Jamie Dukes Predicts?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from patriots44. Show patriots44's posts

    Jamie Dukes Predicts?

    I feel alot better going to the Game this week, now that Dukes has predicted a Charger Victory on Sunday.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from ewhite1065. Show ewhite1065's posts

    Re: Jamie Dukes Predicts?

    I'm sure at some point Dukes has picked the Patriots but I have never seen it. I hope all the "experts" pick against us every week just like they did against Miami and the Ravens.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from LazarusintheSanatorium. Show LazarusintheSanatorium's posts

    Re: Jamie Dukes Predicts?

    Is that the guy who for some reason hates black people, or the girl who makes me lose my reason with her high-cut jean shorts?
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from EnochRoot. Show EnochRoot's posts

    Re: Jamie Dukes Predicts?

    The only person I can remember deliberately not picking the Pats is Marshall Faulk.

    A few years ago, he "analyzed" the matchup, acknowledged the Pats had the edge in every phase and then picked against them. I think it was Rod Woodson on set with him and he just laughed and shook his head.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from LazarusintheSanatorium. Show LazarusintheSanatorium's posts

    Re: Jamie Dukes Predicts?

    I still recall the year after NE's 1st SB, a quote from SI's "In the Player's Own Words" section which I cut out and had tapped to my fridge long ago.  The question posed was "What was the hardest game you ever played in?"  Marshal Faulk was questioned, and he said something like, "I have ZERO doubt. It was The SB against NE. In it, on the 1st drive alone, I was punched, kicked, stepped on, thrown down, and bitten too."  BEST quote ever...handss down. 
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from ewhite1065. Show ewhite1065's posts

    Re: Jamie Dukes Predicts?

    In Response to Re: Jamie Dukes Predicts?:
    [QUOTE]The only person I can remember deliberately not picking the Pats is Marshall Faulk. A few years ago, he "analyzed" the matchup, acknowledged the Pats had the edge in every phase and then picked against them. I think it was Rod Woodson on set with him and he just laughed and shook his head.
    Posted by EnochRoot[/QUOTE]

    I remember that. I think it was 2007 when we didn't lose until the Super Bowl.
    He kept picking against us at the end of the season. The only unfortunate part is that he was right about the Superbowl.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from patriots44. Show patriots44's posts

    Re: Jamie Dukes Predicts?

    In Response to Re: Jamie Dukes Predicts?:
    [QUOTE]The only person I can remember deliberately not picking the Pats is Marshall Faulk. A few years ago, he "analyzed" the matchup, acknowledged the Pats had the edge in every phase and then picked against them. I think it was Rod Woodson on set with him and he just laughed and shook his head.
    Posted by EnochRoot[/QUOTE]Faulk has been a hater since the Rams lost to us in 2001 Super Bowl
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from BBReigns. Show BBReigns's posts

    Re: Jamie Dukes Predicts?

    Dukes is one of those racist types who acts like he isn't a racist.   I cannot stand people who have clear agendas or race generated commentary, but then play dumb like they aren't doing it.

    In my opinion, Dukes hates NE because I think he feels like they have this snobby business model which leans on intelligence and character, which isolates a lot of African-Americans.  IN HIS MIND. 

    Just a hunch.  He continues to be belliegerent with analysis with regards to NE, and this isn't just because he picks SD here either. It's been going on for years.

    I think he is annoyed Belichick, NE, etc are praised for drafting and signing character/IQ people. 

    He'll sit there and praise a self centered Brett Favre and then act like true teamwork on the Pats is a bad thing.   It's pathetic.

    I get this vibe with a lot of analysts, who happen to be African-American.  Like now, for example, we'll see Cris Carter go back to his anti-Pats crap because Moss is now in Minny. lol

    And then we'll see columns from people like Jaymele Hill that just scream racism.  This gal constantly uses a racist angle.

    I have noticed an about face from squinty eyed Marshall Faulk lately. He isn't as overtly anti-NE as he had been for years. So, congrats Marshall on finally making it less obvious.

    Sorry if this is a touchy opinion, I certainly don't mean to offend, but I think there is truth in these race baiter types who analyze sports.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from patriots44. Show patriots44's posts

    Re: Jamie Dukes Predicts?

