We are not very good, and I'm fading

[ETex]

This thread gives my headspot an owie...

Haven't seen this much bloviating since that time I got drunk and watched C-Span all night.
:shoot2:

For another chance at redemetion, here is anthor pic of the lovely miss Cole:

 

[windjc]

Good questions. I'll admit I haven't studied all of these guys lives in depth. I admitted a few threads back that Brady is definitely an example of a "celebrity athlete" who has remained a great, winning QB. But my idea of "celebrity athletes," which I kind of assumed folks on here would understand without having to define in detail, are those athletes who are treated as celebrities in our culture outside of their sport. They sometimes go to the big celebrity events, are sometimes the focus of tabloid media and internet media, date famous women, etc. Brees and Manning don't really fit that category. Again, I'm not going to do the research to prove this point, but I think everyone can agree that Romo and Brady are much bigger celebrities than Manning or Brees. Manning and Brees are not considered as interesting in popular culture today because they appear to be what one might call "settled." And it wouldn't be a stretch to speculate (yes it is speculation because I don't know them personally nor have I done an in-depth study of their lives) that Manning and Brees are, indeed, more "settled," thus less likely to be distracted.

These are not outrageous claims I am making, nor do the lack substance.

Yes, saying Manning is not a bigger celebrity than Romo is outrageous and lacks complete substance.

Everytime I watch TV I see Manning in a commercial. I never see Romo in one.

You, my friend are depressed about something other than football. That is for sure. Football, it seems, is your choosen scapegoat.

If you hate it, quit watching. Go take up croquet or something.

 

[CIWhitefish]

Good questions. I'll admit I haven't studied all of these guys lives in depth. I admitted a few threads back that Brady is definitely an example of a "celebrity athlete" who has remained a great, winning QB. But my idea of "celebrity athletes," which I kind of assumed folks on here would understand without having to define in detail, are those athletes who are treated as celebrities in our culture outside of their sport. They sometimes go to the big celebrity events, are sometimes the focus of tabloid media and internet media, date famous women, etc. Brees and Manning don't really fit that category. Again, I'm not going to do the research to prove this point, but I think everyone can agree that Romo and Brady are much bigger celebrities than Manning or Brees. Manning and Brees are not considered as interesting in popular culture today because they appear to be what one might call "settled." And it wouldn't be a stretch to speculate (yes it is speculation because I don't know them personally nor have I done an in-depth study of their lives) that Manning and Brees are, indeed, more "settled," thus less likely to be distracted.

These are not outrageous claims I am making, nor do the lack substance.

Your argument seems to be based on the idea that TMZ following you around is a bigger distraction then national commercials, traveling around pimping Madden, or having a family. While Brees and Manning may not be as 'interesting' from a Paris Hilton perspective they sure have more off field things going on that could be a cause of distraction then Romo does. This also ignores the mountains of evidence that Romo is the biggest football junkie and gym rat on the team.

If you want to base an opinion on part of the picture so be it but you may as well believe 2+2=5. It just doesn't add up.

 

[CIWhitefish]

This thread gives my headspot an owie...

Haven't seen this much bloviating since that time I got drunk and watched C-Span all night.
:shoot2:

For another chance at redemetion, here is anthor pic of the lovely miss Cole:
http://turbo.inquisitr.com/wp-content/2010/02/cheryl-cole.jpg

Ah...I mean...ummm...what was I saying?

 

[peplaw06]

Good questions. I'll admit I haven't studied all of these guys lives in depth. I admitted a few threads back that Brady is definitely an example of a "celebrity athlete" who has remained a great, winning QB. But my idea of "celebrity athletes," which I kind of assumed folks on here would understand without having to define in detail, are those athletes who are treated as celebrities in our culture outside of their sport. They sometimes go to the big celebrity events, are sometimes the focus of tabloid media and internet media, date famous women, etc. Brees and Manning don't really fit that category. Again, I'm not going to do the research to prove this point, but I think everyone can agree that Romo and Brady are much bigger celebrities than Manning or Brees. Manning and Brees are not considered as interesting in popular culture today because they appear to be what one might call "settled." And it wouldn't be a stretch to speculate (yes it is speculation because I don't know them personally nor have I done an in-depth study of their lives) that Manning and Brees are, indeed, more "settled," thus less likely to be distracted.

