User talk:Pats1/Archives/2008/February

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

Edit to Wes Welker article

Why did you remove the following from the lead of the Wes Welker article: "He played collegiately at Texas Tech."? Your summary related to this edit gives no indication. →Wordbuilder (talk) 00:12, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. That was a quick reply. I'm hoping for a great game on Sunday. →Wordbuilder (talk) 00:19, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Mitt

You know, if he were elected, he would be the first president to be named mm mm mm mmitt. :-) RC-0722 communicator/kills 01:57, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't see that in your dictionary, so I'm kind of lost :/ Pats1 T/C 02:41, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
It's making fun of how hard it is for people who stammer to pronounce his first name. RC-0722 communicator/kills 04:33, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
How is Mitt hard to pronounce?►Chris NelsonHolla! 05:10, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
It's making fun of how people who stammer hold the M too long. RC-0722 communicator/kills 13:20, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
BTW, doesn't he live up there in the inner Mitten? RC-0722 communicator/kills 13:23, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
Or is he going to pull an Al Gore and say he invented Mittens? Or the CD Romney? :-) RC-0722 communicator/kills 03:10, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
Too much? BTW, I like Mitt. RC-0722 communicator/kills 05:18, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Robert Meachem

Yo, Robert Meachem's article is currently located at Robert Meachem (football player) and Robert Meachem is just a re-direct to it. Want to move it back for me?►Chris NelsonHolla! 19:38, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Same with Tony Hunt (American football).►Chris NelsonHolla! 20:13, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Actually, it might be smarter to reverse these; if we ever had articles on other people named Tony Hunt or Robert Meachem, it would easier to make the names into disambiguation pages. GlassCobra 06:32, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

That makes zero sense. You don't disambiguate articles because it might be necessary later; you disambiguate when it is necessary. By your reasoning, we'd disambiguate every article now just in case. Bill Clinton (politician) and Mother Teresa (humanitarian), etc. And you're an admin...►Chris NelsonHolla! 08:25, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
If we ever had another Robert Meachem come around, then we'd move Meachem back and disambiguate the other. Not difficult. Pats1 T/C 12:10, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Question

Hey there Pats! I have a question for you. In regards to Stan Kroenke, everywhere else I have looked, including the websites for the Denver Nuggets, Colorado Avalanche, and even Forbes, have him listed as E Stanley Kroenke. I may be a bit confused on the style of the article name, and was hoping you could explain it to me. Feel free to reply here, or on my talk page. Thanks! :) Jmlk17 22:42, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Sunday

As a Texans (previously Oilers) fan, I have to pull for the AFC team, so I just have to say…Go Pats! —Travistalk 06:59, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Wow, your support is a rare thing from fans of other teams these days. Can't remember teams getting much more universal hate than the Pats have this season, never mind as many attempts to knock down and distract (*cough* Specter *cough*). Thanks. Pats1 T/C 12:08, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

GO PATS! Stanselmdoc (talk) 14:59, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

I pick the Giants. Why? Because they have the ability to perform the L shaped ambush. RC-0722 communicator/kills 16:18, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

GO GIANTS! Burner0718(Jibba Jabba!) 18:20, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Nervous yet? The Giants are putting a pretty good drive together. --B (talk) 23:42, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

My definition of nervousness changed completely after the last drive of the Ravens game. Pats1 T/C 23:49, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
GO GIANTS! RC-0722 communicator/kills 00:08, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
GO WHOEVER NEEDS TO WIN FOR ME TO GET POINTS IN MY SQUARES POOL! --B (talk) 00:22, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

