hypothetical?

[dragonsdaddy]

if you are a head coach and in a relatively critical third down situation, what do you do when your star te, after running a 13 yd route, decides to tap himself out? i would have been sending shockey back out there for the play, not letting him loll on the bench. what has this nfl come to? toughness and dedication, thy name isn't shockey. that is embarrassing.

[jtk1519]

I see no reason to question Shockey's toughness. He's played when he shouldn't have been on the field. If Shockey has pulled himself out, he knows he cannot help the team and he has no place on the field.

[dragonsdaddy]

I see no reason to question Shockey's toughness. He's played when he shouldn't have been on the field. If Shockey has pulled himself out, he knows he cannot help the team and he has no place on the field.

he ran a freaking 13 yd route. if i'm the coach, i want my best players on the field for every critical play. he wasn't close to even breathing hard. ditka wouldn't have been removeable in that situation.

[jtk1519]

he ran a freaking 13 yd route. if i'm the coach, i want my best players on the field for every critical play. he wasn't close to even breathing hard. ditka wouldn't have been removeable in that situation.

Again, there has never been any reason to question his toughness or resolve... just the opposite. Until that day comes, you're grasping at straws. BTW, if you're a coach, you want you best 11 players on the field. If your TE is hurt and unable to play, he's no longer one of your best 11 and you no longer want him on the field.

[LPMOM]

would need to know the reason he tapped himself out.

[dragonsdaddy]

would need to know the reason he tapped himself out.

unless he got a emergency hangnail on the 13 yd out route, it was simply fatigue. like i said, times have changed. ditka would have given him a reason to tap out. can you older folks ever believe that john mackey could ever take himself out of any game, much less in a critical situation? i guess it wasn't an important situation to the shocker.

[CCDawg]

unless he got a emergency hangnail on the 13 yd out route, it was simply fatigue. like i said, times have changed. ditka would have given him a reason to tap out. can you older folks ever believe that john mackey could ever take himself out of any game, much less in a critical situation? i guess it wasn't an important situation to the shocker.


Did the Giants win? Did Shockey play a vital role in the Giants win?

This Giants fan will take Shockey over any other Tight End in the league.

Really, it's pretty dumb to question Jeremy Shockey's toughness. Nearly every time he's thrown the ball he gets slammed by one or two guys instantly. But you're right, he comes out of one third down play and he's instantly as tough as a marshmallow. Give me a break.

[dragonsdaddy]

Did the Giants win? Did Shockey play a vital role in the Giants win?

This Giants fan will take Shockey over any other Tight End in the league.

Really, it's pretty dumb to question Jeremy Shockey's toughness. Nearly every time he's thrown the ball he gets slammed by one or two guys instantly. But you're right, he comes out of one third down play and he's instantly as tough as a marshmallow. Give me a break.

my point is that he should have been in on that specific play. i guess i haven't bought into the new, player-run league. i am too old school. does anyone, anywhere believe ditka, or mackey would have been tapping out? and btw, i'd take either of them in their prime over the shocker any day, tatts or not. if a 2nd qtr, 13 yd out where no contact was made deserves a rest, how in the world can he be expected to perform in the critical 4th qtr plays? give me a break. he can definitely make some plays, when he isn't too tired from those 15 yd sprints.

[jtk1519]

Given Shockey's balls to the walls toughness, if he pulled himself out, that's fine by me because the only way he would pull himself out of the game is if he felt he was going to hurt the team. You can question a lot of things when it comes to Shockey, but you simply cannot question his toughness or dedication to winning.

[GoOwls]

I won't comment on Shockey specifically since I didn't see the play, but I agree with D-Daddy that todays players, in general, lack the grit that players I grew up watching in the 60's and early 70's had.

Heck, I need go no farther than my Owls to find a free substitution program where HS kids pull themselves out and sit on the sideline in crucial situations.

It's rather embarrassing to see all-world D-linemen sit on the bench while the other team is driving on you in a crucial situation, while there are 6 kids at Celina that play the both ways the whole game and never leave the field. Offense, defense, special teams, kicks......every freakin play......

Damn embarrassing.....

Of course, there is the money factor now, with the pros. The guys in my day played for 15-20K a year and were in contant fear of getting cut. Now they are personal corporations that make millions a year. I guess I might pull myself out if I tweaked a muscle too......NOT.

[Favpack]

I think a real problem is today's player is dumber than dirt. Shockey is tired - so Shockey wants out. He fails to see the critical nature of the play.