These are not outrageous claims I am making, nor do the lack substance.

Ummmmm....

Drew Brees on David Letterman

Peyton Manning on Saturday Night Live

And seriously, these guys and all their commercials and endorsements... And you don't think they're celebrity QBs?? But Romo is?

When was Romo on Letterman or SNL?

 

[DeaconBlues]

Good questions. I'll admit I haven't studied all of these guys lives in depth. I admitted a few threads back that Brady is definitely an example of a "celebrity athlete" who has remained a great, winning QB. But my idea of "celebrity athletes," which I kind of assumed folks on here would understand without having to define in detail, are those athletes who are treated as celebrities in our culture outside of their sport. They sometimes go to the big celebrity events, are sometimes the focus of tabloid media and internet media, date famous women, etc. Brees and Manning don't really fit that category. Again, I'm not going to do the research to prove this point, but I think everyone can agree that Romo and Brady are much bigger celebrities than Manning or Brees. Manning and Brees are not considered as interesting in popular culture today because they appear to be what one might call "settled." And it wouldn't be a stretch to speculate (yes it is speculation because I don't know them personally nor have I done an in-depth study of their lives) that Manning and Brees are, indeed, more "settled," thus less likely to be distracted.

These are not outrageous claims I am making, nor do the lack substance.

Your claims are both outrageous and totally lacking in substance. All you are doing is defining players based upon your opinion of what "celebrity" is. Romo and Brady bigger celebrities than Manning or Brees? Based on what? Manning's face is on TV more than Romo, Brady and Brees combined. Visit New Orleans, and you would believe Brees is not only the greatest QB in NFL history, he's the only one of note.

You are throwing out your biases and hates, placing a bow on top, and calling it substance. What's sad is that although a number of people have repeatedly pointed out your lack of substance, you still don't see it.

Opinion is no substitute for fact. Never has been, never will be.

 

[zrinkill]

These are not outrageous claims I am making, nor do the lack substance.

I like Romo and hope he does well, but ultimately I don't think he has "it."

He is like most young men nowadays. I've heard it described as "feminized." Feminization refers to the way the younger generation of men tend to think/ respond like women. Romo strikes me that way.

:laugh2:

 

[DallasEast]

<--- ~hears the theme from Raiders Of The Lost Ark in the back of my mind while reading each Awakened reply/message~

 

[Awakened]

Welcome to the ride. I hope you can hang on. There are about to be some serious bumps in the road you are on. Buckle up.

You may throw up now, this round of the ride is over and I am sure your stomach is queasy.

My advice to you is to avoid these kind of statements; you are greatly overestimating the power of your writing.

But I do want to respond to what you said...

First, your last part detailing Romo's work ethic is IMPRESSIVE. I'll admit that you know A LOT more about Romo's life than I do... A LOT. I still think Parcells was right and that Tony's celebrity is negatively affecting him, but you have made a strong case for his work ethic.

I'm from Arkansas - Cowboys country all the way. You missed that one. But I don't really have time to make the in-depth study of Romo's life that you have made. I watch Sports Center, read the Sports Page of the paper, and come on Cowboys Zone every once in a while.

Now, the first part of your post about celebrity status is not very persausive to me. You seem to view my comments about the negative affect of celebrity to be about how famous one becomes, or how big of a media appearance an athlete is involved in. You're missing my point about what is different today: the difference today is the ubiquity of media, the sense in which it is non-stop, ever present, always available. It is much harder for any of us to live an undistracted, focused life. I can give you a list of books to read about this cultural phenomena; there is a new one coming out seems like every month.

Here's an example: Deion shoots a music video with Hammer during the off-season. When he comes to training camp, that interaction with Hammer and that video are not a part of his training camp world. It is in the past and, unless the video happens to come on MTV while they are sitting around, it won't come into consciousness. A player makes a music video today, and his buddies are watching it on the iPhone in the locker room, Hammer or his agent is texting him about how it's doing, he is tweeting with his fans about it, a friend sends him a youtube of somebody parodying the video, etc. IT IS MUCH MORE LIKELY TO BE A DISTRACTION BECAUSE WE LIVE IN A RADICALLY DIFFERENT WORLD TODAY. Everything is blended together and expanded for everybody. It is harder for a football player (or anybody) to separate his football life from his busines life and personal life. It is harder for the football player (or anybody) to focus on one single thing.

