NFCCG: Cardinals-Panthers Thread

[tyke1doe]

It amazes me how people who really don't understand football will say that!

That's, in part, because it's easier for fans to hate players. It's a bit more difficult for fans to hate units.

 

[tyke1doe]

I think the reason everything went awry with your post and the subsequent arguments is that it lacked ANY context in relation to this thread, CC, to be honest. You didn't quote any post or mention your stance on Cam at all in this context.

Just an "I must be a racist cause I hate Cam" and off the rails it went from there.

Que sera sera, my friend. Have a good night, man.

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

Plus cam has put the offense on his back. Many times this season their defense gave up leads and Cam drove for the win. He is doing it without his number 1 reciever

His receivers, number 1's or not, make great catches. Snatch that ball out of the air. Nice to see. Wish Dez, a number 1, could do that.

 

[tyke1doe]

His receivers, number 1's or not, make great catches. Snatch that ball out of the air. Nice to see. Wish Dez, a number 1, could do that.

Interesting how less-than-number 1 receivers make great catches depending on who's behind center.

 

[DFWJC]

Does anyone get upset when Romo pats the refs on the butt after making a big play? I think that is 10x worse than Cam celebrating in the end zone.

I don't have an issue with Cam--and I've been pulling for the Panthers all year except vs Dallas--but that's a pretty crazy comment that you just made.

 

[DFWJC]

Kelvin Benjamin will make Cam a happy man next year.

 

[DC Cowboy]

Plus cam has put the offense on his back. Many times this season their defense gave up leads and Cam drove for the win. He is doing it without his number 1 reciever

Not to mention he is or should be the MVP. Dude has an agenda against Cam and it is obvious

 

[CrownCowboy]

I'm glad you recognize.



Actually, my assumption is spot on, unless you're prone to illogic. Let me explain since such weighty concepts are beyond you.

I and superoynx were engaged in a discussion about race. I entered because someone said that criticism of Cam Newton has NOTHING to do with race. I said one cannot dismiss race in total although not everyone who criticizes him does so because of his race.

Superoynx and I had a misunderstanding that was quickly resolved.

Then you enter in with your comment about people bringing up race.

Now unless you have a habit of holding a conversation with one group of individuals and then arguing with a different group of individuals on the matter you raised with the first group, then it stands to REASON you were talking to those in this forum. And since I and superoynx were the ones talking about race when you got here, it's LOGICAL to assume you were focused on our conversation, or, in particular, my part of the conversation - which you got wrong anyway.

If you were having a conversation about race with Bob then wouldn't you address Bob rather than Taylor? Wouldn't you make your points on Bob's forum rather than the forum where Taylor is discussing the issue?

It would be NATURAL for Taylor to assume that if you entered a forum where Taylor is discussing race, that you would be talking to Taylor or addressing the issues that Taylor raised, especially if Bob is not in the same forum.

If this is your practice, then you're confused because people don't generally operate in such a fashion. Well, people who understand how logic works, that is.

The fact that you have the nerve to come on here and write a damn book in response to me explaining what you and some other guy were talking about is hilarious.

I'll say it again. To hell with your assumptions.

Just because I enter a thread and comment does not mean I have hijacked you and another guy's conversation. You assumed that, but you would. It's all about you in your world.

Whatever you were arguing for or against. Whatever point you were trying to make. Whatever your warped mind was agreeing to with another poster. Whatever disagreements you were having. None of that has anything to do with me or what I posted.

I live in right outside of Charlotte. The conversation of Cam and his antics as well as his race has come up more times than I can remember. The race card is soon to follow, most of the time. I made a general comment about it based on my opinion. A general comment about the issue. That's it. It wasn't about you. (Yes, I know that's hard to fathom in your world) and it wasn't towards you or anyone you were engaged in a conversation with.

You obviously took issue with what I said because you refuted my overall premise that I think the race card in this issue for the most part is hogwash. Whatever you said prior to another poster is your problem, or problem you solved, or whatever.

That is where the issues here started with me. As I have acknowledged, perhaps I should have stated my opinion directly on the matter in my original post. It was implied, but it might have helped contextually. But it would have mattered. Your panties would still be in a wad.

It's really not that hard to correlate.

Your logic only works in your world. This is a message board. A person can make a general comment and it doesn't always have to be towards, about, or in response to another poster. But again, I can't fault a person like you for thinking anything other than what you thought. Again, to you, it's your world and we are all just living in it.

Now if you think my post implied anything about you and your conversation or if you didn't agree with what I said, which you obviously didn't, or you were offended by my comment. You are just going to have to get over it. Afterall, you responded to it.

