A question about Dungy

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from themightypatriots. Show themightypatriots's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    Dogg is right.  If Dungy can rehabilitate Vick and turn him into a model citizen who can be a role model to kids, that would be the best possible outcome.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from MVPkilla. Show MVPkilla's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    "So Roger Goodell takes orders from Tony Dungy?  And I am the one being stupid? "

    No he does not take orders from Dungy that is not what I am saying. What i was saying was that when Dungy speaks people listen and that is true. He might not give Goodel order but he has teh commish's ear for sure and if he suggests that Mike Vick may be ready for his comeback Goodel will listen to him and it will play a big role in his final choice. You know this is true. The NFL is having a love affair with Dungy and its clear to everyone but Indy fans. Its not even an insult I am just being honest.



    "If he had that much power he could have had Belichick suspended a year for cheating."


    Not exactly, Bob Kraft is a very powerful owner and brings in a lot of money for the NFL as do the Patriots and a year with out Belichick would have been bad for the sport. Nor do I think Dungy would have wanted Bill suspended, he never said anything in teh media about how he thought Bill should be suspended.



    "You know as well as anyone that Dungy sees an opportunity for a guy (VICK) with a HUGE amount of exposure to turn his life around and become a positive influence for a lot of people - kids in particular. 

    Ultimately,that is only what this is about where Dungy is concerned. "



    No one is debating that what so ever, what we are saying is Dungy has a lot of pull and him giving his approval of Vick will go a long way and you seem to disagree with that.  Why? I have no idea because it seems clear to anyone who watches football that Dungy has a say in teh way thing go down. The final say? No, but people listen to him. people high up with in the NFL office listen to him closely.



    "As many fans as there are here that bich about Dungy, you would think he was the one with 3 rings.  Listen folks, Belichick will never be the media darling that Dungy is.  Belichick goes out of his way to do as little for the media as he can.  That is his choice.  Dungy's stature should bother no one here.  Your coach has chosen a role as a media hermit.  Don't bich about other coaches just because you are jealous about the attention they get." 



    I think you dont understand the mindset of Patriots nation and that is clear by your last statement. The fact that you think we are "jealous" of Dungy for being a media w hore shows exactly how little you know about the way we think around here, the reason we love Belichick is because of teh way he is. We like that he does not give the media anything to print, we like that he is all work and no play. In fact maybe the reason he has three rings and Dungy has 1 is because he spends less time with the media and more time getting his team ready for football. We dont wish we had a coach like Dungy and the reason so many of us have a problem with Dungy is because he is the exact opposit of Belichick, we think a coach has no need to talk to the media and Dungy loves getting his face on TV. We dont hate him cause we are a jealous we hate him because he is not the kind of guy we would want running our football team. Now if you love the guy that is fine but dont assume we are all jealous of his exposure cause we are not. If anything we wish he would sit down and shut up. Dungy would be far less hated if he would do more coaching and less talking.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from MVPkilla. Show MVPkilla's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    I do not agree Mighty, the best thing that can come of this is that the NFL sets an example by banning Vick for life for being a piece of sh*t and a horrible human being.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from themightypatriots. Show themightypatriots's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    As you judge others, so shall you be judged.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Ritchie-az. Show Ritchie-az's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    MVPkilla,
    Did you know there is a growing group of scientists that believe, starting in 1999, we're in a period of Global Cooling? And they've got some pretty compelling evidence to support their theory.

    Here's some interesting links:

    http://www.kusi.com/weather/colemanscorner/38574742.html
    http://english.pravda.ru/science/earth/106922-earth_ice_age-0

    I can provide many more, if you'd like.

    Now I'm not saying that we shouldn't be good to the earth. I believe we have a responsibility to take care of it. However, I believe the whole "Global Warming" theory has been used as a huge grab of power and money, and the losers are people like you and I that have to hand over our wallets and freedoms to a bunch of crooked politicians.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from prairiemike. Show prairiemike's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    There are people heavily invested in the status quo, and others heavily invested in what they like to call "Green Technology." Both sides present arguments to support or hinder legislation that will radically affect the value of their investments. Any link you care to post either for or against "climate change" has about as much value as a free screening of "Thank You For Smoking." If you honestly believe that an insignificant bug crawling around on its surface can significantly effect the atmospheric conditions of this planet, then I would like to show you my beachfront property in Saskatchewan. It's prime. Believe me. This planet got along for millions of years without us, and it will continue to do so once we're gone.