 

[ETex]

Last edited by Hostile : 8 Minutes Ago at 02:23 PM.

Sorry about that Hos. Didn't realize that last pic was over the line.


/MYBAD

 

[Awakened]

ClWhitefish and peplaw make strong cases for Manning and Brees being bigger celebrities than Romo. And they did it without a personal attach or put down. Nice!

Again, I wish I had the time to research this thoroughly, but you guys are basing your observations on old media rather than new media. New media - internet, twitter, youtube, etc - is taking over. My guess (yes, it is a guess but an educated one) is that Romo is more entwined with new media than Brees or Manning.

Here's another point: Is there really anybody who believes dating megastars Jessica Simpson, Carrie Underwood, and Candice Crawford (have there been others?) would be less distracting than being married to the same woman for multiple years? Really? I'm not talking about the fact that these woman are beautiful, but each of them brings with them TONS of drama and media focus. This is a HUGE FACTOR in the difference in the celebrity lifestyle of Romo vs. Manning and Brees.

 

[CIWhitefish]

My advice to you is to avoid these kind of statements; you are greatly overestimating the power of your writing.

But I do want to respond to what you said...

First, your last part detailing Romo's work ethic is IMPRESSIVE. I'll admit that you know A LOT more about Romo's life than I do... A LOT. I still think Parcells was right and that Tony's celebrity is negatively affecting him, but you have made a strong case for his work ethic.

I'm from Arkansas - Cowboys country all the way. You missed that one. But I don't really have time to make the in-depth study of Romo's life that you have made. I watch Sports Center, read the Sports Page of the paper, and come on Cowboys Zone every once in a while.

Now, the first part of your post about celebrity status is not very persausive to me. You seem to view my comments about the negative affect of celebrity to be about how famous one becomes, or how big of a media appearance an athlete is involved in. You're missing my point about what is different today: the difference today is the ubiquity of media, the sense in which it is non-stop, ever present, always available. It is much harder for any of us to live an undistracted, focused life. I can give you a list of books to read about this cultural phenomena; there is a new one coming out seems like every month.

Here's an example: Deion shoots a music video with Hammer during the off-season. When he comes to training camp, that interaction with Hammer and that video are not a part of his training camp world. It is in the past and, unless the video happens to come on MTV while they are sitting around, it won't come into consciousness. A player makes a music video today, and his buddies are watching it on the iPhone in the locker room, Hammer or his agent is texting him about how it's doing, he is tweeting with his fans about it, a friend sends him a youtube of somebody parodying the video, etc. IT IS MUCH MORE LIKELY TO BE A DISTRACTION BECAUSE WE LIVE IN A RADICALLY DIFFERENT WORLD TODAY. Everything is blended together and expanded for everybody. It is harder for a football player (or anybody) to separate his football life from his busines life and personal life. It is harder for the football player (or anybody) to focus on one single thing.

The problem this argument has is that you are comparing the two time periods from the same static point of view. When Deion shot his video there was not as much media intrusion or as many outlets, that is true. The norm was that you stayed out of the spotlight so even a little bit of 'celebrity' was noticed.

Now the norm is a lot of media and a lot of outlets. Athletes today are used to it all. What you think would be a distraction from an 80s/90s point of view is not to the kids that are used to it today. It's all relative. I'd submit that the Boys of the 90s were way more 'distracted' as compared to the norm than they are today, relative to the norm. You can't compare eras from the safety of a fixed base of experiences.

 

[7footer]

Wow...I never checked this thread until now, but seeing that it is now going 32 pages strong, I must have missed some real gems in here.

The title exclaims that "We are not very good..." Without going into whatever else has been discussed in this thread, I will simply state that I disagee. I'm not sure how good we really are yet, because it's only the preseason. However, we only made improvements to our team since last season, and we went 11-5 then and made it to the conference semi-finals. I think that is a pretty good indication that we should also do pretty well this year.

 

[JohnnyHopkins]

I guess this guy isn't done fading yet?

 

[ScipioCowboy]

My advice to you is to avoid these kind of statements; you are greatly overestimating the power of your writing.

But I do want to respond to what you said...

First, your last part detailing Romo's work ethic is IMPRESSIVE. I'll admit that you know A LOT more about Romo's life than I do... A LOT. I still think Parcells was right and that Tony's celebrity is negatively affecting him, but you have made a strong case for his work ethic.

