Re: Edwards will dress, but not start...
Ray O'Hara
"buRford" <buR...@buR.ford.com> wrote in message
news:23ji96hk0ai1apl2e...@4ax.com...
> ... according to Cimini...
>
>
> "Braylon Edwards will dress for Miami game, but will not start, according
> to #Jets. When
> he enters is up to Rex Ryan. No deactivation."
>
>
> So, if the Jets play decently, he'll be sitting. And if they get into
> trouble, he'll be
> inserted. Is this conditional disciplinary action?
he go in on 2nd down of the first possession.
Harlan Lachman
buRford <buR...@buR.ford.com> wrote:
> ... according to Cimini...
>
>
> "Braylon Edwards will dress for Miami game, but will not start, according to
> #Jets. When
> he enters is up to Rex Ryan. No deactivation."
>
>
> So, if the Jets play decently, he'll be sitting. And if they get into
> trouble, he'll be
> inserted. Is this conditional disciplinary action?
Probably. Brilliant. If we blow them out, he misses the game. If not, he
can make up for being a Jerk to his teammates.
And, all of the other consequences he faces still remain.
Most of all, it will likely piss of Cimini. Which in my mind makes it
the perfect solution. The fact that it will also piss off Florio, well,
sometimes, life is just good.
h
Michael
> ... according to Cimini...
>
> "Braylon Edwards will dress for Miami game, but will not start, according to #Jets. When
> he enters is up to Rex Ryan. No deactivation."
>
> So, if the Jets play decently, he'll be sitting. And if they get into trouble, he'll be
> inserted. Is this conditional disciplinary action?
lolz... window dressing...
i'm done trying to convince myself that idiots can be expunged from
pro sports. just win... no holes barred. with or without the problem
cases. it is the next best thing to hope for
J. ust E. njoy T. he S. tupidity
papa.carl44
>
>
> "Braylon Edwards will dress for Miami game, but will not start, according
> to #Jets. When
> he enters is up to Rex Ryan. No deactivation."
>
>
> So, if the Jets play decently, he'll be sitting. And if they get into
> trouble, he'll be
> inserted. Is this conditional disciplinary action?
Unfortunately it is what I think happens a lot at the high school and
college levels. I sure as Hell saw it, never liked or approved of it and
always felt it ultimately hurt the team, but it happened. However, when I
was playing in college it did not happen...never happened and I still have
far more respect for that coach and program than many I've seen since then.
They rationalize this stuff by saying if they hold him out they hurt the
rest of the team and the chances of winning. Then if the guy does not get
into trouble in the near (not far) future it's all forgiven. Compare what
Edwards did to what Big Ben did....and Ben's record before that....these
guys are always getting a pass. Don't you think OJ's attitude was created
by this kind of stuff? He probably was never held accountable.
papa.carl44
"Michael" <mjd...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:523f8216-24d6-4beb...@c21g2000vba.googlegroups.com...
lolz... window dressing...
How can we not have some serious idiots? They get covered up for from the
time they are in jr. high school....get special treatment....that makes lots
of idiots down the road, some go to jail, some straighten out, and some keep
getting into stupid stuff.
Michael
wrote:
> "buRford" <buRf...@buR.ford.com> wrote in message
i would think that the response of the coach depends a lot on the
stakes involved in the decision. if you have a major football high
school or college, there is a strong motive to keep the best guys on
the field no matter what they do while off the field. a high school
coach at one of the nationally known texas, pa, fl, ca, etc football
factories wants a championship for visibility so they can move up the
rung. same deal with the college coaches... at div III rowan where i
went to school, i would not exactly call it a well known powerhouse.
they were a good div III team, but there were no USC type stakes on
the table... it was easy for the coach to axe anyone that did not make
grades or caused an issue. you simply did not have star players there
that the coaches could not do without like div I, nor was there that
immense pressure to win. they did coach hard there though... when i
was a freshman i went out to "scouting day" for the baseball team. i
played in high school and thought it might be fun to play a little
easy going college baseball. i saw that the coach wanted all the
players to consider that they were working like they wanted to be a
pro. Put in the same time and so on. Their best pitcher there did not
even stack up to the best guys that i hit off of in high school... no
way was i gonna turn a hobby into a job.
papa.carl44
To me...if you don't play it like it's a job you aren't really playing
it...not when others and a team are involved..."We play the game to win."
:-)
That said, what you are laying out is clearly situational
ethics....something at stake, you can cheat the ethics laws....nothing at
stake, you get to be ethical...that is how it seems these days. I had a
coach in college who three two guys off the team the week of
homecoming...two starters right before our biggest game....they did some
seriously stupid stuff, but it was back in the day where they practiced far
less situational ethics stuff. I'm not freaked out about Braylon because I
think it's a situation where he got caught, but I think it happens a lot.
Michael
wrote:
> "Michael" <mjd1...@verizon.net> wrote in message
that is why i wisely made my first appearance at scouting day my
last. i was glad to leave it to the "competitors". i could tell the
guys there really wanted to win. the last thing they needed there was
a guy that wanted to have a sunday softball game... even if i could
eat their best pitchers like a crumb. not so much that i did not want
to compete, i just had bigger fish to fry at college.