If things were as simple as you try to keep making things out to be in this thread with your whole logic lecture and you had come to an agreement with another poster over the issue, then why even respond to me?

Unwad them panties, darlin'. Keep doing your logic lectures though. It's hilarious.

 

[tyke1doe]

The fact that you have the nerve to come on here and write a damn book in response to me explaining what you and some other guy were talking about is hilarious.

Just as hilarious as you reading it, pretending that you didn't and then writing your own book.

Just because I enter a thread and comment does not mean I have hijacked you and another guy's conversation. You assumed that, but you would. It's all about you in your world.

Who said anything about hijacked? Do you even know how to use words correctly?

You entered a thread and started commenting about people making this issue about race. In a thread that had a variety of topics being discussed, you picked the one theme that I and another poster were discussing. And then, as skinscalper stated, you provided NO context to your statement.

Anyone who understands context and logic would draw the same conclusion. But maybe in your world, people drop into conversations bellowing about the topic others are discussing then claim they're not talking to anyone specific in that conversation.

Furthermore, your response to me betrays your argument.

After I said we've finished discussing the topic. This is what you said:

Oh I'd love to leave the topic. Unfortunately it'll never be left alone.

Like I said, it's like clockwork.

I can make the same arguments about certain white players as well.

What, you think Cam Newton is the only player to reciever racial hate mail? Do you think that white players haven't recieved it?

Keep them clock dials spinnin', my friend.

Translation: You really wanted to talk about this topic and found a place where you could appropriately do so. Hhhhm. Wonder why you chose this thread if you, indeed, didn't pay attention to the previous comments.

Then instead of stopping you pontificate about how other players have experienced racism (if it's hogwash, why would you reach for other examples that basically confirm my contention that some of Cam's criticism is, indeed, because of race?), then you tell me to keep the clock hands spinning, which means you believe I'm contributing to the Cam-race angle.
But then you say you don't know what I said previously. So you don't know what I said previously yet you accuse me of perpetuating the argument that it's all about race.
And this you deduce without reading my posts.

You're not fooling anyone, except, maybe, yourself.

Whatever you were arguing for or against. Whatever point you were trying to make. Whatever your warped mind was agreeing to with another poster. Whatever disagreements you were having. None of that has anything to do with me or what I posted.

And yet here you are trying to convince yourself that it doesn't.

I live in right outside of Charlotte. The conversation of Cam and his antics as well as his race has come up more times than I can remember. The race card is soon to follow, most of the time. I made a general comment about it based on my opinion. A general comment about the issue. That's it. It wasn't about you. (Yes, I know that's hard to fathom in your world) and it wasn't towards you or anyone you were engaged in a conversation with.

Again, so you just enter conversations and rant about unconnected topics? So if we're having a discussion about Cam Newton's performance, you would enter a conversation to say: "Ah the racists claim. It's like clockwork. I don't like Cam Newton.............I must be a racists. That must be it."

You understand that's what crazy people do? They enter conversations and start talking about totally unrelated issues without any context. Unless, of course, there is a PRIOR discussion about the topic ongoing, and you want to weigh in.

Come on. You can admit it.

You obviously took issue with what I said because you refuted my overall premise that I think the race card in this issue for the most part is hogwash. Whatever you said prior to another poster you is your problem, or problem you solved, or whatever.

LOL! I love it when you agree with me and you don't realize you do.
Uh, you do know that your above statement is the same as my statement: "Again, not everyone who disagrees with Cam's celebration is a racist. Far from it. But some are."

Of course, if you had read this discussion in context, you wouldn't be making yourself look like a complete fool. Maybe a semi-fool, but not a complete one.

Your logic only works in your world. This is a message board. A person can make a general comment and it doesn't always have to be towards, about, or in response to another poster. But again, I can't fault a person like you for thinking anything other than what you thought. Again, to you, it's your world and we are all just living in it.

To the first bold item, yes, people CAN make general comments, just as people can speak about a situation out of context. A message board doesn't discriminate against topics of discussion - per forum rules. But the SANITY and LOGIC of what one says is not something a message board regulates. That would be "regulated" by those who understand how language, conversations and context work.

And as I've pointed out, for you to enter a thread and make statements reflected in THIS thread but claim you weren't addressing anyone or the conversation in THIS thread makes you sound senile. And we're pretty familiar with how senile people operate.

To the last bold information in your book review , you're right you're living in my world. Welcome!

 

[CrownCowboy]

Just as hilarious as you reading it, pretending that you didn't and then writing your own book.


Who said anything about hijacked? Do you even know how to use words correctly?

