Will shockey be a saint?

JKool · 05-13-2008, 12:55 PM

I hope I didn't imply that I don't find it interesting, because I do (well, some of it anyway). I was just offering a positive suggestion for those who don't - rather than try and kill it, try and redirect it.

I don't think it will die, exactly because (some of) it is interesting.

JKool · 05-13-2008, 12:57 PM

Also, I'm not clear on how a vote changes the discussion regarding Shockey at all. Even if the probability that he'll be a Saint (and not merely people's opinion regarding the probability he'll be a Saint) drops to near zero, the discussion regarding his "value" to the team could still be very interesting.

CantonLegend · 05-13-2008, 05:53 PM

Originally Posted by JKool

Also, I'm not clear on how a vote changes the discussion regarding Shockey at all. Even if the probability that he'll be a Saint (and not merely people's opinion regarding the probability he'll be a Saint) drops to near zero, the discussion regarding his "value" to the team could still be very interesting.

the value of him isnt in question....i read several posts under the shockey thread and it was mostly very interesting...but much of the interesting posts had little to do with shockey...the argument about him went back and forth..he's worth too much...hes a cancer....hes a great target....hes a better blocker.....he makes YAC...all of these arguments were tossed around with different wording...i liked the post but after all of that...i think its time that we think about something else...after all..if most of the ppl truely think that shockey will be a saint then the discussion will go on....im merely trying to help ppl move on and not get dissappointed if the deal doesnt go down...believe u me....i want him....but i dont think its gonna happen

Euphoria · 05-13-2008, 06:59 PM

Giants didn't need him to win the SB... so we don't need his crap to win it either. We need D in order to do anything worth a damn. Sending any more picks other than a 4th round is shooting ourselves in the foot for the future. We'll need picks next year to fix what we find a problem this offseason.

JKool · 05-13-2008, 08:20 PM

The Giants didn't need any of our players to win the SB... I'm sure it doesn't follow from that that we don't need them to win a SB.

I'm inclined to agree that a second day draft pick is about all I'd be willing to part with.

I also agree that our D needed the most improvement. By all accounts, the D has been addressed. I'd still like to see a Safety, how about you?

I know no one is opposed to adding good players. You put the puzzle together as you can, even if (and no matter how much) you'd prefer to place certain pieces first.

Euphoria · 05-13-2008, 08:33 PM

Originally Posted by JKool

The Giants didn't need any of our players to win the SB... I'm sure it doesn't follow from that that we don't need them to win a SB.

I'm inclined to agree that a second day draft pick is about all I'd be willing to part with.

I also agree that our D needed the most improvement. By all accounts, the D has been addressed. I'd still like to see a Safety, how about you?

I know no one is opposed to adding good players. You put the puzzle together as you can, even if (and no matter how much) you'd prefer to place certain pieces first.

I am not opposed to adding good players either but the point can be made that Shockey isn't a good player because of his 'locker room' antics (and lack off for no shows in camp and practice). That isn't being a team player and helping win a SB. Yeah yeah sure he can change.

Of course the guy wants out of town and more money. He gave his team crap and his coaches crap for years and he gets hurt and the team goes on to win a SB without one of there supposedly stars. If he ment that much to the team they would have collapsed. Yeah he won't feel good about going get his ring that he didn't earn or help his team win it from the coach he bad mouth.

Oh what fun that will be to get up and get handed a ring from a coach you bad mouthed and you didn't even put on the uniform and help your team win. NICE.

SaintFanInATLHELL · 05-13-2008, 08:37 PM

Canton: The other thread had almost died. But you came back stirring the pot. Shockey's not here. There's no point in speculating on the guy. All that can be said has been said on the subject. I think folks are just tired.

JKool on the safety: I think KK is the guy. Let's not forget he had 6 picks for Cincy in 2006 leading all safeties in the league. Guy has a nose for the ball. Let Bullocks sit and all will be well.

SFIAH

pakowitz · 05-13-2008, 08:54 PM

the giants also didnt need Tiki Barber to win the SB either.. but their running game went to crap without him... just b/c they won a superbowl without certian players doesnt mean they were a better team..

CantonLegend · 05-13-2008, 09:46 PM

Originally Posted by pakowitz

the giants also didnt need Tiki Barber to win the SB either.. but their running game went to crap without him... just b/c they won a superbowl without certian players doesnt mean they were a better team..

its dumb to say that certain players make or break a team...but its also obvious that good players make teams better....i hate that ppl think the giants were better without him.....the giants were not better without him...the won the super bowl because of their defense....not because of their backup tight end....i hate to say it but that argument is bs....that aside...this is not another shockey thread and i didnt stir ne thing...except with this post...other ppl bring up stuff that is irrelevant in this thread....is he going to be a saint or not...if u wanna talk about his value/talent/criticism use the jeremy shockey thread

QBREES9 · 05-13-2008, 11:59 PM

oh my god please let it END !!!!!

View Poll Results: Will Jeremy Shockey ever play for New Orleans?
Yes	15	38.46%
No	24	61.54%
Voters: 39. You may not vote on this poll

05-13-2008, 12:55 PM	#21
JKool 1000 Posts + Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 2,423	Re: Will shockey be a saint? I hope I didn't imply that I don't find it interesting, because I do (well, some of it anyway). I was just offering a positive suggestion for those who don't - rather than try and kill it, try and redirect it. I don't think it will die, exactly because (some of) it is interesting.

05-13-2008, 12:57 PM	#22
JKool 1000 Posts + Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 2,423	Re: Will shockey be a saint? Also, I'm not clear on how a vote changes the discussion regarding Shockey at all. Even if the probability that he'll be a Saint (and not merely people's opinion regarding the probability he'll be a Saint) drops to near zero, the discussion regarding his "value" to the team could still be very interesting.