> That said, what you are laying out is clearly situational
> ethics....something at stake, you can cheat the ethics laws....nothing at
> stake, you get to be ethical...that is how it seems these days. I had a
> coach in college who three two guys off the team the week of
> homecoming...two starters right before our biggest game....they did some
> seriously stupid stuff, but it was back in the day where they practiced far
> less situational ethics stuff. I'm not freaked out about Braylon because I
> think it's a situation where he got caught, but I think it happens a lot.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
common sense and average life experience would say you are right.
only a small percentage of idiots are caugt in the light.
papa.carl44
Ahhh...but see, you don't really know if you could until you do it...and you
can't say you could or would have until you've done it...that's the beauty
of sports and it's why we follow them, the world is full of people who say
they could but only a few who go prove it...there are guys all over the
place who claim they just didn't have time to be the starting QB or
whatever. The only thing someone who never proved they can do it, by doing
it should ever really do, from an ethical standpoint, is to say
nothing....they just didn't do it.
> That said, what you are laying out is clearly situational
> ethics....something at stake, you can cheat the ethics laws....nothing at
> stake, you get to be ethical...that is how it seems these days. I had a
> coach in college who three two guys off the team the week of
> homecoming...two starters right before our biggest game....they did some
> seriously stupid stuff, but it was back in the day where they practiced
> far
> less situational ethics stuff. I'm not freaked out about Braylon because I
> think it's a situation where he got caught, but I think it happens a lot.-
> Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
common sense and average life experience would say you are right.
only a small percentage of idiots are caugt in the light.
And I've been told the statistics on that are very telling.....if you get
caught drunk driving once, you are very unlucky....the odds are very slim,
something like 1 in 2,500 or more. Now...with those odds, the guy who gets
caught works extra hard at it by how he goes about it. If you get caught a
second time....you are in some trouble, and if you get caught a third
time...you need to stop driving altogether, and take a bus to the AA
meetings. Braylon appears to be in that first category at least....but IF,
IF it is true that he was involved in the incident where Donte Stallworth
killed someone while drinking....he obviously does not learn from personal
experience either...and is well on his way to the second or even third
category.....they should learn to play without him.
Michael
ahhh... now i want to go back and play :-) and you are correct... i
should not say i would have done well at div III baeball even though i
had a consistent 400+ batting average in hs... i might have gotten hit
by lightning or abducted by aliens...
> > That said, what you are laying out is clearly situational
> > ethics....something at stake, you can cheat the ethics laws....nothing at
> > stake, you get to be ethical...that is how it seems these days. I had a
> > coach in college who three two guys off the team the week of
> > homecoming...two starters right before our biggest game....they did some
> > seriously stupid stuff, but it was back in the day where they practiced
> > far
> > less situational ethics stuff. I'm not freaked out about Braylon because I
> > think it's a situation where he got caught, but I think it happens a lot.-
> > Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> common sense and average life experience would say you are right.
> only a small percentage of idiots are caugt in the light.
>
> And I've been told the statistics on that are very telling.....if you get
> caught drunk driving once, you are very unlucky....the odds are very slim,
> something like 1 in 2,500 or more. Now...with those odds, the guy who gets
> caught works extra hard at it by how he goes about it. If you get caught a
> second time....you are in some trouble, and if you get caught a third
> time...you need to stop driving altogether, and take a bus to the AA
> meetings. Braylon appears to be in that first category at least....but IF,
> IF it is true that he was involved in the incident where Donte Stallworth
> killed someone while drinking....he obviously does not learn from personal
> experience either...and is well on his way to the second or even third
> category.....they should learn to play without him.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
i would seem that he may be a train wreck waiting to happen... if you
remember, I was one of the ones that protested agaisnt brining in guys
like santonio and edwards... once the moves were made, i just had to
have some hope that they might learn better... i guess not in edwards
case... but... cromartie is said to really be on the right track. if
one out of three work out, they did good.
Johnny Morongo
> On Tue, 21 Sep 2010 21:15:51 -0400, "papa.carl44" <papadotc...@nospamverizon.net> wrote:
>
> >"buRford" <buRf...@buR.ford.com> wrote in message
> ignorant, etc, a person is, the more notoriety. Not because of this incident, but I'm
> really sad for our kids. They never really saw our country at its best. And the way it
> looks, they never will.
This is so true. What a shame.
Johnny Morongo
wrote:
<snip>
> IF it is true that he was involved in the incident where Donte Stallworth
> killed someone while drinking....he obviously does not learn from personal
> experience either...and is well on his way to the second or even third
> category.....they should learn to play without him.
They will...next year.
papa.carl44
If that HBO show showed gave us any insight into these guys, you may be
right, it seemed Santonio was more on track in terms of his attitude.
Edwards always seems to have an edge to him, but sometimes some coaches like
that and think it gives them a more competitive player. Football has never
been populated by choir boys and angels, no matter what some would like to
think. The history of the game is filled with controversy and behavior a
lot of people felt was on the edge of acceptibility. When we were a labor
oriented society that worked quite well, the guy who could take the pain and
punishment of the steel mill was a plus, the hard drinking tough guy worked
out well for the boss and for the coach. Now, we want them to go to
college, become gentlemen and play an even more violent game. Some can deal
with it, and others will always be on the edge.
Michael
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
yeah... you see the same stuff in law enforcment... they train to be
able to match agression and exposive anger... understandable that some
guys cant turn it off as easy as the next. military also especially
if you have been in combat. the worst part of that sort of thing is
that it is very hard for people to be sympathetic to a person that
malfunctions like that. its almost impossible to react in a positive
manner to a person with serious anger issues. it almost ensures that
the problem is gonna get worse.