You entered a thread and started commenting about people making this issue about race. In a thread that had a variety of topics being discussed, you picked the one theme that I and another poster were discussing. And then, as skinscalper stated, you provided NO context to your statement.

Anyone who understands context and logic would draw the same conclusion. But maybe in your world, people drop into conversations bellowing about the topic others are discussing then claiming they're not talking to anyone specific in that conversation.



And yet here you are trying to convince yourself that it doesn't.



Again, so you just enter conversations and rant about unconnected topics? So if we're having a discussion about Cam Newton's performance, you enter conversations and say: "Ah the racists claim. It's like clockwork. I don't like Cam Newton.............I must be a racists.That must be it."

You understand that's what crazy people do? They enter conversations and start talking about totally unrelated issues. Unless, of course, there is a PRIOR discussion about the topic ongoing, and you want to weigh in.



LOL! I love it when you agree with me and you don't realize you do.
Uh, you do know that your above statement is the same as my statement: "Again, not everyone who disagrees with Cam's celebration is a racist. Far from it. But some are."

Of course, if you had read this discussion in context, you wouldn't be making yourself look like a complete fool. Maybe a semi-fool, but not a complete one.



To the first bold item, yes, people CAN make general comments, just as people speak about a situation out of context. A message board doesn't discriminate against topics of discussion - per forum rules. But the SANITY and LOGIC of what one says is not something a message board regulates. That would be "regulated" by those who understand how language, conversations and context work.

And as I've pointed out, for you to enter a thread and make statements reflected in THIS thread but claim you weren't addressing anyone or the conversation in THIS thread makes you sound senile. And we're pretty familiar with how senile people operate.

Oh I read your logic book, unfortunately. No pretending about that, my friend.

Your assumptions that my comments were towards you were wrong.

It is possible. My only fault was not putting my post into context for people like you to understand that.

And yes, the way you are PMS'ing right now would make one think that I came into your world and hijacked it.

That's what this is all about anyway. You didn't like what I said and seemingly disagreed with it and now you are on here trying to act like the smartest guy in the world. And if we do agree on the subject then there was no need in your original response.

Let's just leave it at this.

You think I am an idiot. I think you are an idiot.

Have a good day.

 

[tyke1doe]

Your assumptions that my comments were towards you were wrong.

It is possible. My only fault was not putting my post into context for people like you to understand that.

People like me and skinscalper and a few others.

And yes, the way you are PMS'ing right now would make one think that I came into your world and hijacked it.

Or it would make one think that I like to argue and defend my position. That too is welcomed on a message board.

That's what this is all about anyway. You didn't like what I said and disagreed with it and now you are on here trying to act like the smartest guy in the world.

First, isn't that why we respond to people in the first place? We either agree or disagree with their comments. And if we disagree, we try to prove them wrong. Uh, that's the nature of debate.

Second, you're giving voice to your insecurities. I don't believe I'm the smartest person here. Far from it. But apparently, YOU think I am, or think I do - which says more about your perception than some supposed declaration on my part.
I do, however, have confidence in my opinion, my observations and by communication skills, and I do believe I can articulate my position very well, thank you.
And that's why I'm here. That's why we discuss. There are those who make better points than I. But I don't storm off getting upset or thinking they're smarter than I. They just have more knowledge in a given area than I do. No shame in that. And I consider it a privilege when someone teaches me or shares with me something I didn't know.

But maybe that's the difference between you and me.

Let's just leave it at this.

You think I am an idiot. I think you are an idiot.

You're speaking out of wounded pride and frustration. You don't think I'm an idiot. Your lengthy conversation with me says otherwise. People don't spend long conversation with people who are idiots. People who are idiots tend to be dismissed pretty quickly because there's no point in discussing with them.
And, no, I don't think you're an idiot. I think you lack context, yes. I think you don't fully process the flow of a conversation, and I don't think you articulate your position clearly, but I don't think you're an idiot.

In fact, I believe you understand/understood everything I said perfectly. I think you understand what I mean when I say people don't just enter unrelated conversations and start ranting unless there's a reason for them to do so.

I think you're just so mad and frustrated with me, you won't acknowledge the points I've made. So you've hunkered down and will toss all logic to the wind just to win an argument.

But it's okay. I understand how these things work.

Have a good day.

Ditto.

 

[CrownCowboy]

People like me and skinscalper and a few others.



Or it would make one think that I like to argue and defend my position. That too is welcomed on a message board.



First, isn't that why we respond to people in the first place? We either agree or disagree with their comments. And if we disagree, we try to prove them wrong. Uh, that's the nature of debate.