(Suprised grunt) RC-0722 communicator/kills 00:25, 4 February 2008 (UTC) You should be nervous, GO Giants--Rockies 17Holla at Ya Boy! 02:16, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Congrats, guys. Really. Surprisingly, I'm in OK spirits right now. Since the bye week, the Patriots have had only two real solid wins: against the Bills and Steelers. They did what they needed to do in the other games, but it wasn't going to fly in this one. Like Mike Vrabel said before the playoffs, Belichick-coached teams usually get better after Thanksgiving. This one did not. Their undefeated regular season still stands, but it looks like they'll be still be sitting at Mercury's door. What this team has been able to accomplish this decade has been tremendous, and it doesn't look to be ending anytime soon. People sometimes forget Larry Bird and the Celtics lost twice in the NBA Finals during the 1980s. There are simply times when it doesn't work out. The Giants won fair and square, and that I'm perfectly content with. Enjoy your win. The Pats have a month of offseason work to be catching up with. Obviously they would have preferred to be doing it even later, but hell. Enough ranting. Pats1 T/C 03:17, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
The Giants' game plan reminded me a lot of a Virginia Tech gameplan - lots of running, shorten the game on offense, very aggressive on defense. All that was missing was the punt block. --B (talk) 03:19, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Wow, you're in much better spirits than I, and the Pats are only my AFC team; by virtue of my state of birth I must be a Packers fan first (that didn't work out so well this year either). Frankly, I was hoping that you'd delete the main page in order that blasphemous, if true, shit like "the New York Giants defeat the New England Patriots" might go away. If you do, you might be desysopped, but you'll also earn my coveted {{Barnstar of the Hoodie}}. Joe 03:24, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Hey, Pats1, Sorry your team lost but I lost a lot of respect for Bill and Tom Brady for walking off and not congratulating Eli and the Giants. It was a good game which is all you can ask for in the long run. KellyAna (talk) 03:24, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
I think that was due to the fact that it was complete chaos on the field, with fans running around and such, so at that time teams are generally instructed to get out of there. Pats1 T/C 03:26, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
That would make sense but Bill's locker room interview with Chris Meyers didn't help my opinion of him. He is a considerable sore loser. I know you aren't but Coach Bill sure is. KellyAna (talk) 03:51, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

I just wanted to say sorry for your Pats lost even though I hate the Pats and I wanted the Giants to win--Yankees10 03:27, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

I hate to say it, wait no I don't. Giannts won! YAY! RC-0722 communicator/kills 03:33, 4 February 2008 (UTC) BOOM - GIANTS Niyant (talk) 03:35, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

This is so much better than the Patriots having a losing season. It's worth it to see them get this far and fail.►Chris NelsonHolla! 03:42, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
I agree, but only because of what you compare it to. I guess. Pats1 T/C 03:44, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
People, can we have a moment of silence? Show some respect! Justin(c)(u) 03:54, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Nah, I prefer an applause for the underdog Giants. That and Mannings first ring. BTW pats, you can always get a combine and race the Amish... RC-0722 communicator/kills 04:00, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
I'm supposed to stop screaming now??? LOL! I'm a Steelers girl. I can't have that skinny Brady boy tying my Terry. I'm sorry, I'm just too happy but I do feel bad for Pats1. It sucks to be on that end. KellyAna (talk) 04:03, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
I find it hard to feel sorry for the pats after the spygate incident. Anywho, I guess the Steelers are OK but I'm a Chiefs/Titans/Cowboys person. RC-0722 communicator/kills 04:09, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Oh, you said pats1. Sorry 'bout that. Yeah I do feel sorry for pats1, glasscobra, and nelson. Maybe next year... RC-0722 communicator/kills 04:12, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

To be honest, I felt that it was a pretty cruddy game all around. Way more fumbles and turnovers than there should be in a game supposedly between the best two teams in the league. Certainly the Giants played well, and for that, they should be congratulated. Eli Manning managed not to choke, against all odds, though I'm fairly sure he had his eyes closed on that 3rd and long with under two minutes in the fourth quarter.

However, everyone's focus is (rightly) on the Patriots. This was completely and totally their game to lose. Most notably, it was an utter failure of the Patriot offensive line, which, until this game, was undeniably the best in the league. Yet for some reason they were unable to protect Tom Brady whatsoever, resulting in several sacks and yard losses. This forced Brady to play an absolutely subpar game, snapping off throws in a hurry since he couldn't trust his line to protect him, as was their job.