    In Response to Re: Jamie Dukes Predicts?:
    [QUOTE]Dukes is one of those racist types who acts like he isn't a racist.   I cannot stand people who have clear agendas or race generated commentary, but then play dumb like they aren't doing it. In my opinion, Dukes hates NE because I think he feels like they have this snobby business model which leans on intelligence and character, which isolates a lot of African-Americans.  IN HIS MIND.  Just a hunch.  He continues to be belliegerent with analysis with regards to NE, and this isn't just because he picks SD here either. It's been going on for years. I think he is annoyed Belichick, NE, etc are praised for drafting and signing character/IQ people.  He'll sit there and praise a self centered Brett Favre and then act like true teamwork on the Pats is a bad thing.   It's pathetic. I get this vibe with a lot of analysts, who happen to be African-American.  Like now, for example, we'll see Cris Carter go back to his anti-Pats crap because Moss is now in Minny. lol And then we'll see columns from people like Jaymele Hill that just scream racism.  This gal constantly uses a racist angle. I have noticed an about face from squinty eyed Marshall Faulk lately. He isn't as overtly anti-NE as he had been for years. So, congrats Marshall on finally making it less obvious. Sorry if this is a touchy opinion, I certainly don't mean to offend, but I think there is truth in these race baiter types who analyze sports.
    Posted by BBReigns[/QUOTE]Finally someone has the Guts to write what has been blatantly obvious.Marshall Faulk has only turned because others have told him how stupid he looks.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Brady2Moss07. Show Brady2Moss07's posts

    Re: Jamie Dukes Predicts?

    I predict Jamie Dukes will likely explode soon from a massive heart attack. But seriously, I just laugh when I listen to this guy talk. You can see right through him when he talks. His defense or support of some players and teams is so funny. Plus he constantly contradicts himself. Deion Sanders and Micheal Irvin do the same exact thing. These 3 have all said what a mistake Belichick made for letting Moss go, etc... They are former players on TV no journalist.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Tcal2. Show Tcal2's posts

    Re: Jamie Dukes Predicts?

    In Response to Re: Jamie Dukes Predicts?:
    [QUOTE]Dukes is one of those racist types who acts like he isn't a racist.   I cannot stand people who have clear agendas or race generated commentary, but then play dumb like they aren't doing it. In my opinion, Dukes hates NE because I think he feels like they have this snobby business model which leans on intelligence and character, which isolates a lot of African-Americans.  IN HIS MIND.  Just a hunch.  He continues to be belliegerent with analysis with regards to NE, and this isn't just because he picks SD here either. It's been going on for years. I think he is annoyed Belichick, NE, etc are praised for drafting and signing character/IQ people.  He'll sit there and praise a self centered Brett Favre and then act like true teamwork on the Pats is a bad thing.   It's pathetic. I get this vibe with a lot of analysts, who happen to be African-American.  Like now, for example, we'll see Cris Carter go back to his anti-Pats crap because Moss is now in Minny. lol And then we'll see columns from people like Jaymele Hill that just scream racism.  This gal constantly uses a racist angle. I have noticed an about face from squinty eyed Marshall Faulk lately. He isn't as overtly anti-NE as he had been for years. So, congrats Marshall on finally making it less obvious. Sorry if this is a touchy opinion, I certainly don't mean to offend, but I think there is truth in these race baiter types who analyze sports.
    Posted by BBReigns[/QUOTE]




     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from bsmith78. Show bsmith78's posts

    Re: Jamie Dukes Predicts?

    Forgive my ignorance, who is this Jamie Dukes character? I'm not familliar with him.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from oklahomapatriot. Show oklahomapatriot's posts

    Re: Jamie Dukes Predicts?

    In Response to Re: Jamie Dukes Predicts?:
    [QUOTE]Forgive my ignorance, who is this Jamie Dukes character? I'm not familliar with him.
    Posted by bsmith78[/QUOTE]

    http://www.nfl.com/news/author?id=09000d5d802bdfa7
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from bsmith78. Show bsmith78's posts

    Re: Jamie Dukes Predicts?

    In Response to Re: Jamie Dukes Predicts?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Jamie Dukes Predicts? : http://www.nfl.com/news/author?id=09000d5d802bdfa7
    Posted by kansaspatriot[/QUOTE]Thanks much!
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from USMCM1A1. Show USMCM1A1's posts

    Re: Jamie Dukes Predicts?