Second, you're giving voice to your insecurities. I don't believe I'm the smartest person here. Far from it. But apparently, YOU think I am, or think I do - which says more about your perception than some supposed declaration on my part.
I do, however, have confidence in my opinion, my observations and by communication skills, and I do believe I can articulate my position very well, thank you.
And that's why I'm here. That's why we discuss. There are those who make better points than I. But I don't storm off getting upset or thinking they're smarter than I. They just have more knowledge in a given area than I do. No shame in that. And I consider it a privilege when someone teaches me or shares with me something I didn't know.

But maybe that's the difference between you and me.



You're speaking out of wounded pride and frustration. You don't think I'm an idiot. Your lengthy conversation with me says otherwise. People don't spend long conversation with people who are idiots. People who are idiots tend to be dismissed pretty quickly because there's no point in discussing with them.
And, no, I don't think you're an idiot. I think you lack context, yes. I think you don't fully process the flow of a conversation, and I don't think you articulate your position clearly, but I don't think you're an idiot.

In fact, I believe you understand/understood everything I said perfectly. I think you understand what I mean when I say people don't just enter unrelated conversations and start ranting unless there's a reason for them to do so.

I think you're just so mad and frustrated with me, you won't acknowledge the points I've made. So you've hunkered down and will toss all logic to the wind just to win an argument.

But it's okay. I understand how these things work.




Ditto.

I'm not mad at all. But I do engage with idiots every day. I'm not storming off anywhere. I can go back and forth all day.

And I understand your point of view very well. I understand how you might have thought I was addressing you or another party in your conversation because it was indeed regarding the same issue and only issue being discussed in the thread.

What you are having a hard time understanding is that I really wasn't addressing you or your friend. I made a general comment about the issue. It was a sarcastic comment made to make an overall point that I am tired of the race debate in certain situations. It wasn't a rant. My reasons for that have been made apparent but it was not a necessary attack or response one way or the other to you and your points previously made. Whatever insecurities you have regarding the issue was made apparent by your response to me. If things were the way you say they were during your conversation regarding the issue, then why even bother responding to me? Especially if we agree on the subject as you say we do.

I know that doesn't seem like it's feasible especially in the context of the conversation and in a thread in a message board, but that's really all it was, a general comment.

Your response to me seemed as if you disagreed with me and off we went.

That's really what it boils down to for me. I can articulate my thoughts and points of view very well and I indeed can process the flow of a conversation. I can make the same arguments against you as well but it would be condescending in nature and really pointless.

I'm sorry if I offended you.

 

[Irvin88_4life]

His receivers, number 1's or not, make great catches. Snatch that ball out of the air. Nice to see. Wish Dez, a number 1, could do that.

What are you talking about. ......anyways dude I can tell you dislike Cam so I'm going to talk with someone that actually knows football. Nice talking to you goodbye now

 

[Irvin88_4life]

Not to mention he is or should be the MVP. Dude has an agenda against Cam and it is obvious

Without a doubt Cam is mvp. Not just passing but running as well. He has a way to get his teammates motivated and not sure what it is. He does celebrate to much but he is dominating and having fun. Scary to think what he could do when he cuts it out and just plays tough

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

What are you talking about. ......anyways dude I can tell you dislike Cam so I'm going to talk with someone that actually knows football. Nice talking to you goodbye now

I love Cam!

 

[tyke1doe]

I'm not mad at all. But I do engage with idiots every day. I'm not storming off anywhere. I can go back and forth all day.

Well, my question to you would be why do you waste your time if you think people are idiots?

What you are having a hard time understanding is that I really wasn't addressing you or your friend. I made a general comment about the issue. It was a sarcastic comment made to make an overall point that I am tired of the race debate in certain situations. It wasn't a rant. My reasons for that have been made apparent but it was not a necessary attack or response one way or the other to you and your points previously made. Whatever insecurities you have regarding the issue was made apparent by your response to me. If things were the way you say they were during your conversation regarding the issue, then why even bother responding to me? Especially if we agree on the subject as you say we do.

Actually, I don't have any insecurities as it relates to race. However, yes, I am SENSITIVE about issues of race. You get that way when you've encountered racism and when your presence and existence in this country is a product of racism.

So you are correct. Not necessarily in your term of "insecure," but in your overall concept of me being more concerned about issues of racism. Of course, your position about getting "tiredof race being brought up" speaks to your insensitivities also.

As to why I "bothered" responding to you, I thought I already addressed that. We were having a conversation about race. You entered and offered a statement without context. Naturally, since we were talking about the topic here and you inserted your comments, it would be logical to assume you were taking issue with an opinion expressed here.