Speaking of toughness - how about VY last night? In terrible pain, but he plays and produces the entire second half.

Gotta disagree with jtk on this one. The best know they are the best - and aside from a significant injury - they will be in every play.

Case in point - VY from last night.

[SLC93]

Shockey's an overated arse. He has been since day one & it will never change.

[JMSFan]

I have to say that you guys are speaking of something you know absolutely nothing about. The only 3 rational posters in this thread are myself, jtk, and LPMOM.

[Favpack]

I have to say that you guys are speaking of something you know absolutely nothing about. The only 3 rational posters in this thread are myself, jtk, and LPMOM.

So, you have no take other than to say you're rational -- profound! Do you know who John Mackay is -what team he played for?

[SLC93]

I have to say that you guys are speaking of something you know absolutely nothing about. The only 3 rational posters in this thread are myself, jtk, and LPMOM.

Says you.:rolleyes:

[dragonsdaddy]

I have to say that you guys are speaking of something you know absolutely nothing about. The only 3 rational posters in this thread are myself, jtk, and LPMOM.

i can give jtk and lpmom the benefit of the doubt on being rational. what exactly makes you so esteemed as to be rational?

[GoOwls]

I have to say that you guys are speaking of something you know absolutely nothing about. The only 3 rational posters in this thread are myself, jtk, and LPMOM.


Explain yourself in detail and give reasons why you have a grip on being rational. I can put up with people being wrong, if they know why they think the way they do. Let's see you explain how you came to this epiphany in your life.... your moment of clarity.

[bowiedawgs01]

Shockey is a dick. I'll take Witten.

[slorch]

Shockey is a dick. I'll take Witten.

I agree.

I don't like Winslow either, and I loved watching his Dad- talk about leaving it out on the field...:eek:

[LPMOM]

i can give jtk and lpmom the benefit of the doubt on being rational. what exactly makes you so esteemed as to be rational?

easy one. it takes a rational person to realize that jtk and myself are rational people!;)

[JMSFan]

easy one. it takes a rational person to realize that jtk and myself are rational people!;)

Thank you. Thats why I didnt feel obligated to explain myself to the others.:D

[tayb]

Shockey is an extremely tough man and would NEVER leave the game because he was just "tired." I have to think there was something else going on be it frustration with how the game was playing out, dehydration, or some sort of injury we couldn't see from the tubes.

[JMSFan]

Shockey is an extremely tough man and would NEVER leave the game because he was just "tired." I have to think there was something else going on be it frustration with how the game was playing out, dehydration, or some sort of injury we couldn't see from the tubes.

Exactly.

[GoOwls]

Thank you. Thats why I didnt feel obligated to explain myself to the others.:D

Easy out for you...because you CAN'T explain yourself......:eek:

[SLC93]

Shockey is an extremely tough man and would NEVER leave the game because he was just "tired." I have to think there was something else going on be it frustration with how the game was playing out, dehydration, or some sort of injury we couldn't see from the tubes.

That's all well & good but it does not change the fact that he's an underacheiving, petulant arse.

[JMSFan]

Easy out for you...because you CAN'T explain yourself......:eek:

Here are the statements that were made by you and the others where I determined you werent rational...

Favpack--Shockey is tired - so Shockey wants out. He fails to see the critical nature of the play. How do you know this? Did he specifically tell you this?

SLC93--Shockey's an overated arse. He has been since day one & it will never change. You cant say that as a fact. You dont know him personally.

Your post--but I agree with D-Daddy that todays players, in general, lack the grit that players I grew up watching in the 60's and early 70's had.--
Damn embarrassing.....
Embarassing to who? Just you I guess. And how do they lack the grit? Players are bigger, stronger,and faster than they ever were in the 60's or 70's.

Truth is none of you knew the reason that Shockey came out of the game, so it made your statements look really rediculous.

[SLC93]

SLC93--Shockey's an overated arse. He has been since day one & it will never change. You cant say that as a fact. You dont know him personally.


I can say nothing to an absolute certainty, same as you. You'll notice, for clarification, I have not made a single comment regarding Shockey removing himself from play. I don't care why he came out & I do not care for him. It may suprise you to know that I am far from alone on the later. I do not know this man, which is so true that it's a given in these types of discussions. All we can know of any of these athletes is what they project themselves as & what we can piece together through the thousands of sound bites, segments and articles our insatiable media provide us with. Shockey has done nothing but present himself as a self absorbed, party all the time, do what I want & say what I want rebel since day one. He's injury prone and has failed to live up to the splash of his rookie season. Additionally, you can count on him opening his mouth and creating controversy through a deragatory comment more than once year. You're right, I'm wrong. He's a splendid teammate and a better person. I'm sure of it because of all the evidence there is to support that.:rolleyes: Not to add insult to injury, no pun intened, but he may not even be in the top 10 at his position, legitimately.

