pacman on the Michael Irvin show right now

[superpunk]

Oh so now its yours? Like I said get in line.

If you didn't realize my venom for the reactionary, non-visonary, draconian, patsy turd that is Goodell then you havent been paying attention.

I had you on ignore. Maybe I missed it.

http://cowboyszone.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1436886&postcount=7

Earliest known theogt critique of Goodell (3/26/07). He'd been on the job for just 7 months. Oh, how it was just the tip of the iceberg.

Another member! The 4th musketeer, or however we were degraded as a unit, has yet to show.

 

[burmafrd]

Pacman is a criminal. He might not be a thug- but he certainly is a criminal.

 

[superpunk]

Pacman is a criminal. He might not be a thug- but he certainly is a criminal.

Does this mean you'll drop the Pac-Thug nonsense if we sign him?

joy.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

Hang in there, Catch... There's absolutely nothing wrong with not wanting Pacman on your team.

 

[Hostile]

Hang in there, Catch... There's absolutely nothing wrong with not wanting Pacman on your team.

I agree.

If there is, then I am wrong, because I would much rather we not acquire him. If we do, same thing I said about TO and Tank, I am not going to constantly complain about him here. I will give him credit when he does good. I will criticize when he screws up, and when he leaves I will feel relief.

To TO's credit, I think he has been outstanding here and I am actually starting to really like him. I did not think that was possible. I really didn't.

I prefer we not have players that the media are just itching to see screw up and make a big deal out of it. Call me puritanical, a boy scout, whatever you want. Just don't expect me to apologize for it, because I won't.

 

[CATCH17]

Hang in there, Catch... There's absolutely nothing wrong with not wanting Pacman on your team.

/hug

Thanks choc :laugh2:

I agree.

If there is, then I am wrong, because I would much rather we not acquire him. If we do, same thing I said about TO and Tank, I am not going to constantly complain about him here. I will give him credit when he does good. I will criticize when he screws up, and when he leaves I will feel relief.

To TO's credit, I think he has been outstanding here and I am actually starting to really like him. I did not think that was possible. I really didn't.

I prefer we not have players that the media are just itching to see screw up and make a big deal out of it. Call me puritanical, a boy scout, whatever you want. Just don't expect me to apologize for it, because I won't.

Nice post and I agree with everyone you said.

Once its done its done. Im not a fan of the guy either way but I will be cheering him on either way.

I just wish someone like Landry were here to pimp slap some people when it comes to issues like this.

 

[Vintage]

I agree.

If there is, then I am wrong, because I would much rather we not acquire him. If we do, same thing I said about TO and Tank, I am not going to constantly complain about him here. I will give him credit when he does good. I will criticize when he screws up, and when he leaves I will feel relief.

To TO's credit, I think he has been outstanding here and I am actually starting to really like him. I did not think that was possible. I really didn't.

I prefer we not have players that the media are just itching to see screw up and make a big deal out of it. Call me puritanical, a boy scout, whatever you want. Just don't expect me to apologize for it, because I won't.

To be fair, I think the media in general likes it when players screw up. If Ware ever gets busted for steroids, we'd have a media frenzy.


Perhaps you meant to say take risks, instead. Because that is what PacMan is: a risk. There is no denying it. There's no denying he's put himself in bad situations, screwed up, and got punished for his actions.

The thing that makes this move smart is the risk vs reward.

Is it low risk? PacMan himself is a risk. Sure. But is it risky to give up a 6th round pick (or whatever) for him? Its a relatively low cost.

The reward is potentially huge.

And I think because the risk is so low in comparison to the reward that it makes this move desirable. This is what a lot of us are harping on. Because the reality of it is, in the 6th round, that player is going to be likely cut anyway. I know last year we struck gold with Folk, but that was bec. we needed a K. And we seemed to have done well with Anderson, but that was because the coaching staff apparently wasn't too impressed with Hoyte.