That's why I responded.

I know that doesn't seem like it's feasible especially in the context of the conversation and in a thread in a message board, but that's really all it was, a general comment.

But it was a comment with no context. You came on claiming that people thought you were a racist because you criticize Cam. No one said that. In fact, it's a strange comment to make if you weren't privy to the conversation in this thread, as you claim you weren't.

Then when I said you were late to the party, and we've already explored that issue, you appeared to get upset (You said you're "tired" of such claims so I assume that means "upset") and started talking about how Cam isn't the only one who has experienced racism (the implication being that he DOES experience racism). Then you implied that I was "spinning the clock" by talking about this issue. I think "Like clockwork" is your specific phrase.

That's really what it boils down to for me. I can articulate my thoughts and points of view very well and I indeed can process the flow of a conversation. I can make the same arguments against you as well but it would be condescending in nature and really pointless.

You just did.

See examples like the above are the reasons why I question whether you're aware of what you're saying and doing.

I'm sorry if I offended you.

How do you define "offended"? In what way are you "sorry"?

Or were you being sarcastic and/or condescending?

 

[CrownCowboy]

Well, my question to you would be why do you waste your time if you think people are idiots?



Actually, I don't have any insecurities as it relates to race. However, yes, I am SENSITIVE about issues of race. You get that way when you've encountered racism and when your presence and existence in this country is a product of racism.





So you are correct. Not necessarily in your term of "insecure," but in your overall concept of me being more concerned about issues of racism. Of cours
e, your position about getting "tiredof ra
ce being brought up" speaks to your insensitivities also.

As to why I "bothered" responding to you, I thought I already addressed that. We were having a conversation about race. You entered and offered a statement wit
hout context. Naturally, since we were
talking about the topic here and you inserted your comments, it would be logical to assume you were taking issue with an opinion expressed here.

That's why I responded.



But it was a comment with no context. You came on claiming that people thought you were a racist because you criticize Cam. No one said that. In fact, it's a strange comment to make if you weren't privy to the conversation in this thread, as you claim you weren't.

Then when I said you were late to the party, and we've already explored that issue, you appeared to get upset (You said you're "tired" of such claims so I assume that means "upset") and started talking about how Cam isn't the only one who has experienced racism (the implication being that he DOES experience racism). Then you implied that I was "spinning the clock" by talking about this issue. I think "Like clockwork" is your specific phrase.



You just did.

See examples like the above are the reasons why I question whether you're aware of what you're saying and doing.



How do you define "offended"? In what way are you "sorry"?

Or were you being sarcastic and/or condescending?

You see now we are getting somewhere. It was obvious you were sensitive regarding this subject from the get go and especially after you responded to me. I'm glad you finally admit that.

After all of this riff raff, it's been established that my original comment was just a general comment regarding my opinion on the issue. Despite your assumption, your wrong assumption in which I reckon you were justified, it was, again, obvious that you didn't agree with my statement. I guess I can make an argument that my statement had enough context within itself just to get that far. Regardless, I have already acknowledged that I should have stated better my original thought and comment and provide more context to it. If you thought my comment was strange, well I guess I can understand that as well. It was sarcastic in nature and was meant to get my overall point across as to what my thought at the time was.

Anyway, I too, have experienced racism in my life. It exists on many levels. I also have seen racism become too much of an excuse and it's to the point that I find ridiculous. You don't have to agree with that.

As far as my use of the word idiot, I apologize. It was inappropriate and, you are right, I did not mean it. Nothing more, nothing less.

We can keep slinging mud at each other if you want, my friend. I don't think we'll ever see eye to eye on this, although I could be wrong.

 

[Biggems]

He was in the endzone a good 30 seconds AFTER Ginn on his score. I don't have a problem with some celebration, but that me first bull**** needs to go.

The way I see it.....you reach the endzone you have until the PAT or 2pt Conv. attempt to get your celebration in.

 

[texbumthelife]

The way I see it.....you reach the endzone you have until the PAT or 2pt Conv. attempt to get your celebration in.

He didn't reach the endzone though. The throw came for 30+ yards downfield and Ginn and the team had already celebrated before he started celebrating. The way I see it, that's "look at me" selfish. I am all about having fun and celebrating with your team, especially in such a big game, but running down there by yourself 15 seconds after the play and celebrating is a bit much. I might be more prone to agree with your "until the PAT or 2pt to celebrate" idea, if that was a set threshold, but now since they review every score, that's anywhere from 35 seconds to over a minute.

 

[dallasdave]

These arguments in this thread are more entertaining then the game lol.

That is the truth !!!!