    Dukes obviosuly hates NE,and always has some snide remark to make, but I never noticed that from Faulk.  Mike Mayok, Sterling Sharpe, Joe Theisman, pretty much most of the Playbook hosts all obviously respect the Patriots and Bill Belichick.  Woodson seems pretty fair, too.

    No one though, no one openly hated on the Pats like ole fatboy himself, Lincoln Kennedy.  Plus he was terrible on camera--I was pretty happy when he got fired.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from BBReigns. Show BBReigns's posts

    Re: Jamie Dukes Predicts?

    In Response to Re: Jamie Dukes Predicts?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Jamie Dukes Predicts? : Finally someone has the Guts to write what has been blatantly obvious.Marshall Faulk has only turned because others have told him how stupid he looks.
    Posted by patriots44[/QUOTE]

    Thank you, sir. I am glad others agree.  I could see this being taken the wrong way, but I feel Dukes has the issue, not me or anyone else who sees his ridiculous agenda.

    I am surprised Faulk has let his agenda drop, to be honest. He's been using it thiw whole time.

    This season is the first time I have seen him not show it.

    Dukes is terrible, though. Well spoken, smart guy, but he's so smug about the agenda.


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

    Re: Jamie Dukes Predicts?

        Why would anyone care what these people say?They and their thoughts are Irrelevant,except to provide B.B.with more motivational fodder.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from paob. Show paob's posts

    Re: Jamie Dukes Predicts?

    In Response to Re: Jamie Dukes Predicts?:
    [QUOTE]Dukes is one of those racist types who acts like he isn't a racist.   I cannot stand people who have clear agendas or race generated commentary, but then play dumb like they aren't doing it. In my opinion, Dukes hates NE because I think he feels like they have this snobby business model which leans on intelligence and character, which isolates a lot of African-Americans.  IN HIS MIND.  Just a hunch.  He continues to be belliegerent with analysis with regards to NE, and this isn't just because he picks SD here either. It's been going on for years. I think he is annoyed Belichick, NE, etc are praised for drafting and signing character/IQ people.  He'll sit there and praise a self centered Brett Favre and then act like true teamwork on the Pats is a bad thing.   It's pathetic. I get this vibe with a lot of analysts, who happen to be African-American.  Like now, for example, we'll see Cris Carter go back to his anti-Pats crap because Moss is now in Minny. lol And then we'll see columns from people like Jaymele Hill that just scream racism.  This gal constantly uses a racist angle. I have noticed an about face from squinty eyed Marshall Faulk lately. He isn't as overtly anti-NE as he had been for years. So, congrats Marshall on finally making it less obvious. Sorry if this is a touchy opinion, I certainly don't mean to offend, but I think there is truth in these race baiter types who analyze sports.
    Posted by BBReigns[/QUOTE]

    BBreigns,
    In the interest of full disclosure, I'm black. I have morals and am reasonably intelligent. I have no issues with the way Belichick is running the Patriots, I may not like everything he does, but it's his team and he's successful.
    At first glance, your post left me wondering whether you're trying to incite a vicious response or if you're truly clueless. 

    You can't stand people who have "clear agendas or race based commentary" yet you offer up several paragraphs with commentary on former black athletes or scribes who are (I'm paraphrasing here) less than flattering in their appraisal of the Patriots. Where's Mark Schlereth or Merrill Hoge or Dan Marino or Mike Ditka or Steve Young or Howie Long or to a much, much lesser extent Boomer Esiason? This gives me the impression you're only singling them out because they're black.

    Am I wrong?! 

    Help me to understand how you think - what does the following satement mean: Dukes hates NE because I think he feels like they have this snobby business model which leans on intelligence and character, which isolates a lot of African-Americans. W!#@%#!*!#@%#T!*!#@%#!*!#@%#!F*

    Not sure how to interpet the former statement, but I'll take a stab at it: A paid analyst for the NFL network (Jamie Dukes) and former athlete takes issue with an "organization that stresses intelligence and character in the players it chooses to sign because it isolates blacks." Who in their right mind wouldn't choose to run a business that stresses intelligence and character - the salaries doled out are tremendous and there is a very small window for error. Again, you choose to highlight a specific race!
    There are numerous other passages I don't appreciate, but I'm running out of time, work beckons.