I'm from Arkansas - Cowboys country all the way. You missed that one. But I don't really have time to make the in-depth study of Romo's life that you have made. I watch Sports Center, read the Sports Page of the paper, and come on Cowboys Zone every once in a while.

Now, the first part of your post about celebrity status is not very persausive to me. You seem to view my comments about the negative affect of celebrity to be about how famous one becomes, or how big of a media appearance an athlete is involved in. You're missing my point about what is different today: the difference today is the ubiquity of media, the sense in which it is non-stop, ever present, always available. It is much harder for any of us to live an undistracted, focused life. I can give you a list of books to read about this cultural phenomena; there is a new one coming out seems like every month.

Here's an example: Deion shoots a music video with Hammer during the off-season. When he comes to training camp, that interaction with Hammer and that video are not a part of his training camp world. It is in the past and, unless the video happens to come on MTV while they are sitting around, it won't come into consciousness. A player makes a music video today, and his buddies are watching it on the iPhone in the locker room, Hammer or his agent is texting him about how it's doing, he is tweeting with his fans about it, a friend sends him a youtube of somebody parodying the video, etc. IT IS MUCH MORE LIKELY TO BE A DISTRACTION BECAUSE WE LIVE IN A RADICALLY DIFFERENT WORLD TODAY. Everything is blended together and expanded for everybody. It is harder for a football player (or anybody) to separate his football life from his busines life and personal life. It is harder for the football player (or anybody) to focus on one single thing.

False.

Deion not only starred in but sang in a rap video. After he signed with the Cowboys, the team would play the video inside the locker room.

Your point is irrelevant because there isn't a single NFL player who isn't forced to contend with media saturation in everyday life.

 

[Hostile]

My advice to you is to avoid these kind of statements; you are greatly overestimating the power of your writing.

Sounds like good advice to ignore. Thank you just the same.

But I do want to respond to what you said...

First, your last part detailing Romo's work ethic is IMPRESSIVE. I'll admit that you know A LOT more about Romo's life than I do... A LOT. I still think Parcells was right and that Tony's celebrity is negatively affecting him, but you have made a strong case for his work ethic.

Then why didn't Troy Aikman's celebrity status negatively affect him? Why hasn't Peyton Manning's affected him? Why hasn't Tom Brady's? Why hasn't Eli's affected him? Why hasn't Drew Brees' affected him? Not even the much publicized fight with his mother nor her suicide derailed him. Why didn't all the celebrity after his motorcycle wreck derail Ben Ruthlessraper and the Steelers?

If your only point is the commentary of a former Head Coach who hasn't won a Super Bowl in nearly 20 years then I'd suggest changing the radio station. If you think for one minute that Bill Parcells wouldn't have jumped at the chance to coach the team we have right now versus the abortion he was left with you are out of your ever loving mind. And that includes the celebrity QB you are so afraid of.

I saw where you call him feminized. That's an interesting comment to make by a man who I bet couldn't endure labor pains and has no clue whatsoever about Romo collapsing in the shower after being beaten to a pulp in the 2008 finale. You don't think a man who did that is a fighter?

I'm from Arkansas - Cowboys country all the way. You missed that one. But I don't really have time to make the in-depth study of Romo's life that you have made. I watch Sports Center, read the Sports Page of the paper, and come on Cowboys Zone every once in a while.

Yes, Sportscenter is a great place to have your ideas of the Cowboys shaped.[/sarcasm] It really didn't matter where you were from. What matters is where your ideas are born and how do you feed them? Trent Dilfer is on Sportscenter. Why don't you give heed to him?

No, it's plainly obvious that you enjoy the negative voices about the Cowboys and that is what feeds you. I nailed that from the word go whether I knew where you were from or not.

Now, the first part of your post about celebrity status is not very persausive to me. You seem to view my comments about the negative affect of celebrity to be about how famous one becomes, or how big of a media appearance an athlete is involved in. You're missing my point about what is different today: the difference today is the ubiquity of media, the sense in which it is non-stop, ever present, always available. It is much harder for any of us to live an undistracted, focused life. I can give you a list of books to read about this cultural phenomena; there is a new one coming out seems like every month.

