Sketch Soland

naw, bonds has his own wing in the sportsdouche of the century HOF

This thread needs to die right now. See this post

I don think you get it: Mike Sherman snorts wasabi with Swedish Albino women.

I hear Sherman's dating Marilyn Manson.

It took me a while but I knew this thread reminded me of something

please tell me you left off the "/sarcasm" here.

I agree This about sums everything up. It's about his football performance and if that can improve or if it can't/won't, what we do with him then. All else that doesn't have a direct bearing on this is immaterial.

Perhaps I am reading too much into it. That's certainly possible. My point is that people are flying off the handle because "Mcgahee is a moron". Really? Are ya sure? Hardly a newsflash. There has been so much "Are the Bills going to move speculation?" around here from every corner that everyone is super sensitive to the least little twitch, and I can understand that as I would freak the phuck out if it did happen. But you got to keep things in perspective, imo... LOL, maybe so....

And I certainly hope that Marv Levy in Co. use their heads and not their hearts and hurt feelings in assessing how best McGahee can help the Bills win, whether that being playing on the field or traded to another team or whatever. Pure zeal does not a playoff team make, and certainly stringing a player up by his ball hair for comments in a penthouse interview (that no one has even read fully, btw) is not the way to come to sound decisions about a football teams future.

For Dawgg -- an act of Reading Comprehension.

So he's a moron. What's new? Everyone has known that for years. What's your point? You scream "MORON" and I say the average NFL player is not exactly a superstring theorist or a semantic tactician. That doesn't prevent some of them from being rather good. The question should be about McGahee's production or lack thereof. Screaming "MORON" sidesteps the question of his effectiveness on the football field, which, to this point, has been rather lacking, imo. So far, his special brand of "moron" has not produced consistent results on the football field. That is my problem with him.

I dare you to read the last sentence of my post. I dare you. Okay, I'll paste it in this one just for you: "No one ever thought McGahee was mensa material". I'll translate that for you: McGahee is not an intelligent human being. I wonder what it takes to, you know, convince people that they should read through the whole post before they respond.... So McGahee is not the sharpest knife in the drawer. Everyone knows this and has known it since day one when he opened his mouth. What makes anything different now?

Hey Dave McBride, trot out that grueling "McGahee is a moron" thread again!!

Okay, here's the quote as per WGN: "When asked about the possibility of an NFL team in Toronto, McGahee said, "That would be a good situation. Toronto is a beautiful place. But if they're going to put a team there, they should just bring the Buffalo Bills to Toronto. Case closed." Does the definition of "if" lack clarity here? They asked what he thought about the possibility of an NFL team in Toronto, and McGahee replied that if they are going to put a team there, they should just bring the Bills to Toronto (the "should" not bolded in this sentence is in context of the hypothetical "if", before anyone gets their panties in a twist.) McGahee is answering a hypothetical question with a hypothetical answer. He does not say the Bills should move to Toronto or that he wants the Bills specifically to move to Toronto. His point is that it wouldn't make practical sense to have a team in Buffalo and Toronto, considering Buffalo gets a good amount of fans from the Canadian area. Even McGahee knows this. Now is he going to win the brainiac of the year award for making this comment? No, it was rather tactless, especially since people are just dying to string him up for a relatively throwaway comment. Rendering moral judgment from the anonymity of a message board about someone you don't even know is retarded. Who are you to wag your finger? The only thing that matters is his performance on the field and his preparation/committment to playing and winning football games. If that is subpar, then lets get someone else who isn't subpar in these areas. But his sexual habits are not our concern as Bills fans and we certainly don't have any privelege to condemn him because of them. No, hardly retarded. Brash, Overly Cocky, Arrogant, sure, especially for a RB who is generally considered to have "under performed" for most of his career. See, now you're getting somewhere. This potentially goes to his performance on field and preparation/committment to that performance and to winning football games. Nothing that wasn't patently obvious to any observant Bills fans for a long time now. No one has ever thought McGahee was mensa material.

Yes. That's what happens when someone creates a "new thread". Others read it and post their most salient reaction to the OP. I find your kind of kneejerk Witch Hunt BS to be rather maudlin and overdramatic. As several people in this thread have noted, you failed to notice the two or three rather complementary comments he made about Bills fans etc., while also stretching the context of the disputed quote. You care more about stirring the proverbial pot than actual reasoned debate about a player's field worth/future benefits/pros and cons.

This is the umpteenth pointless spectulation thread on Youboty, similar to the McCargo threads. Are we concerned? Slightly, but lots of rookies don't produce their first year. Is there high expectations for him? Yes, as there would be for any rookie, especially one some consider a "steal" at his draft placement. But what is the point of this thread? Until he actually sees some serious playing time we won't have anything to even speculate about, and if he never sees serious playing time, the question will become moot now won't it?

So, we want a guy who will "run like a mad man" and thus be "oft-injured"?

*Gets up in Arms! REAL UP IN ARMS! My Arms are so UP!! RAH RAH UP IN ARMS RABBLE RABBLE* *yawn*

Even Mort knows a setup when he sees one LOL

so true.

/thread

Yes, well said. This is the reasonable viewpoint to take, imo.

*cries into the dark night air, the wind, accentuating his call to the abysmal depths!*

so sensitive aren't you? Because we traded back into the 1st round to get him, and the general consensus seems to be that the light was beginning to come on when he got injured. It's also a latent hope that he will be the answer or at least a big part of the answer to shore up our internal D. Again, I don't see anybody enshrining him in Canton. I do see a lot of people with high expectations and hopes based upon the little time he has played so far. I think you are over exaggerating all the supposed "McCargo Ballwashing" that you see going on. So, you started a whole thread to say that you can't know that someone is going to perform well until they actually perform? Because that's what this thread is: a marvelous exercise in obviousness

so you just don't expect him to be a quality starter next year but he will pan out? that is certainly true. but so are all young players/rookies. what's so different about mccargo? that doesn't mean that he won't be a quality starter next year. he has to play so we can find out. when you invest a 1st round pick on a player you have to expect to count on him to be a "quality starter". Otherwise what is the point of drafting someone so high? Now that you are elaborating on your initial statement i don't have to read so much into your opinion. No ballwashing involved. No one knows how good or bad mcCargo is going to be but to render judgment either way based on 5 games is absurd. That was my point.