[JMSFan]

I can say nothing to an absolute certainty, same as you. You'll notice, for clarification, I have not made a single comment regarding Shockey removing himself from play. I don't care why he came out & I do not care for him. It may suprise you to know that I am far from alone on the later. I do not know this man, which is so true that it's a given in these types of discussions. All we can know of any of these athletes is what they project themselves as & what we can piece together through the thousands of sound bites, segments and articles our insatiable media provide us with. Shockey has done nothing but present himself as a self absorbed, party all the time, do what I want & say what I want rebel since day one. He's injury prone and has failed to live up to the splash of his rookie season. Additionally, you can count on him opening his mouth and creating controversy through a deragatory comment more than once year. You're right, I'm wrong. He's a splendid teammate and a better person. I'm sure of it because of all the evidence there is to support that.:rolleyes: Not to add insult to injury, no pun intened, but he may not even be in the top 10 at his position, legitimately.

He is ranked 4th at his position this season behind Gates, Winslow, and Witten. He has 15 rec. for 180 yards, avg. 60 yds per game. I guess thats not bad for someone who gets tired and doesnt stay in the game. :rolleyes:

[SLC93]

[/B]

He is ranked 4th at his position this season behind Gates, Winslow, and Witten. He has 15 rec. for 180 yards, avg. 60 yds per game. I guess thats not bad for someone who gets tired and doesnt stay in the game. :rolleyes:

3 games in, let's see if he can actually sustain production for a season's entirety.

[SLC93]

[/B]

He is ranked 4th at his position this season behind Gates, Winslow, and Witten. He has 15 rec. for 180 yards, avg. 60 yds per game. I guess thats not bad for someone who gets tired and doesnt stay in the game. :rolleyes:

Additionally, me thinks that if Crumpler & Gonzales weren't playing with the qb's they are this season, both would be ahead of him as usual.

[SLC93]

[/B]

He is ranked 4th at his position this season behind Gates, Winslow, and Witten. He has 15 rec. for 180 yards, avg. 60 yds per game. I guess thats not bad for someone who gets tired and doesnt stay in the game. :rolleyes:

ps - Any doubt that Dallas Clark may produce more?

[slorch]

i prefer to remove my stars from the game on crucial 3rd and 4th downs, or even for an entire half or so, before they ever have to tap out. Why embarass them like that?

It is better to eliminate the need for a player to ever have to ask off the field. I keep them from getting tired, so they don't have to ask.

signed,
Fran

[SLC93]

i prefer to remove my stars from the game on crucial 3rd and 4th downs, or even for an entire half or so, before they ever have to tap out. Why embarass them like that?

It is better to eliminate the need for a player to ever have to ask off the field. I keep them from getting tired, so they don't have to ask.

signed,
Fran

That guy's a genius.:D

[JMSFan]

Additionally, me thinks that if Crumpler & Gonzales weren't playing with the qb's they are this season, both would be ahead of him as usual.

Actually Crumpler was ahead of him only last year. The 2005 season he was still 3rd best. And as far as comparing him and Gonzales during the 2005 season, look at his numbers. The only stat that Gonzales was better was total receptions. Shockey had 5 more td's,better avg, longer reception ( a 59 yarder ) than Tony also.
Look at the numbers, dont let your bias get in the way of reality.
Shockey is a great T.E.

[SLC93]

Actually Crumpler was ahead of him only last year. The 2005 season he was still 3rd best. And as far as comparing him and Gonzales during the 2005 season, look at his numbers. The only stat that Gonzales was better was total receptions. Shockey had 5 more td's,better avg, longer reception ( a 59 yarder ) than Tony also.
Look at the numbers, dont let your bias get in the way of reality.
Shockey is a great T.E.

You have a huge man crush, seek help. He can be a great tight end on your team. I would not have him on mine. Too many others to choose from that don't bring the baggage.

[GoOwls]

Here are the statements that were made by you and the others where I determined you werent rational...

Favpack--Shockey is tired - so Shockey wants out. He fails to see the critical nature of the play. How do you know this? Did he specifically tell you this?

SLC93--Shockey's an overated arse. He has been since day one & it will never change. You cant say that as a fact. You dont know him personally.