    I'm well aware this is a blog, and we get to say what we want in the privacy of our own homes. I commend you for putting your convictions out there for everyone to see, but you from all appearances are the exact model you complain about in your post, with one slight difference and I think we both know what that is.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from NEPfan4life. Show NEPfan4life's posts

    Re: Jamie Dukes Predicts?

    The guys in NFL channel are bunch of clowns and NEP haters (except Mooch).  We will stay underdog and just keep winning. 
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from BBReigns. Show BBReigns's posts

    Re: Jamie Dukes Predicts?

    No.  Not at all. 

    I am not singling him or anyone else based on color. Not at all.  I think Dukes sort of comes from that position, though. Jamele Hill or Howard Bryan't columns on ESPN do the same thing (more blatantly - this is a another thread altogether), even though Dukes's is more subtle.

    Can we admit that Jesse jackson, Sharpton, etc are race baiters?

    If we can, then we can sort of tap into what I am talking about. They sort of start with the insinuations, not people who see right through their race based agendas.

    Personally, I think that is absolute junk and no one should give peolpe who use that to make money off it, the time of day.  It's disgusting.

    With Dukes, I am not sure he realizes he hints at this.

    I know what the agenda is of Merrill Hoge. NE beat his Steelers repeatedly.  Hoge never won a title. He's angry and jealous.  He'll pretend Spygate actually meant NE had some mystery advanage and that's what allows him to sleep at night and attend the Bill Cowher 4x at home loser AFC Title parties once a year.

    There's a difference with that agenda, and even Marshall Faulk's (SB 36).

    Faulk is African-American, but his agenda is different than Dukes's.

    Look at Michael Irvin now saying Brady will never win another SB now that Moss is gone.  What on earth is the reasoning behind that premise? 

    I think other talking heads do not like NE for other reasons I have mentioned here before, but the theme is they all have a selfish/personal agenda behind it.

    You could argue Irvin's recent agenda is to protect his own Dynasty OR is it to highlight Moss's high impact at the WR position AND prima donna style?  I argue the latter, because Irvin was not this vocal in 2007 when NE was going to the SB.

    So, that is his agenda now (WR importance/prima donna defense).

    My premise is that Dukes, who has never won a SB, probably cannot stand the fact NE had 3 in 4 years and runs their operation very "tightly".  Not sure how else to phrase it.

    Yes, I feel NE has a model some people can't handle.  I get it, but why would something that works and possibly does isolate people who "don't get it" (look no further than poorly run SD or Dallas teams), be a bad thing?

    Isn't team work better than selfish millionaire NFL players?

    Also, I know plenty of diehard NFL fans who call NE "cheap", "they cheat", etc, In other words, they attach a trigger word to mask their jealousy for NE.

    With Dukes, there was always a snide remark that just reeked of jealousy, but I get the impression, Dukes, like a Hoge on ESPN, or 95% of ESPN heads, or a Marshall Faulk, etc, had their obvious agendas.

    Dukes is no different, but he doesn't have anything to protect.  

    But, with his comments, through the years, he seems to also demean the NE approach aka "The Patriot Way". I think he sees it as a program where Belichick turns people into robots and BB being sort of a coach who tries to control the individual.

    I.E., Terrell Owens and certain prima donna, yes, African American players, would never play in NE.  I think Dukes takes this personal.   When in reality, it has to do with the person and the fit in NE, not the color.

    See what I mean? I think Dukes sees this as arrogant. He's made comments in the past. Not direct comments, but little veiled comments that support this.

    Anyway, it's just on observation, I can guarantee you others who read this know what I am talking about.

    I do agree it's not a race thing and I don't want it to be.

    In the end, my issue is with selfish media people who use their position as one to promote an agenda. A selfish agenda.

    It could be Ron Borges or Jamie Dukes.  No bearing on color, unless someone speaks from that place and wants it to be an issue of that.

    If anyone finds this touchy subject offensive, I apologize ahead of time. I just feel the selfish agenda driven media/talking heads are over the top and out of line.









     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Rerun85. Show Rerun85's posts

    Re: Jamie Dukes Predicts?

