Phins4life

Anything to do with Jeff Ireland pisses me off. I also get annoyed when I think too long about how we skipped over Brees for Culpepper . Though at this point I don't blame Saban as much about it as I used to.

I guess looking at it on the helmet it isn't TOO bad. Like I said... it will take some time. It isn't as dramatic a change as the ones made to say the Pats or Broncos or Bucs, but it's still bigger change than I've seen in my lifetime.

I'm not really feeling the new logo. But like all things, I'm sure it will grow on me in time. I just didn't see the need for change. Frankly I liked the stylized, slightly cartoony look of the old one. It gave it a little personality. This one lacks...character, or something. That said, apparently even Marino likes it. To each their own.

Now, because my knowledge of the NBA is very limited, I'm cautious to put out my own list, but I figured, why not? What is your all-time NBA roster? This originated form an discussion between me and a co-worker today. Let's just go with 2 players per position, for the sake of argument. If 3, no big deal. PG: John Stockton/Chris Paul SG: Michael Jordan/Steve Nash SF: Lebron James/Larry Bird PF: Tim Duncan/Kevin Garnett C: Kareem Abdul-Jabbar/Wilt Chamberlain

Yeeeees. At least we did something partially right. I just hope he's recovered enough from the injury.

Totally forgot about Kobe. Sheesh.

I'm aware, but I figured if needed he could play SG. It was a toss-up for me between him and Magic. Looking back on it I'd probably go with him instead.

Maybe I should rephrase. I think Manning is the better intangible QB. I think Flacco is the better pure passing skill QB. They each carry their own "not such a great QB" baggage. Of course this is all based on personal opinion, anyway. I'm certainly no expert. I haven't seen every Giants game, nor have I seen every Ravens game. I have to use what I have seen. I just like Flacco more, or perhaps I should say his potential to take it to the next level. The Caps Lock button didn't get stuck on the word "could". I did that specifically because I'm saying IF, and only IF, he sticks with that level of play, he should be considered one of the better franchise QB's.

Thing about Flacco is we saw a glimpse of what he COULD be this last post-season. Manning, as far as I can recall, has never even come close to that kind of efficiency in the playoffs. It's speculative at best, but I think Flacco at his best blows Manning out of the water.

Couple of reasons I decided against him... 1) Inconsistency as already mentioned 2) I don't place a huge premium on rings, but if we were to discuss the 2 he has, you'd have to look at the fact that he was basically a one-handed helmet catch away from not even having the first one. The second one came after the team spent half the season coming back from behind and barely squeaking into the WC. Don't get me wrong...I value clutch ability, which he certainly has...but when you play from behind that often, I start looking at the reasons you were trailing in the first place. I certainly don't lay all the blame at Manning's feet, but in the same vein nor will I give him all the credit, especially regarding his SB rings. 3) Maybe I only catch him on off days, but I've never once been blown away by what I saw. I've never thought to myself that he is the type of QB I'd want to build my team around. Some of it could also be because I subconsciously compare him to Peyton. It's unfair, but a possibility nonetheless.

AFC East 1. New England: Yes. 2. Miami: Unsure. Tannehill isn't a clear cut success or failure at this point. 3. Buffalo: No. 4. Jets: No. AFC North Baltimore: Yes. Although his performance without Boldin as a cushion will speak volumes to the critics, in my opinion. Cincinnati: Maybe. I think Dalton will grow into one of the better ones in time. Pittsburgh: Yes. Cleveland: Unlikely. I think Weeden is just the next in a long line of failures for this team at QB. AFC South Houston: No. Without Johnson or Daniels, I don't think Schaub would be too great. Indy: Yes. Eventually, at least. Tennessee: No. I didn't like Locker at Washington. I don't like him now. Talent-wise, that is. Jacksonville: No. AFC West Denver: Yes, but for how long? San Diego: Tough call. When Rivers is on, he's solid. When he's off, well...see last season for reference. KC: No. Although I'm curious how Smith fairs in Reid's offense. Oakland: No. NFC East Washington: Yes as long as he makes smart decisions when scrambling. Such a dynamic player. Giants: No. Too inconsistent in my book. Cowboys: Truly a tough one. One of the best 4th quarter QB's in the last 5 years, but makes costly mistakes early in games that cause them to work from behind more than they should. Eagles: No. NFC North Packers: Yes. Vikings: No. Lions: Unsure...I say this because even with CJ, he wasn't able to push this offense into the playoffs. Debatable, to say the least. The physical tools and intelligence are there, in my opinion. Not sure what's missing. Bears: No. Too inconsistent. NFC South Falcons: Yes. Saints: Yes. Bucs: Unsure, but leaning towards no...for now. Panthers: No, for now. He has all the tools, but seems to be lacking the maturity to handle the setbacks. He did help put up a decent string of wins late last season, though. Time will tell. NFC West 49ers: Unsure...but I will say yes based on the scheme he is currently in. He also makes good decisions when running with the ball, health wise. Seahawks: See above. Rams: Unsure. Loved him in college, but it has yet to translate. Cardinals: No.

