Watch out, Joh--er, Ocho Cinco--some of those Baltimore players might try to hit you hard on that left shoulder...
man i love chad, hes the ****... i dont want that kinda behavior on my team, but hes entertaining on someone elses team, haha
chad has had to watch himself since he was a rookie...players are gunning for him every play i for one love trash talk
I think the name change is an embarassement I'm thrilled he's nowhere near Miami with his three ring circus.
I'll take him here. Hey, he's a circus off the field but on Sundays, when it counts, he's there producing. I find him entertaining.
I just don't want that type of guy period. Before the name change I was on the same page as you are, but this episode just speaks to his ego and the "me me me" need that he has.
Your right he does have a big ego but I'd still take him lol. The guy can flat-out play and he helps win games. In the end, we all want to win games, right?
At least for me not at the price of having low calibre people on the team. When Jimmy Johnson was here I was embarassed to be a Dolphin fan with all the thugs that he brought in.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with wanting good people on a team that you are encouraging your kid to watch along with you. I don't think athletes should get nearly the role model status that they do because a lot of them sure as hell don't deserve it but it's also what' wrong with the whole f'in system when those showboating clowns get all the attention and the dude that quietly plugs along and does a damn fine job gets overlooked and that's what kids see and that's what they emulate. Watch a high school game and look how the sportsmanship has just went down the crapper.
Good character is a nice thing to have but imo, it doesn't beat out having good talent. These guys can change games around and you want that on your team. They may act like ***-clowns off the field but they do what they're asked to on the field.
So you don't feel that the sharpie incident or the video camera thing was being an *** clown on the field? By virtue of changing his last name is making him a spectacle on the field. Every sports network keys on those types of things and that's what kids see they won't see the catch he makes for 20 yards where he just puts the ball on the ground and goes back to the huddle because it isn't sensational.
there is nothing wrong with being confident in who you are or what you can do. Talk is one thing - choreographed dances, hidden props & this funky *** name change are a complete different level.
Sadly drama, sensationalism & showboaters sell tickets more than hard work, dedication & consistency.
As long as he's not getting in trouble with the law and puts out 100% on the field and in training, he's fine in my book. Ocho may be a showboater but he works hard and produces.
Respectfully and with no offense to you - I disagree 100%, but that's what's great is we don't have to agree to engage in football talk.
I'm not sure what your bone of contention with Aqua's statement is. It's true. Chad Johnson's production far, far outweighs his antics, none of which are truly detrimental to the team, let alone criminal in nature. He wanted to have a custom name on the back of his jersey and found a way around NFL regulations. Big freaking deal. He'll change his name back after this season and the NFL will cash in with a new jersey run. (I might even buy one, because the name change appeals to my sense of humor.) Could you elaborate on your position?
He said that as long as a player was productive he didn't care what type of person he was. I disagree I feel that the caliber of person should make a difference. I'm speaking of the league as a whole not just Chad Johnson I think the name change is moronic and borders flat *** stupid and I think it's a mockery of the league and causes an unnecessary distraction.
This would be the problem: you thought Aqua was implying that he would excuse Terrell Owens' behavior in exchange for 14 TDs. That's not what he said. His statement was limited exclusively to Chad Johnson and the behavior he has exhibited to this point. You're applying his statement to situations it was never meant to address. No, Pacman Jones makes a mockery of the league. Chad Johnson has fun. Or do you really think wearing a jacket on the sidelines pre-game, wearing a removable nametag during pregame warmups and removing it before the game started, and holding up a sign that says "I love you mom and grandma" is really equivalent to potentially being the shooter in a stripclub gunfight that left a man paralyzed from the waist down?
I was including Chad Johnson in the first statement so it's 100% applicable for me. As a football fan I find 99% of his antics intolerable and I have no interest in seeing or hearing his antics and it irritates me that they trump other good plays in the evening news. Apples & Oranges. Adam Jones is a thug of low character. Chad Johnson just an attention whore that steals the light from the other skilled player around him that do their damn job without the antics.
But was not applicable for Aqua. You have to take his statement the way he intended it, not the way you want it to be intended. We're talking Communications 101 here, basic stuff. It's Chad Johnson's fault that ESPN covers his jacket instead of the game? Come on now. And, as a football fan, I find Chad Johnson's activities refreshing. Football should be fun. Johnson is clearly having fun out there, whether he's catching a 60 yard bomb or holding up a sign. Were the league filled with lunchpail-type stoics, it would be less engaging to watch. When the players have fun, I have fun. When they look like a fart just drifted in on the breeze, I get tempted to switch to the other game.
I said I disagreed with what he said no more and no less than that. I disagreed in the spirit he meant it and in the broader scope of my overall interpretation. So is it a rule that I have to make my responses based on how you think I should interpret another persons statement? I really hope that isn't your intention. I find them annoying, irritating and the moment I see them I switch the channel. I like football basics I want to see the players make good plays get their asses back to the huddle to line up and do it again. If you need sensationalism to enjoy the sport maybe you should switch to soccer.
It is generally advisable to approach written statements from the perspective of the intent of their author. Nothing Johnson has ever done can possibly qualify as sensationalism. Get back to me when he tries to kill himself via drug overdose.
That really isn't the way it always works. I don't care how something is said it's 100% how I hear it that matters to me. I don't fully understand where you think you are qualified to offer me lessons on communication. By your definition if a man makes an lewd advance toward a woman and means it in a flattering way (his interpretation) she isn't allowed to be offended because that wasn't the spirit he meant it? Now let's go back to what Aqua said: and my response Notice my statement was a direct response to his statement. His opinion was that chad johnson can do "whatever the hell he wants" based on productivity and in my opinion I disagree that he should not be able to do whatever he wants based on productivity. Now my opinion spreads further than Johnson, but in my response I indicated no other player, team or situation other than his statement about Johnson. Oh and if you want to go back to sensationalism - anything done in order to excite a response.
You disagreed with an implication he did not make, that he is willing to excuse any and all behavior in the name of on-field production. Furthermore, you've just changed your story: you said in post #32 that you are speaking of NFL-wide conduct--"I'm speaking of the league as a whole not just Chad Johnson"--while now you're claiming to speak solely about the conduct of Chad Johnson. Okay, this is getting stupid. I'm done.
I didn't change s**t. It's only now stupid because you're failing to win your communications lecture. He implied that he didn't care what Chad Johnson does - I disagree!!! Why is that so hard? I 100% meant it toward Chad Johnson which is what Aqua was referring to. But on the same hand, I 100% mean it league wide for any and all similar situations. Why can't you accept that what I find entertaining and on the flip side annoying may not be what you find entertaining / annoying? Let it the hell go
I really hope somebody (Ed Reed) knocks him the **** out. Might be the only way to actually knock some sense into the asshat.
Since when does Sensationalism=Drug Overdose This guy wants to have ALL the attention ALL the time. What an arrogant little man. He really needs to just put his gold-plated pacifier in and STFU I have two very good friends that are die-hard Bengals fans, they are both very very embarrased and extremely tired of his antics.