    In Response to Re: Jamie Dukes Predicts?:
    [QUOTE]No.  Not at all.  I am not singling him or anyone else based on color. Not at all.  I think Dukes sort of comes from that position, though. Jamele Hill or Howard Bryan't columns on ESPN do the same thing (more blatantly - this is a another thread altogether), even though Dukes's is more subtle. I know what the agenda is of Merrill Hoge. NE beat his Steelers repeatedly.  Hoge never won a title. He's angry and jealous.  He'll pretend Spygate actually meant NE had some mystery advanage and that's what allows him to sleep at night and attend the Bill Cowher 4x at home loser AFC Title parties once a year. There's a difference with that agenda, and even Marshall Faulk's (SB 36). Faulk is African-American, but his agenda is different than Dukes's. Look at Michael Irvin now saying Brady will never win another SB now that Moss is gone.  What on earth is the reasoning behind that premise?  I think other talking heads do not like NE for other reasons I have mentioned here before, but the theme is they all have a selfish/personal agenda behind it. You could argue Irvin's recent agenda is to protect his own Dynasty OR is it to highlight Moss's high impact at the WR position AND prima donna style?  I argue the latter, because Irvin was not this vocal in 2007 when NE was going to the SB. So, that is his agenda now (WR importance/prima donna defense). My premise is that Dukes, who has never won a SB, probably cannot stand the fact NE had 3 in 4 years and runs their operation very "tightly".  Not sure how else to phrase it. Yes, I feel NE has a model some people can't handle.  I get it, but why would something that works and possibly does isolate people who "don't get it" (look no further than poorly run SD or Dallas teams), be a bad thing? Isn't team work better than selfish millionaire NFL players? Also, I know plenty of diehard NFL fans who call NE "cheap", "they cheat", etc, In other words, they attach a trigger word to mask their jealousy for NE. With Dukes, there was always a snide remark that just reeked of jealousy, but I get the impression, Dukes, like a Hoge on ESPN, or 95% of ESPN heads, or a Marshall Faulk, etc, had their obvious agendas. Dukes is no different, but he doesn't have anything to protect.   But, with his comments, through the years, he seems to also demean the NE approach aka "The Patriot Way". I think he sees it as a program where Belichick turns people into robots and BB being sort of a coach who tries to control the individual. I.E., Terrell Owens and certain prima donna, yes, African American players, would never play in NE.  I think Dukes takes this personal.   When in reality, it has to do with the person and the fit in NE, not the color. See what I mean? I think Dukes sees this as arrogant. He's made comments in the past. Not direct comments, but little veiled comments that support this. Anyway, it's just on observation, I can guarantee you others who read this know what I am talking about. I do agree it's not a race thing and I don't want it to be.
    Posted by BBReigns[/QUOTE]


    I also am African American and I didn't take it as a racist rant. Most all of my friends are also African American and I am the only one that likes the Patriots.
    The Problem is that among many Minorities from outside of Boston it is still seen as being a racist city. Having grown up in Boston but also lived in the South and the midwest for many years I know this to be untrue but many people don't have any Idea what Boston is about in past the year 1972. Trust me on this. The south and the midwest are more racist than Boston is but that is part of the reason for what you think may be Dukes problem. The actual bottom line is this: If you are not from Boston the chances are you don't like it or anything from it.Those are the cold hard football facts.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from BBReigns. Show BBReigns's posts

    Re: Jamie Dukes Predicts?

    See, I agree here. Good point. I lived in Chicago for 5 years, live in the Southeast now, and I cringe when I hear people say "Boston is racist".

    Chicago is as segregated as any city around.   Great city, great people, etc, but the neighborhoods are isolated.

    Every single city or region in this country has skeletons in the closet. Absolutely.

    So, that may be another point that is very true when that kind of an overrated stigma is atatched to a city or region.

    Anyone, white, black, brown, yellow, blue, etc, who comes to Boston and NE, that I have ever come across, always really enjoyed the city a lot.

    I cannot speak as minority, but I am sure there bad examples from their point of view, and that's a shame.  Not sure what else to say. It's an unfortunate thing.

    There is no doubt the city itself had some issues in the past, but I actually feel it has come a long, long way, in terms of ridding the "old regime" feel out of there, as generations move on, both from a racial standpoint and a political standpoint.

    Does it still exist? Yes. But, it does everywhere. 

    So, good point.   I think it's incredibly unfair and hypocritical to pretend only Boston is racist.  You could point to many incidents in any city in this country in the last 200 years and showcase issues.

    I don't think it should be ignored, but I cringe when political talking heads or even sports talking heads race bait.