Origins turned me off pretty bad. Hopefully this one revives the story a little.

Both of you are partially correct and incorrect. The concept of right and wrong being black and white is as narrow-minded as the idea that right and wrong is solely based on opinion. For example: Almost all societies agree that killing another human being for the sake of sating your boredom is wrong...and should be punished. So objectively speaking, killing for fun is wrong across the board. Now moving on to a blurrier context, stealing is wrong, right? Let's see...would you punish a starving child for stealing food for his family the same as you would a thief who steals for sport? Why or why not? A lot of it depends on the culture you are raised in. Which is one of the underlying themes of this whole thread. Our views on right and wrong are just as affected by our environment as everything else. NOTE: This is not a justification, simply the reinforcement of a fact already presented by D-Mac. While some people, including myself, will argue that there are indeed some black and white principles of right and wrong...this can never be proven so, and more importantly, those principles should be limited to things of the greatest influence to the system of "right vs. wrong" that is in place in said society. Reason being, there are too many differences between the cultures of the world, influenced by things ranging from geography to religion to familial ideology, for right and wrong to be viewed in a black and white in all cases. Likewise, there are some things that almost all humans will agree on, such as the example I gave, meaning that there are indeed some instances of an overarching, objective view of right and wrong. I'm a bit drunk, so if I'm rambling or repeating myself, I apologize.

Who? I sincerely hope we fail miserably...only so that Ireland can be fired, and maybe a decent replacement can unfuck the results of his fruitless reign.

My mistake, man. That is the post I thought you were referring to. Kind of nullifies the rest of what I was saying in regards to your other points as well.

Agreed. Good acting is a must for character pieces to stay afloat. And they all did a great job.

Probably due to the need to create conflict that could translate to the screen. I didn't mind it, but I can't help but feel like they are going to try and outdo the LOTR trilogy. An unwise endeavor, in my opinion.

One of my favorites from deployment last year. Second from right.

The Matrix. I still hate Keanu Reeves, but it's so awesome, regardless.

I think the point being made in his post was the idea that this girl was cherry picking one "traditional" value while ignoring others, which ironically would deprive her of many of the rights she currently enjoys in numerous cultures around the world. Sometimes even including the right to choose who she marries (that's the real irony). Many "traditional" conservative values are oppressive in nature, particularly towards women. Unless he would like to correct me, that's all I think he was getting at. Be careful when bringing cultural perspective into it. I'm under the impression you are against it, because you're a good guy, but you are aware that there are societies in the Middle East who deem it acceptable to stone a woman to death for being raped? In the same vein, thieves have their hands hacked off in public squares as spectacles of entertainment, regardless of the circumstances that drove the individual to steal. One more example...true story...a young girl rejected the advances of a man in Afghanistan. In retaliation, he and a couple of his cronies held her down and poured battery acid on her face. If he couldn't have her, no one would. Taliban turned a blind eye, because it was fine by them. Would you consider any of this right? I get your point. But my point is that cultural opinion on something being right or wrong does not make it more or less right or wrong. When viewed objectively, none of the examples I gave are really all that fair. In each case the recourse is far worse than the inciting act. A woman is put to death for being a victim... killed by the very powers that should be protecting her, all because she allowed her purity to be taken or some bullshit. The thief with his hand cut off... now a weaker member of society because he only has one hand. How exactly does that benefit anyone? Make him do manual labor as punishment . Make him build something that will contribute to society. Any number of alternatives. A girl is now mutilated, possibly doomed in her society to never marry, and never have children, because some prick couldn't stand being told no. Just food for thought. Unless people differ on when exactly in embryonic development one becomes a human being. Which I guess fits pretty well into this whole argument of perspective.

Been bored lately so I decided to start a simmed franchise in Madden 13.

Bess done in Miami? Oh, hell no...

Imagine the irony if this ends up being one of the better moves of the off-season. Either way, Skip Bayless won't quit swinging on Tebow's nuts until he gets a full season to start. And if he doesn't, then Skip'll just blame the Jets failure on not starting him.

I can't get over what a deal the Niners ran away with. Boldin still has juice in the tank, Colin gets another weapon, and all for just a 6th rounder. And I'm loving the (not so)subtle war between the Hawks and Niners as they both add playmaking receivers among other pieces. They're gonna be the new Pats/Colts game every year. Being division rivals is just icing on the cake....or fuel for the fire...whatever.