    On second thought, never mind all that.

    I just noticed I used insignificant and significantly in the same sentence.

    Clearly, I have no idea what I'm talking about.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Ritchie-az. Show Ritchie-az's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    There are people heavily invested in the status quo, and others heavily invested in what they like to call "Green Technology."

    Just trying to understand what you are saying. How would it benefit someone--say the founder of the Weather Channel--to be "heavily invested in the status quo"? I would think the opposite would benefit him and being "heavily invested in the status quo" would hurt him? Please explain.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from prairiemike. Show prairiemike's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    I'll explain it this way -- there is as much worthwhile evidence on both sides of the argument that you can pick a side and feel perfectly comfortable. The hard-working folks at The Weather Channel, for all their technology, have trouble accurately predicting rain, so I'm not looking to them for reliable information of any kind. But when I talk about people with vested interests, I'm not talking about your local weatherman. I'm talking about paid consultants. I'm talking about funded studies with predrawn conclusions. I'm talking about Al Gore.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Ritchie-az. Show Ritchie-az's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    Thanks for the explanation. And for what it's worth, I agree.

    On this (off-topic) discussion, I watched [I don't know, Dateline? One of those "news" programs] and they had this physicist, Piers Corbyn, who accurately predicts the weather world-wide a year in advance. The news anchor asked him, "Is there "Global Warming?" He said that weather is cyclical, there is no man-made global warming, and that we are at the beginning of a period of global cooling.
    A big reason for that, is that the sun is cyclical. 10-11 years of many sun spots followed by 10-11 years of few sun spots, etc. However, this "active" period has been very inactive. For example, last September there were no sun spots found.

    Now I doubt the next ice age is approaching, but I do find it funny that some people are frantically running after global warming while we may actually be cooling. It demonstrates what fools we often are, how small we really are, and how little we actually know.

    But, in reality, "global warming" is probably better for the human race than "global cooling".

    The one thing that bothers me most about all this "climate change" is those who use it as a power grab and money machine. It's sick!

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from underdogg. Show underdogg's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy


    That people listen when Dungy speaks is a testament to Dungy.  That you have a problem with that whether it is jealousy or just plain unexplainable, petty, hatred is bothersome. 

    I accept that the NFL loves Dungy.  The NFL wants players to be respectable citizens and no one pushes that on players more that Dungy did.  Dungy puts a great deal of time and effort (and maybe this is why he didn't win when he should have at times) counseling his players about their roles in the community and the world.  Players that played for him both in Tampa and Indy have made huge contributions of both time and money to their communities and the public in general and have received many honors for their charitable works that I believe are a direct reflection of Dungy. 

    I was just gigging you about the Belichick thing.

    If you are not jealous of Dungy, then what is it?  I am interested in why you think he is a media w hore.  To my knowledge, Dungy never asked for media time beyond what was required by NFL rules.  That the media chose to cover him beyond this is their preogative and has nothing to do with him.  I totally disagree with your perception that Dungy loves to get his face on TV.  I am not even sure you could provide examples of excess face time.  The reason that I call it jealousy - at least where you are concerned - is because you've made statements that I think are both unprovable and untrue, so I label it jealousy. 

    As for doing more coaching, Dungy has a better winning percentage than Belichick over the last decade.  I am not saying Dungy deserved the ESPN coach of the decade honor.  He didn't, but you can't tell me that the winningest coach of the decade didn't coach. 
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from MVPkilla. Show MVPkilla's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    You anywhere I go if i bring up global warming about 90% of teh room will say oh its all BS as like you pretty much just did Pmike and it just baffles me. First of all why does there even need to be proof to get people to act smart and take care of the one plannet we have. Even if Global Warming was a big fake guess what it still got people off their a ss and got people to rethink how they treat this plannet and that is a GOOD THING. People who shoot down the theory or point at Al Gore and say "oh well he flys in a jet and he has a huge house" just dont want to change the way they do things. So what if Al Gore is a giant hypocrit that does not make him right. And there is FAR MORE evidence to prove Global Warming then there is against it. Pretty much every scienctist is in agreement that global warming is a problem. But it does not matter, they could come out with a smoking gun tomorrow that proves once and for all that global warming is real and people would still come up with some reason to justify why they refuse to change the way they do things.