    Just leave it alone.

    Jamele Hilll brought this up with the Celts and Lakers rivalry.  African Americans liked the Lakers and Whites liked the Celtics?  Really? Why?

    Even if that is true, which I don't discount, it's a shame it has to be looked at that way.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from paob. Show paob's posts

    Re: Jamie Dukes Predicts?

    In Response to Re: Jamie Dukes Predicts?:
    [QUOTE]No.  Not at all.  I am not singling him or anyone else based on color. Not at all.  I think Dukes sort of comes from that position, though. Jamele Hill or Howard Bryan't columns on ESPN do the same thing (more blatantly - this is a another thread altogether), even though Dukes's is more subtle. Can we admit that Jesse jackson, Sharpton, etc are race baiters? If we can, then we can sort of tap into what I am talking about. They sort of start with the insinuations, not people who see right through their race based agendas. Personally, I think that is absolute junk and no one should give peolpe who use that to make money off it, the time of day.  It's disgusting. With Dukes, I am not sure he realizes he hints at this. I know what the agenda is of Merrill Hoge. NE beat his Steelers repeatedly.  Hoge never won a title. He's angry and jealous.  He'll pretend Spygate actually meant NE had some mystery advanage and that's what allows him to sleep at night and attend the Bill Cowher 4x at home loser AFC Title parties once a year. There's a difference with that agenda, and even Marshall Faulk's (SB 36). Faulk is African-American, but his agenda is different than Dukes's. Look at Michael Irvin now saying Brady will never win another SB now that Moss is gone.  What on earth is the reasoning behind that premise?  I think other talking heads do not like NE for other reasons I have mentioned here before, but the theme is they all have a selfish/personal agenda behind it. You could argue Irvin's recent agenda is to protect his own Dynasty OR is it to highlight Moss's high impact at the WR position AND prima donna style?  I argue the latter, because Irvin was not this vocal in 2007 when NE was going to the SB. So, that is his agenda now (WR importance/prima donna defense). My premise is that Dukes, who has never won a SB, probably cannot stand the fact NE had 3 in 4 years and runs their operation very "tightly".  Not sure how else to phrase it. Yes, I feel NE has a model some people can't handle.  I get it, but why would something that works and possibly does isolate people who "don't get it" (look no further than poorly run SD or Dallas teams), be a bad thing? Isn't team work better than selfish millionaire NFL players? Also, I know plenty of diehard NFL fans who call NE "cheap", "they cheat", etc, In other words, they attach a trigger word to mask their jealousy for NE. With Dukes, there was always a snide remark that just reeked of jealousy, but I get the impression, Dukes, like a Hoge on ESPN, or 95% of ESPN heads, or a Marshall Faulk, etc, had their obvious agendas. Dukes is no different, but he doesn't have anything to protect.   But, with his comments, through the years, he seems to also demean the NE approach aka "The Patriot Way". I think he sees it as a program where Belichick turns people into robots and BB being sort of a coach who tries to control the individual. I.E., Terrell Owens and certain prima donna, yes, African American players, would never play in NE.  I think Dukes takes this personal.   When in reality, it has to do with the person and the fit in NE, not the color. See what I mean? I think Dukes sees this as arrogant. He's made comments in the past. Not direct comments, but little veiled comments that support this. Anyway, it's just on observation, I can guarantee you others who read this know what I am talking about. I do agree it's not a race thing and I don't want it to be. In the end, my issue is with selfish media people who use their position as one to promote an agenda. A selfish agenda. It could be Ron Borges or Jamie Dukes.  No bearing on color, unless someone speaks from that place and wants it to be an issue of that. If anyone finds this touchy subject offensive, I apologize ahead of time. I just feel the selfish agenda driven media/talking heads are over the top and out of line.
    Posted by BBReigns[/QUOTE]

    BBR,
    Appreciate the rebuttal. You're now tackling the "Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton are race baiters subject." I'll ask again, are you sure you don't have an agenda?! I've seen a number of things written on this board over the years that I found offensive, but I picked my battles wisely and when called on it the perp (for lack of a better word) would take the I don't know what you're talking about road. I still find it curious you highlighted all players and scribes who are black to prove a point when you had other means. 

