[mraynrand]

So free speech here is decided by the chemical surges in that nut job's head? That does sound scary. Free Speech is always a relative term, here, there and everywhere. In fact I would say the limits of free speech at packerrats is well understood, and therefore I would call this a relatively relaxed and free forum. I think what happened in this particular cock-up is that officer Zool jumped the gun and deleted a post to teach me a lesson - he is part of the robust club that finds me distasteful.

In the football forum, I would suggest that the video clip was one of very few distasteful posts

[Zool]

So free speech here is decided by the chemical surges in that nut job's head? That does sound scary. Free Speech is always a relative term, here, there and everywhere. In fact I would say the limits of free speech at packerrats is well understood, and therefore I would call this a relatively relaxed and free forum. I think what happened in this particular cock-up is that officer Zool jumped the gun and deleted a post to teach me a lesson - he is part of the robust club that finds me distasteful.

Sometimes, your wrongness is stunning even to me after all these years.

I was reacting to multiple requests to remove the post. If it were anywhere but in the Packer room it would have stayed. I wasn't permanently deleted in case someone decided I over-reacted. Also, I don't think I would ever do something to teach you a lesson. That would indicate you have the ability to learn about consequences for actions. I don't give you that much credit.