    You are right this plannet got on for millions of years before humans got here and it will continue once we are gone. However that does not disscredit the fact that humans have progressed to the point that our very existence is hurting this plannet. So although it will go on with out us that does not mean we should ignore the growing evidence and just let our plannet kill us off. I am sure man was not sopossed to invent things like cars or polute the Oceans or any of those things but we did so the whole teh earth got on fine before us argument is irrelevent because the earth got on without us because we were not here to destroy it. If we had been here all along who knows how long ago we would have destroyed ourselves.


    If Global Warming gets to the point that some people think it will the only people to blame are ourselves. Not the president or some other tools in D.C. but us. We are the ones that were so selfish that we couldnt change our ways simply because peole are set in there ways and are afraid of change. If we put up a big enough fight the preident would do what needs to be done but it wont ever happen because for every 1 person who buys into global warming theer are four people who just want to shrug it off never mind teh evidence so it will be our fault. I am not some treehugger or anything like that I am a realistic person I know this is not going to hurt me, or maybe even my kids will get away with not changing the way we do thigns but someday our grandkids and our great grandkids are going to sit back and say what the he ll were those people thinking? Didnt they see the writing on the wall? didnt they read the evidence? It was there.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from MVPkilla. Show MVPkilla's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    Could you please provide me with some people who use it as a power grab and a money grab? and if you say Al Gore remember this, many many people wanted him to run for president again after he made his little movie on global warming and he didnt even think twice about it. He stayed retired. And he was rich before he made that movie and he didnt even get all the profits from that movie. SO again who exactly are you reffering to when you say power grabbers and money grabbers?
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from MVPkilla. Show MVPkilla's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    Also richie there is far far more evidence to support global warming then there is global cooling so why is it foolish for people to buy into global warming? There is evidence to support the argument so how is it foolish?
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from MVPkilla. Show MVPkilla's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    Underdogg, those same reporters try and get Belichick and many other coaches on camera just as much as they do Dungy but for whatever reason people like Belichick shy away from it and they truely only talk to them when they have to. Dungy on the other hand does not shy away from it, he embraces it and get his face on TV way more then teh average coach. Name me one coach who was on TV or in the papers or whatever more then Dungy in the last decade and maybe i will change my mind. All I am saying is you are trying to make it sound like he only used the same amount of media time as every other coach and that is not true, the same reporters try the same sh*t with other coaches and they say "see you at the press conference" but Dungy does not do that. That is all I am saying. And that is why he is a w hore. I didnt say he didnt do great things for his player or for his community cause he did I am saying that he is a camera hog and a media w hore. you act like a man cant be both.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from prairiemike. Show prairiemike's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    Killa, you are not going to drag me into one of those long, drawn-out, cut-and-paste wars that you and 347 love so much.  But I will say this . . .

    If I believed mankind could significantly alter the atmospheric conditions of the planet, I would be all in favor of doing anything possible to make our stay here on Earth more comfortable. I don't need scaremongers telling me the icecaps are melting to get me to recycle or not litter or conserve energy. I do those things because they make sense to me. What bothers me about the "climate change" debate (and this has already been mentioned) is that certain people use it for their own ends. Carbon taxes, cap-and-trade, are not going to radically change the climate of the planet -- all they will do is send American industries rocketing to foreign lands that do not tax them to death for doing business.

    I work for one of the world's largest multi-national chemical corporations, and it is wildly enthusiastic about cap-and-trade, for reasons that are too lengthy to go into here. I work at a very small subsidiary of that company out here on the prairie, working with technology that makes clean water -- a far more pressing problem in the real world than this mythical global warming certain factions are so up in arms about. Well, when cap-and-trade makes doing business in Minnesota prohibitively expensive (and it will), the parent company will think nothing of pulling up stakes and moving the entire operation to China. The conglomerate doesn't care. It does most of its business overseas anyway. But the guy who will be scooping your fries at Burger King (me) cares.

    That is why debate over basing policy on mythical analysis is important.

    That is why we want proof.

    That is why a filibuster-proof majority in Congress (thank you, Al Franken) is a dangerous thing.

    And that is why, from a common-sense standpoint, you are right; but as this relates to politcal maneuvering, you are wrong.


    Other than that, I have no strong feelings on the subject.
    Cool

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Ritchie-az. Show Ritchie-az's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    A "consensus" in science means theory. Despite billions (trillions now?) spent worldwide and top scientists hard at work, "Global Warming" (or, more specifically, man-made global warming) remains a theory and nothing more. Why? (Think about it a little while before responding).

