I always heard he was a "class act" but he's talked mad shit about the Pats, and I was just watching him talking shit to his QB on the sideline yesterday, and then acting like a spanked child in the postgame.
Maybe my view is skewed from a Pats perspective, so that's why I ask ... am I just biased or is he a bitch?
Can I get an opinion from an impartial observer (AKA non-SD or Pats fan) ... I'm really curious:
LT = BITCHMADE?
He went to school here in Fort Worth....and if I got a definition of Bitchmade I could probably answer you.
Incredibly, if one googles "definition bitchmade," this is what you get:
Bitchmade?[/b]
Yesterday one of my colleauges here at xxlmag.com put up a post that defined the term ???bitchmade??? as any guy that was raised by a single mom and/or grandmoms, without a male figure present. ???It???s easy to spot bitchmade dudes in the comments section,??? Billy Sunday writes, ???because they are the types of people that have a hard time accepting truth without emotion.??? He adds: ???It???s not their fault either but they were taught how to frame their communications in the style of a woman.??? He goes on to characterize single mothers as being ???loose??? and ???desperate??? when it comes to money, and being willing to do pretty much anything to make a quick dollar. Hence, he reasons, their kids grow up to be rappers that are willing to spit straight garbage for a little bit of paper.
Now, normally I???m a big fan of Mr. Sunday???s writing, but obviously I???m not about to let this one slide. I???m not sure how the demise of hip-hop, which is a 99.999% male subculture, can be blamed on women???and the same women that have busted their buts to raise a good lot of you, no less.
First of all, the whole concept of ???bitchmade??? is just plain wrong. It basically serves as a sweeping condemnation of all single moms trying to raise young men. These women find themselves in a situation where they???re forced to shoulder alone financial and emotional responsibilities that should be shared. They break their backs at (often low-paying) jobs to put food on the table for kids they love more than anything else in the world. They sacrifice hobbies, interests, and a social life to be around for those kids. And then society tells them that no matter how hard they try, their boys are destined to be incomplete human beings. It???s a pretty disheartening scenario.
Second, the term ???bitchmade??? kinda lets deadbeat daddies off the hook, don???t you think? Instead of pissing all over the women that stick around, shouldn???t the animosity be directed at the jerks that take off?
Lastly, equating hotheaded modes of communication with females is a bit of a stretch. Let???s be honest here, dudes more than pull their weight on this front. (Please see the last 30 years of hip-hop history for examples.)
I think we can all agree that young boys need their fathers. But if your father decides to bounce, does that automatically mean you???re emotionally scarred for life? I think not.
HarveyCanal"a distraction from my main thesis." 13,234 Posts
my view on everything under the football sun is skewed from a Pats perspective
Ok, well I didn't mean to open a can of sociological worms with my use of "bitchmade" - I thought it was just another way of calling someone a whiny bitch. Although my 2 close friends who were raised without fathers do tend to be emotional messes and are known for crying when frustrated, even at the age of 30.
Ok, well I didn't mean to open a can of sociological worms with my use of "bitchmade" - I thought it was just another way of calling someone a whiny bitch.
So did I. I couldn't believe someone went to the trouble to write up such a heartfelt analysis of the term. I don't know???reading that...the author sounds pretty bitchmade to me.
any and all giants fans i hate you this week the hate will subside as time passes but as for right now i hate you fueled by fire only hell can create
HarveyCanal"a distraction from my main thesis." 13,234 Posts
I did live in the East Bay at the time of that horrendous change-of-call absolutely correct interpretation of an admittedly suspect rule.
Says the guy with a skewed perspective...my initial point exactly.
No he's saying the rule itself is wrong - but it was a correct application of the rule.
That's about the size of it, unfortunately.
No, that's only how non-football-playing dipshits with faulty rulebooks in their hands end the conversation...all the while ignoring that 1. however long that written garbage was on the books, it had NEVER been enforced as such and 2. the rule the way it was written was such extreme garbation that its enforcement should have been denied by a referee with enough nads to insist on applying common football sense instead.