Your post--but I agree with D-Daddy that todays players, in general, lack the grit that players I grew up watching in the 60's and early 70's had.--
Damn embarrassing.....
Embarassing to who? Just you I guess. And how do they lack the grit? Players are bigger, stronger,and faster than they ever were in the 60's or 70's.

Truth is none of you knew the reason that Shockey came out of the game, so it made your statements look really rediculous.

It appears that your definition of "rational" is, "if I say it it's all good, if you say it you're stupid".

Youngster, you're confusing opinions with rationality. You have opinions and so do I and the others. Just because you have declared yourself king of all you survey, doesn't make you right...in fact... your "irrational" reasoning and conjectures expose you for what you are......A kid with a keyboard.

[SLC93]

It appears that your definition of "rational" is, "if I say it it's all good, if you say it you're stupid".

Youngster, you're confusing opinions with rationality. You have opinions and so do I and the others. Just because you have declared yourself king of all you survey, doesn't make you right...in fact... your "irrational" reasoning and conjectures expose you for what you are......A kid with a keyboard.

Well played :D

[JMSFan]

It appears that your definition of "rational" is, "if I say it it's all good, if you say it you're stupid".

Youngster, you're confusing opinions with rationality. You have opinions and so do I and the others. Just because you have declared yourself king of all you survey, doesn't make you right...in fact... your "irrational" reasoning and conjectures expose you for what you are......A kid with a keyboard.

So now you have changed your stance from your statements being facts to being opinions? If we are all allowed to voice our opinions, then I stated mine about the things you said.
And no where in any of my posts did the word " stupid " ever come up.
Here is a vocabulary word for you. There will be a quiz on it later on, so study up.

ir·ra·tion·al

1. without the faculty of reason; deprived of reason.
2. without or deprived of normal mental clarity or sound judgment.
3. not in accordance with reason; utterly illogical: irrational arguments.
4. not governed by a fair consideration of facts or evidence;

The statements that each of you made about this subject fit this definition.
Thats just my opinion..... I could be wrong.

[GoOwls]

So now you have changed your stance from your statements being facts to being opinions? If we are all allowed to voice our opinions, then I stated mine about the things you said.
And no where in any of my posts did the word " stupid " ever come up.
Here is a vocabulary word for you. There will be a quiz on it later on, so study up.

ir·ra·tion·al

1. without the faculty of reason; deprived of reason.
2. without or deprived of normal mental clarity or sound judgment.
3. not in accordance with reason; utterly illogical: irrational arguments.
4. not governed by a fair consideration of facts or evidence;

The statements that each of you made about this subject fit this definition.
Thats just my opinion..... I could be wrong.

Don't worry...you are...:eek: (wrong, that is)

[JMSFan]

Don't worry...you are...:eek: (wrong, that is)


opinions are never wrong, only a misinterpretation or denial of facts are wrong.

[dragonsdaddy]

opinions are never wrong, only a misinterpretation or denial of facts are wrong.

in what parallel universe do you live where opinions can't be wrong?

[JMSFan]

in what parallel universe do you live where opinions can't be wrong?

the same one where unless Shockey "got a emergency hangnail on the 13 yd out route, it was simply fatigue."

[dragonsdaddy]

the same one where unless Shockey "got a emergency hangnail on the 13 yd out route, it was simply fatigue."

since he played 2-3 plays later, and he didn't limp off, or even get hit, fatigue is the most likely reason. hey, i'm sure i would have tapped out too. you don't seem to recognize, or care if you do, that shocker is of the new breed of player. no one has contradicted that john mackey or ditka, or almost any player from their era, would have to have a compound fracture before they could be removed from the field. these player first(shocker) types are probably the main reason ditka wanted out of coaching, in the first place. i guess the old saying describes shocker-"he's he!! when he's well-------"

[JMSFan]

since he played 2-3 plays later, and he didn't limp off, or even get hit, fatigue is the most likely reason. hey, i'm sure i would have tapped out too. you don't seem to recognize, or care if you do, that shocker is of the new breed of player. no one has contradicted that john mackey or ditka, or almost any player from their era, would have to have a compound fracture before they could be removed from the field. these player first(shocker) types are probably the main reason ditka wanted out of coaching, in the first place. i guess the old saying describes shocker-"he's he!! when he's well-------"

Since, more than likely you were not one the sidelines as a player, coach or waterboy, and did not speak with him personally, then you dont know what happened, then the hangnail statement was stupid. Just my opinion.