    You ask, "There is evidence to support the argument so how is it foolish?" Because you willingly give up your freedoms and money to crooked politicians in the name of an unproven theory with many holes in it. How is that NOT foolish?

    "Could you please provide me with some people who use it as a power grab and a money grab?"
    Pick a politician, it almost doesn't matter who. Scientists and college professors are getting tons of money for projects. Here in Arizona, a professor at the local university received a multi-million dollar grant from the federal government to study the possibility of putting a large sun shade in space. Companies are raking in dough with "green" products, most of which wouldn't make a dime without the government either paying a big chunk of it or forcing the compitition out.

    "that does not disscredit the fact that humans have progressed to the point that our very existence is hurting this plannet."
    Last I heard is that 25% of "Global Warming" is caused by animals, not humans. I also have not heard how this is hurting the planet. Has not the globe warmed significantly and cooled significantly throughout history? What explains that?

    "If we had been here all along who knows how long ago we would have destroyed ourselves."
    If you are such a problem to the earth--if you exist only to destry it--then why exist? Why, MVPkilla? If the earth is better off without you, why are you here? Go away and let the Garden of Eden return! This is the most idiotic pro-Global Warming arguement I've heard, but it's so telling at the same time.

    "why does there even need to be proof to get people to act smart and take care of the one plannet we have."
    Those who disagree with the man-made Global Warming theory are always portraid as polluters who throw their trash out the windows of their gas-guzzlin' boats. That's a logical fallacy. 
    I, and everyone else I know that doesn't buy into this whole "Global Warming" junk, really do believe we have a responsibility to take care of the earth and the environment that we live in. But it is not because the earth is (supposedly) warming. It's because it is the right thing to do. And we have a problem with the government forcing this stuff down our throats because so much of it is as distructive as much as it is a help (MTBE, anyone?) and they grossly mismanage everything they touch. (Not to mention after our money and freedom).

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from MVPkilla. Show MVPkilla's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    Well that s ucks Pmike, it s ucks that some scum bag will pack up and fire people like you because they dont want to pay the tax. And you may be right that these new policys may not make a huge change in our climit but the point is they are finaly making moves in the right direction. It truely s ucks that rich pr*cks who dont want to pay the tax will put hard working americans out on the street but that does not mean that its the fault of teh goverment for trying to make a change in the way we do things. It just means that greedy scum bags dont like paying taxes and it stinks that a good guy like you has to feel teh effect of those same rich D bags.

    Do you really not think there is not enough evidence out there to support global warming? It seems to me there is overwhelming evidence that we need to change and althought good and smart people like yourself may do all the right things al on your own like recycling and saving energy and all that good stuff there are still many many stupid people that wont do the right thing unless made to by the goverment which is why things like a new tax will start happening. I dont think that big companys should eb allowed to just pack up shop and go to China because they dont want to pay the tax i wish they would somehow regulate that kind of thing but i do think they need to continue to push people into treating this plannet better. 

    And you might not need people to tell you that the icecaps are melting to do the right thing but you sir are a good man and there are few and far between now adays so like i said you might not need someone to point out what is happening to "scare" you into doing teh right thing but lots of other people do need that kind of thing so there is a place for it. Its not just simply fearmongering for no reason there is a reason and it is theer are far more people not willing to do the right thing then there are people who will do it.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Ritchie-az. Show Ritchie-az's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    "It just means that greedy scum bags dont like paying taxes"
    Corporations don't pay taxes, they pass them on to the consumer. In reality, that "greedy scum bag" that doesn't like paying taxes is you and I and everyone else that would purchase that product.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from MVPkilla. Show MVPkilla's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    Except that I dont mind paying a tax that helps take care of the problem. Paying taxes is part of living in this world so i dont sweat it i just pay what i got to pay and that is that.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from underdogg. Show underdogg's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    In Response to Re: A question about Dungy:
    [QUOTE]Underdogg, those same reporters try and get Belichick and many other coaches on camera just as much as they do Dungy but for whatever reason people like Belichick shy away from it and they truely only talk to them when they have to. Dungy on the other hand does not shy away from it, he embraces it and get his face on TV way more then teh average coach. Name me one coach who was on TV or in the papers or whatever more then Dungy in the last decade and maybe i will change my mind. All I am saying is you are trying to make it sound like he only used the same amount of media time as every other coach and that is not true, the same reporters try the same sh*t with other coaches and they say "see you at the press conference" but Dungy does not do that. That is all I am saying. And that is why he is a w hore. I didnt say he didnt do great things for his player or for his community cause he did I am saying that he is a camera hog and a media w hore. you act like a man cant be both.
    Posted by MVPkilla[/QUOTE]