No, that's only how non-football-playing dipshits with faulty rulebooks in their hands end the conversation...all the while ignoring that 1. however long that written garbage was on the books, it had NEVER been enforced as such and 2. the rule the way it was written was such extreme garbation that its enforcement should have been denied by a referee with enough nads to insist on applying common football sense instead.
Ignoring the fact that you just called me a dipshit (I'm used to this stuff from you, so it doesn't phase me much) I just find it hilarious that your argument is the ref should have ignored the rules[/b] and instead applied "football sense" ... yet I'm supposedly the one with a biased/skewed perspective
HarveyCanal"a distraction from my main thesis." 13,234 Posts
No, that's only how non-football-playing dipshits with faulty rulebooks in their hands end the conversation...all the while ignoring that 1. however long that written garbage was on the books, it had NEVER been enforced as such and 2. the rule the way it was written was such extreme garbation that its enforcement should have been denied by a referee with enough nads to insist on applying common football sense instead.
Ignoring the fact that you just called me a dipshit (I'm used to this stuff from you, so it doesn't phase me much) I just find it hilarious that your argument is the ref should have ignored the rules[/b] and instead applied "football sense" ... yet I'm supposedly the one with a biased/skewed perspective
No, the ref called it correctly on the field and then some dipshit/nerd/asshole with a rulebook protested and basically ruined the integrity of American football forever with his Poindexter tactic.
I've been watching/playing football for over 30 years and I have never seen another incident where the rulebook had to be referenced like that.
And I've seen that same exact sort of play correctly called a fumble probably 200+ times in that same time span.
You have your ring and no one can take it away. Now, be a man already and make a full confession that that utterly-ridiculous reversal of a call was 100% bullshit...oh yeah, or you're soft.
You have your ring and no one can take it away. Now, be a man already and make a full confession that that utterly-ridiculous reversal of a call was 100% bullshit...oh yeah, or you're soft.
When it happened, I was shocked, confused, and ... overjoyed.
If it had been your team, you would have felt the same way.
I can't believe we can still argue this in 2007. But then, you seem the kind of guy that will bring up shit to your friends that they did to you when you were both 8 years old, as a reason why they can't be trusted 25 years later. Just a feeling.
And the Pack? Are you shitting me? They're looking good. Interesting to see if they can keep it going in Minnie next week...Favre has historically been not good in that building and Domes in general.
Favre's going for the record at Minnesota. He and his receivers will be inspired.
I don't see Jackson picking apart any defense at this point in his career. The Packers can stop the run. How will the Viqueens score?
Hmmm, someone seems to be drinking the company kool aid!
Let us not forget when it was the Patriots who were a laughing stock.
Fair enough. Though, when the Pats were a laughing stock, I was but a young pup in Ohio, Who Deying for the Bengals...Who have a pretty good claim on that title themselves.
I don't hate the Raiders, and I am rooting for Kiffen to turn that team around. But, I think SoI is eactly right about the Tuck Rule. It is a horrible worded rule, that was correctly interpreted, and immediately changed following that Playoffs. And, with good reason.
But, to be hung up on this ruling that many years later is nonsense. Hell, the Steelers (who I DO hate, owing to the Bengals love) got jobbed on that INT against the Colts a couple years back, and still managed to win that game, and eventually the Super Bowl.
Basically? Bad calls happen. Get over that. And, you've got all of fucking overtime to win that game. So DO it. Then, you never have to complain.
Comments
Figured out? Everyone's figured out the Pats already ... it's just that
there ain't a cot-damn thing they can do about it!
(AKA non-SD or Pats fan) ... I'm really curious:
LT = BITCHMADE?
He went to school here in Fort Worth....and if I got a definition of Bitchmade I could probably answer you.
I always heard he was a "class act" but he's talked
mad shit about the Pats, and I was just watching him
talking shit to his QB on the sideline yesterday, and
then acting like a spanked child in the postgame.
Maybe my view is skewed from a Pats perspective, so
that's why I ask ... am I just biased or is he a bitch?