    Having said that, there are certain talking heads I avoid: Hoge, Schlereth, Michael Irving, Trey Wingo and Faulk. As a fan, do you think Hoge enjoys talking about a team he continually lost to as a player. The same holds true for Faulk. Schlereth during his time in Denver got the best of NE, so, his analysis comes across as smug to me because of the Broncos history.
    Michael Irving is no Deon Sanders. Sanders is loud, with a personality to match, but he's no fool. When Mike opens his mouth I hit the mute button. Finally, we come to Mr. Wingo, I'm not sure what to make of him.

    I can think of a number of players and writers who appear to be biased in their commentary of the Patriots, some more than others: Shannon Sharpe, Dan Marino, Terrell Davis, the gap toothed former Giant whose name escapes me, Ditka, Trey Wingo and Michael Wilbon. I ask you, do you see any similarities?
     

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from chrisakawoody. Show chrisakawoody's posts

    Re: Jamie Dukes Predicts?

    In Response to Re: Jamie Dukes Predicts?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Jamie Dukes Predicts? : BBreigns, In the interest of full disclosure, I'm black. I have morals and am reasonably intelligent. I have no issues with the way Belichick is running the Patriots, I may not like everything he does, but it's his team and he's successful. At first glance, your post left me wondering whether you're trying to incite a vicious response or if you're truly clueless.  You can't stand people who have "clear agendas or race based commentary" yet you offer up several paragraphs with commentary on former black athletes or scribes who are (I'm paraphrasing here) less than flattering in their appraisal of the Patriots. Where's Mark Schlereth or Merrill Hoge or Dan Marino or Mike Ditka or Steve Young or Howie Long or to a much, much lesser extent Boomer Esiason? This gives me the impression you're only singling them out because they're black. Am I wrong?!  Help me to understand how you think - what does the following satement mean: Dukes hates NE because I think he feels like they have this snobby business model which leans on intelligence and character, which isolates a lot of African-Americans. W!#@%#!*!#@%#T!*!#@%#!*!#@%#!F* Not sure how to interpet the former statement, but I'll take a stab at it: A paid analyst for the NFL network (Jamie Dukes) and former athlete takes issue with an "organization that stresses intelligence and character in the players it chooses to sign because it isolates blacks." Who in their right mind wouldn't choose to run a business that stresses intelligence and character - the salaries doled out are tremendous and there is a very small window for error. Again, you choose to highlight a specific race! There are numerous other passages I don't appreciate, but I'm running out of time, work beckons. I'm well aware this is a blog, and we get to say what we want in the privacy of our own homes. I commend you for putting your convictions out there for everyone to see, but you from all appearances are the exact model you complain about in your post, with one slight difference and I think we both know what that is.
    Posted by paob[/QUOTE]

    Your reply could not have been written better.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from chrisakawoody. Show chrisakawoody's posts

    Re: Jamie Dukes Predicts?

    In Response to Re: Jamie Dukes Predicts?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Jamie Dukes Predicts? : I also am African American and I didn't take it as a racist rant. Most all of my friends are also African American and I am the only one that likes the Patriots. The Problem is that among many Minorities from outside of Boston it is still seen as being a racist city. Having grown up in Boston but also lived in the South and the midwest for many years I know this to be untrue but many people don't have any Idea what Boston is about in past the year 1972. Trust me on this. The south and the midwest are more racist than Boston is but that is part of the reason for what you think may be Dukes problem. The actual bottom line is this: If you are not from Boston the chances are you don't like it or anything from it.Those are the cold hard football facts.
    Posted by Rerun85[/QUOTE]

    I can't speak of Boston, since I am from R.I., but I can speak for Gainesville, FLA and IL.  Gainesville had many tolerant people under the age of 35.  Over the age of 35?  The landlord of the strip mall at which I worked was probably in the (clan).  He would visit our bike shop and never failed to tell a race joke, at which we all wanted to vomit. That's just one example, and it cut both (all) ways.

    But Chicagoland, IL? Holy smokes! Talked about a bigoted society, from all sects, to all sects. I could write a book about my negative experiences in regard to racism during my 11 years there as an outside salesperson.  The worst of them there?  Without question, the self-proclaimed holy rollers. Yes, even a virulently bigoted ordained minister I knew from work.  If they preached at you and wore their religion on their sleeves, you could expect that sooner or later, about 90% of them would drop your jaw with some outrageous revelation about their true, racists mindsets.  Uncanny.
     

Share