But where would we use that 6th rounder? A WR? Owens, Crayton, Stanback are locks. If Glenn comes back, we have 4 locks. And I doubt a 6th round pick beats out Austin or Hurd.... OL? He'd be behind our 5 starters, McQ, Free, Marten at best. DL? He'd be 7th at best in the rotation.

The best place for a 6th round pick to make the roster is at developmental QB, 3rd RB, developmental OLB, developmental CB. Why not go ahead and use it on a CB that can come in and play nickel immediately as well as PR/KR?

I know you already have probably gone through this already.... But its worth saying anyway (plus, I have time to kill between classes)

 

[The Rawhide Kid]

Hang in there, Catch... There's absolutely nothing wrong with not wanting Pacman on your team.

There's not anything wrong with not wanting Pacman. There is something wrong with presenting a promotional poster as evidence for not wanting him just because it has his face on it.

Although, if he stars in BrokePac Mountain, I might not want him here either.

 

[CATCH17]

There's not anything wrong with not wanting Pacman. There is something wrong with presenting a promotional poster as evidence for not wanting him just because it has his face on it.

Although, if he stars in BrokePac Mountain, I might not want him here either.

Yeah... The only reason I dont want him is because of that poster.

Whether the poster was real or not it still proves my original point.

 

[Bleu Star]

To be fair, I think the media in general likes it when players screw up. If Ware ever gets busted for steroids, we'd have a media frenzy.


Perhaps you meant to say take risks, instead. Because that is what PacMan is: a risk. There is no denying it. There's no denying he's put himself in bad situations, screwed up, and got punished for his actions.

The thing that makes this move smart is the risk vs reward.

Is it low risk? PacMan himself is a risk. Sure. But is it risky to give up a 6th round pick (or whatever) for him? Its a relatively low cost.

The reward is potentially huge.

And I think because the risk is so low in comparison to the reward that it makes this move desirable. This is what a lot of us are harping on. Because the reality of it is, in the 6th round, that player is going to be likely cut anyway. I know last year we struck gold with Folk, but that was bec. we needed a K. And we seemed to have done well with Anderson, but that was because the coaching staff apparently wasn't too impressed with Hoyte.

But where would we use that 6th rounder? A WR? Owens, Crayton, Stanback are locks. If Glenn comes back, we have 4 locks. And I doubt a 6th round pick beats out Austin or Hurd.... OL? He'd be behind our 5 starters, McQ, Free, Marten at best. DL? He'd be 7th at best in the rotation.

The best place for a 6th round pick to make the roster is at developmental QB, 3rd RB, developmental OLB, developmental CB. Why not go ahead and use it on a CB that can come in and play nickel immediately as well as PR/KR?

I know you already have probably gone through this already.... But its worth saying anyway (plus, I have time to kill between classes)

I already said it but thanks for reiterating. low risk. high reward. We're in the perfect spot as far as this acquisition is concerned.

 

[Bleu Star]

Yeah... The only reason I dont want him is because of that poster.

Whether the poster was real or not it still proves my original point.

Your original point had agenda written all over it. Please proceed.

 

[Bleu Star]

http://cowboyszone.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2012501&postcount=97

By K19: hm theres a disclaimer under the poster now.

(UPDATE: Apparently, Pac Man was played here. From an email to Pro Football Talk:

"This is KAY-P contacting you on behalf of Club Nite concerning an event that was suppose to feat. Pacman Jones. We are apologizing to him and his family for the misunderstanding. We were informed by a false represenatives who lied to us saying that they could book Pacman Jones. After getting in contact with the real represenatives we discovered that Pacman Jones was not aware his name was advertised for an event and we also found out that he was not even accepting offers to host events. Again we would like to apologize to Pacman Jones, his fan(s) and family.")

Stop the madness.

 

[Bleu Star]

Man oh Man... This thread sure died a fast and silent death. How's that pill tasting?

 

[CATCH17]

Your original point had agenda written all over it. Please proceed.

Well my agenda was right and it will keep being right.

 

[Bleu Star]

Well my agenda was right and it will keep being right.

In which world? Yours? Do pigs have wings in this world too?