    Really?  Because I just don't remember seeing Dungy on National TV doing interviews all that much.  I asked you to show me where Dungy was in the media more frequently than others and now you are asking me to do the same.  I can be a little child and say I asked first. 

    What I am saying is that the media talked about him.  It was not necessarily him doing televised interviews all the time.  Coaches have requirements to talk to the media at least 2 times per week I would think and that includes Belichick.  Just because Dungy answers the questions that are asked in a way that provides more story line does not make him a w hore.  it makes him more honest. 

    I just think you are being petty.  I think your pissed that Belichick has gotten a raw deal while Dungy is beloved.  It is that simple. 
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from themightypatriots. Show themightypatriots's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    Taz,

    Even if we are certain that humans are causing global warming, what will the consequences of global warming be?  And how many resources should we devote to global warming over other problems?  There are many more immediate problems that are killing lots of people around the world - malaria, AIDs, famine, poverty, war, genocide ... and rising temperatures?  How does rising temperatures even make it on the list?   Malaria kills millions of children every year and it is curable.  US farming subsidies and tariffs kill the farming industry in the entire third world.  America is spending billions on trying to cure the health effects of its fat slobs overeating while letting people in Niger starve.  And then of course there is our fascist government waging war all over the world so it can line the pockets of Saudi Arabian oil tycoons. 

    I'm not saying we shouldn't give every problem the recognition it deserves, but we shouldn't give problems that aren't as important too much of our money or lives (seriously, how many people are devoting their whole freaking lives to global warming when they could be giving out humanitarian aide in Africa)?
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from MVPkilla. Show MVPkilla's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    So mighty are you saying we should just not care? Because its not an immedite problem? So we should just leave it on the back burner for what seems like forever so that is does become an immedite problem, but not for us for our kids and our grand kids? How is the a good plan? I agree with you, global warming does not need to be the # 1 issue we are going after. And i was not trying to say that at all, this was just the enxt subject me and 347 wanted to debate so we talked about it, i realize there are other areas in which we need to devote time to BUT just saying its not a problem right now is not an excuse for people to ignore the facts and ignore the problem. Or else it will become a much bigger problem for the next generation. And those same fat slobs that you reffered to are the same people who will refuse global warming no matter how much proof there is to support it because they dont want to change their habits. I agree it is not the #1 issue we ar efacing right now but we still need to devote a section of our time and our tax dollars towards fixing it. Not all our money not even a large sum just enough to show that we are doing our part like the rest of the world. China and American are the two leading countrys in green house gases so all i am saying is we need to make some effort even if just a little to get ourselves going in the right direction. And if all we are going to do is sit around and say that the "green" effort that is being made is just greedy bizzness men trying to make a buck then we will never let there be a solution to the problem. We cant see people trying to "go green" as a bad thing it is sopossed to be a step in the right direction.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from MVPkilla. Show MVPkilla's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    Underdogg you make a good point, its the media that talks about him 24/7 not himself. Maybe it seems to me at least that he is a TV w hore merely because they talk about him so much so I guess you have a point. I will back off on the man as far as that goes. I still dont like him, he is everything I dont want in a head coach.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from Ritchie-az. Show Ritchie-az's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    "Except that I dont mind paying a tax that helps take care of the problem. Paying taxes is part of living in this world so i dont sweat it i just pay what i got to pay and that is that."

    If that were true Mike's company wouldn't be thinking of moving to China.

    By the way, you haven't answered a single question that I asked you. You blow it off with a "the debate is over" attitude. News flash: the debate on Global Warming is not over, despite the fact that pro-Global Warmers do not wish to debate. (Why is that?) 
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from themightypatriots. Show themightypatriots's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    Taz - we need to know, at least approximately, what the damage from global warming will be and when it will happen.  Then we can assess the resources we should devote to dealing with it.  I am not seeing any such cost/benefit analysis being widely circulated for discussion today.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share