Incredibly, if one googles "definition bitchmade," this is what you get:
with my use of "bitchmade" - I thought it was just another
way of calling someone a whiny bitch. Although my 2 close friends
who were raised without fathers do tend to be emotional messes
and are known for crying when frustrated, even at the age of 30.
Sorry, my eyes tend to be blinded by the glare from the 3 Super Bowl rings.
I've lost track, which of your "homes" do you claim as a football fan?
Saints?
Raiders?
Austin Wranglers?
You have roots in more states than GWB!
So did I. I couldn't believe someone went to the trouble to write up such a heartfelt analysis of the term. I don't know???reading that...the author sounds pretty bitchmade to me.
Yes, I recently revisited the graemlins thread.
I'm with SoI; for such a classy player, he's a biatch.
Saints 4 Life!!!
Sounds like you might have a little Raiders burn going on, too.
His dad died this off-season.....killed in a car wreck ....and now for the first time I can remember, dude is talking some shit.
I did live in the East Bay at the time of that horrendous change-of-call.
Says the guy with a skewed perspective...my initial point exactly.
No he's saying the rule itself is wrong - but it was a correct application of the rule.
That's about the size of it, unfortunately.
the hate will subside as time passes but as for right now i hate you fueled by fire only hell can create
No, that's only how non-football-playing dipshits with faulty rulebooks in their hands end the conversation...all the while ignoring that 1. however long that written garbage was on the books, it had NEVER been enforced as such and 2. the rule the way it was written was such extreme garbation that its enforcement should have been denied by a referee with enough nads to insist on applying common football sense instead.
Ignoring the fact that you just called me a dipshit (I'm
used to this stuff from you, so it doesn't phase me much)
I just find it hilarious that your argument is the ref should
have ignored the rules[/b] and instead applied "football sense" ...
yet I'm supposedly the one with a biased/skewed perspective
No, the ref called it correctly on the field and then some dipshit/nerd/asshole with a rulebook protested and basically ruined the integrity of American football forever with his Poindexter tactic.
I've been watching/playing football for over 30 years and I have never seen another incident where the rulebook had to be referenced like that.
And I've seen that same exact sort of play correctly called a fumble probably 200+ times in that same time span.
You have your ring and no one can take it away. Now, be a man already and make a full confession that that utterly-ridiculous reversal of a call was 100% bullshit...oh yeah, or you're soft.
When it happened, I was shocked, confused, and ... overjoyed.
If it had been your team, you would have felt the same way.
I can't believe we can still argue this in 2007. But then,
you seem the kind of guy that will bring up shit to your friends
that they did to you when you were both 8 years old, as a reason
why they can't be trusted 25 years later. Just a feeling.
Harvey, this is awesome. I could read this shit all fuckin' day.
Did you know last year, the Raiders media guide cover was a #1 finger pointing in the air, with "TEAM OF THE DECADE," running up the front.
That was my favorite...That team sucks. I hope Al Davis bitches about that game until he is died and buried.
Keep at it, though, Raiders fans. Ain't changing anything!
Let us not forget when it was the Patriots who were a laughing stock.
Favre's going for the record at Minnesota. He and his receivers will be inspired.
I don't see Jackson picking apart any defense at this point in his career. The Packers can stop the run. How will the Viqueens score?
Fair enough. Though, when the Pats were a laughing stock, I was but a young pup in Ohio, Who Deying for the Bengals...Who have a pretty good claim on that title themselves.
I don't hate the Raiders, and I am rooting for Kiffen to turn that team around. But, I think SoI is eactly right about the Tuck Rule. It is a horrible worded rule, that was correctly interpreted, and immediately changed following that Playoffs. And, with good reason.
But, to be hung up on this ruling that many years later is nonsense. Hell, the Steelers (who I DO hate, owing to the Bengals love) got jobbed on that INT against the Colts a couple years back, and still managed to win that game, and eventually the Super Bowl.
Basically? Bad calls happen. Get over that. And, you've got all of fucking overtime to win that game. So DO it.
Then, you never have to complain.
He was healthy last year, and I ride for Pennington anyway. Having Clemens ready to step in is a nice thing to fall back on though.
Like I said, they've been analyzed all offseason. No more magic tricks.