05-13-2008, 05:53 PM	#23
CantonLegend 1000 Posts + Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Canton, Ohio Posts: 2,685 Blog Entries: 2	Re: Will shockey be a saint? Originally Posted by JKool Also, I'm not clear on how a vote changes the discussion regarding Shockey at all. Even if the probability that he'll be a Saint (and not merely people's opinion regarding the probability he'll be a Saint) drops to near zero, the discussion regarding his "value" to the team could still be very interesting. the value of him isnt in question....i read several posts under the shockey thread and it was mostly very interesting...but much of the interesting posts had little to do with shockey...the argument about him went back and forth..he's worth too much...hes a cancer....hes a great target....hes a better blocker.....he makes YAC...all of these arguments were tossed around with different wording...i liked the post but after all of that...i think its time that we think about something else...after all..if most of the ppl truely think that shockey will be a saint then the discussion will go on....im merely trying to help ppl move on and not get dissappointed if the deal doesnt go down...believe u me....i want him....but i dont think its gonna happen
	"deal with it or you can go play the saints and get trounced by 30 and you won't have to worry about it."-colin cowherd

05-13-2008, 06:59 PM	#24
Euphoria 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Hollywood, CA Posts: 7,601 Blog Entries: 5	Re: Will shockey be a saint? Giants didn't need him to win the SB... so we don't need his crap to win it either. We need D in order to do anything worth a damn. Sending any more picks other than a 4th round is shooting ourselves in the foot for the future. We'll need picks next year to fix what we find a problem this offseason.

Latest Blogs
2023 New Orleans Saints: Training Camp Last Blog: 08-01-2023 By: MarchingOn Puck the Fro Browl! Last Blog: 02-05-2023 By: neugey CFP: "Just Keep Doing What You're Doing" Last Blog: 12-08-2022 By: neugey

05-13-2008, 08:20 PM	#25
JKool 1000 Posts + Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 2,423	Re: Will shockey be a saint? The Giants didn't need any of our players to win the SB... I'm sure it doesn't follow from that that we don't need them to win a SB. I'm inclined to agree that a second day draft pick is about all I'd be willing to part with. I also agree that our D needed the most improvement. By all accounts, the D has been addressed. I'd still like to see a Safety, how about you? I know no one is opposed to adding good players. You put the puzzle together as you can, even if (and no matter how much) you'd prefer to place certain pieces first.
	"... I was beating them with my eyes the whole game..." - Aaron Brooks

05-13-2008, 08:33 PM	#26
Euphoria 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Hollywood, CA Posts: 7,601 Blog Entries: 5	Re: Will shockey be a saint? Originally Posted by JKool The Giants didn't need any of our players to win the SB... I'm sure it doesn't follow from that that we don't need them to win a SB. I'm inclined to agree that a second day draft pick is about all I'd be willing to part with. I also agree that our D needed the most improvement. By all accounts, the D has been addressed. I'd still like to see a Safety, how about you? I know no one is opposed to adding good players. You put the puzzle together as you can, even if (and no matter how much) you'd prefer to place certain pieces first. I am not opposed to adding good players either but the point can be made that Shockey isn't a good player because of his 'locker room' antics (and lack off for no shows in camp and practice). That isn't being a team player and helping win a SB. Yeah yeah sure he can change. Of course the guy wants out of town and more money. He gave his team crap and his coaches crap for years and he gets hurt and the team goes on to win a SB without one of there supposedly stars. If he ment that much to the team they would have collapsed. Yeah he won't feel good about going get his ring that he didn't earn or help his team win it from the coach he bad mouth. Oh what fun that will be to get up and get handed a ring from a coach you bad mouthed and you didn't even put on the uniform and help your team win. NICE.
	E U P H O R I A

05-13-2008, 08:37 PM	#27
SaintFanInATLHELL The Professor Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Lithonia, GA Posts: 2,773	Re: Will shockey be a saint? Canton: The other thread had almost died. But you came back stirring the pot. Shockey's not here. There's no point in speculating on the guy. All that can be said has been said on the subject. I think folks are just tired. JKool on the safety: I think KK is the guy. Let's not forget he had 6 picks for Cincy in 2006 leading all safeties in the league. Guy has a nose for the ball. Let Bullocks sit and all will be well. SFIAH

05-13-2008, 08:54 PM	#28
pakowitz The Dark Overlord Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: dirty south Posts: 3,450	Re: Will shockey be a saint? the giants also didnt need Tiki Barber to win the SB either.. but their running game went to crap without him... just b/c they won a superbowl without certian players doesnt mean they were a better team..

05-13-2008, 09:46 PM	#29
CantonLegend 1000 Posts + Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Canton, Ohio Posts: 2,685 Blog Entries: 2	Re: Will shockey be a saint? Originally Posted by pakowitz the giants also didnt need Tiki Barber to win the SB either.. but their running game went to crap without him... just b/c they won a superbowl without certian players doesnt mean they were a better team.. its dumb to say that certain players make or break a team...but its also obvious that good players make teams better....i hate that ppl think the giants were better without him.....the giants were not better without him...the won the super bowl because of their defense....not because of their backup tight end....i hate to say it but that argument is bs....that aside...this is not another shockey thread and i didnt stir ne thing...except with this post...other ppl bring up stuff that is irrelevant in this thread....is he going to be a saint or not...if u wanna talk about his value/talent/criticism use the jeremy shockey thread
	"deal with it or you can go play the saints and get trounced by 30 and you won't have to worry about it."-colin cowherd

05-13-2008, 11:59 PM	#30
QBREES9 Moderator Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: New Haven Ct Posts: 23,985	Re: Will shockey be a saint? oh my god please let it END !!!!!