No, I actually grasped that from the word go. The difference here is I haven't forgotten the media attention of the 1990's good and bad that you have completely erased from your memory. You don't remember the team being called pompous, arrogant, and consumed by their own celebrity? Of course you don't.

You don't remember the backlash in the media world from Jimmy saying we would beat the 49ers? From him saying "put it in 3 inch letters" across the top of the page? You don't remember the media frenzy about his hair never moving? You don't remember the backlash after "how bout them Cowboys?" of course you don't.

You don't remember him and Troy Aikman on the TV Show Coach? You don't remember Michael wearing fur coats to his trial? Of course you don't.

You don't remember the world lauding Don Beebe's strip of Leon Lett as the play of the Super Bowl because of Lett's arrogance, despite a 52-17 blowout and a magnificent performance by Aikman? Of course you don't.

Here's an example: Deion shoots a music video with Hammer during the off-season. When he comes to training camp, that interaction with Hammer and that video are not a part of his training camp world. It is in the past and, unless the video happens to come on MTV while they are sitting around, it won't come into consciousness. A player makes a music video today, and his buddies are watching it on the iPhone in the locker room, Hammer or his agent is texting him about how it's doing, he is tweeting with his fans about it, a friend sends him a youtube of somebody parodying the video, etc. IT IS MUCH MORE LIKELY TO BE A DISTRACTION BECAUSE WE LIVE IN A RADICALLY DIFFERENT WORLD TODAY. Everything is blended together and expanded for everybody. It is harder for a football player (or anybody) to separate his football life from his busines life and personal life. It is harder for the football player (or anybody) to focus on one single thing.

MC Hammer's album was released on October 29, 1991. Correct me if I am wrong, but that is during the football season. He didn't flash signs form the video as a Falcon that he did all through his NFL career? You're going to stick with that?

I notice how you make no mention of the fact that Deion played baseball for the Reds and missed the first part of a season that we won a Super Bowl.

No distractions?

Tell me truthfully. Are these lapses in memory self inflicted or simply intentional?

One last thing. Please show me Tony Romo's legit Facebook page and tell me his twitter account. I got 50 bucks says you can't.

 

[Hostile]

Sorry about that Hos. Didn't realize that last pic was over the line.


/MYBAD

No sweat, she's beautiful.

 

[Awakened]

The problem this argument has is that you are comparing the two time periods from the same static point of view. When Deion shot his video there was not as much media intrusion or as many outlets, that is true. The norm was that you stayed out of the spotlight so even a little bit of 'celebrity' was noticed.

Now the norm is a lot of media and a lot of outlets. Athletes today are used to it all. What you think would be a distraction from an 80s/90s point of view is not to the kids that are used to it today. It's all relative. I'd submit that the Boys of the 90s were way more 'distracted' as compared to the norm than they are today, relative to the norm. You can't compare eras from the safety of a fixed base of experiences.

Ah, a postmodernist? If so, we'll probably have to agree to disagree on this. I believe there is a fixed, desirable state of being that has to do with focus. As Winifred Gallagher, author of Rapt, says: “if you could just stay focused on the right things, your life would stop feeling like a reaction to stuff that happens to you and become something that you create: not a series of accidents, but a work of art.”

 

[Hostile]

And now we see what this is really about.

Get your popcorn ready because I expected that response and had ammo waiting.

 

[CIWhitefish]

Ah, a postmodernist? If so, we'll probably have to agree to disagree on this. I believe there is a fixed, desirable state of being that has to do with focus. As Winifred Gallagher, author of Rapt, says: “if you could just stay focused on the right things, your life would stop feeling like a reaction to stuff that happens to you and become something that you create: not a series of accidents, but a work of art.”

No, not even close. Postmodern? Please. I am not talking focus. Focus is needed and as it pertains to Romo I'd say all evidence shows he has it in spades.

I am talking about perceived distractions. What you personally think is a distraction in todays world is based on your experiences. You put yourself in the the place of todays athlete and say to yourself that they have to be distracted because or twitter, TMZ, constant media, whatever.

What I am saying is that all things are relative to your experience. Todays athlete grew up in this environment. They don't have the experience of how it used to be. They are used to the media as it is so it does not cause them to be as distracted as you would assume. It does not mean that focus is unimportant, it was and will continue to be. What is does mean is that what can cause a person to lose focus is not constant and is dependant on experience. If you are used to something it does not distract to the same degree.