My conclusion? Probably a fluke. 10-6 teams don't win Super Bowls. The better team lost tonight. I consider myself to not be a sore loser, though, and as I said before, the Giants deserve to be congratulated. There's always next year. GlassCobra 04:36, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

The better team in the regular season, but not on February 3rd. In the playoffs, Giants defense held the Buccs to 14, Cowboys to 17, and the Packers to 20 points. Along with this offense, I see a good team, myself. Litanss (talk) 01:21, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
"The better team lost tonight?" I'm not so sure. Week 17, and now the Super Bowl.. ever since that near game back against the Ravens, the Patriots haven't been the same team that had been blowing everybody out at the beginning of the season. The Giants seemed to be the one team that could actually go head-to-head with the Patriots consistently. They deserved to win Week 17, but didn't. They got their due tonight. The defensive line was just destroying Brady the first three quarters of the game (and the 10-yard sack on the last drive) and to hold an 18-0 team to one scoring play in the first 57 minutes of a game is definitely deserving of some long overdue credit.
I find it really unfortunate that after the night is over, the story is going to be how the Patriots ruined a chance to go 19-0, rather than the amazing effort put out there by the Giants. Not to degrade the Patriots amazing season in any way, but the Giants aren't getting enough credit. To go toe-to-toe with an 18-0 team (mind, the Giants were 12-6) in what could arguably be the most important game in the long history of the entire NFL, two touchdown underdogs, and win a great game.. I can't believe I'm actually saying this for a New York-based team (it makes no sense that Eli said "this one is for the city of New York.." you don't even play in the STATE of New York), but New York deserves all the credit for this one win that the Patriots got over the course of the whole season.
Whether you're a Giants fan, Patriots fan, or an impartial fan such as myself, you've gotta applaud the Giants for what they did in this game, knowing all that was at stake for both teams and trying to avoid being the Patriots' doormat for the second time in a month (remember, the Patriots became the first 16-0 team with a win over the Giants), the pressure on the Giants was immense. There isn't anybody who can say that the Giants didn't deserve this championship. Ksy92003(talk) 05:09, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
I would actually agree the better team of the season lost tonight. I would say the Giants outplayed them tonight and I don't think you can argue that, but in my 20 years of living, the 2007 Patriots are the most overall dominant team I've ever seen.►Chris NelsonHolla! 05:12, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
As a fellow football-related article editor, I just wanted to say, "Ha ha!" Giants! No hard feelings. :) Useight (talk) 05:42, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
The better post-Thanksgiving team won last night. That's what matters. There wasn't much, as a Patriots fan, to hang your hat on from the second half of the season. Especially Moss. He dropped off the face of the Earth after his 4 TDs in Buffalo. This is, believe it or not, a crucial offseason for the Pats. They have the #7 pick, a second rounder, and 2 third rounders. Once they do something with Colvin's, Stallworth's, and Eckel's (he had a $5M LTBE to give them $5M of cap room in 2008, but he also has another $5M in 2008). They're going to have to make decisions on guys like A$ante and Moss, and all the sudden Moss doesn't look to be a lock for next season. Wesley the Amazing played his ass off all season long and would have easily been the MVP if the Pats had won. Guys like Chad Jackson and Brandon Meriweather are going to be thrust into situations we're they will need to perform like the high picks they were. Finally, Bruschi, Brown, Seau, and Rodney all need to make decisions. Personally, I wouldn't mind seeing a few of them leave (Brown obviously will, but didn't do anything this season). The pass defense of this team has absolutely sucked the past few seasons. Teams were shredding the middle of the field like crazy. Part of that is do to the competition committee and the "chuck" rule a few years ago. That means an aggressive, physical approach like the Pats had in 2001-03 with Law, Otis, Milloy, etc. won't work. If Colvin is able to restructure and stick around, then he'll obviously start at OLB with Vrabel. Inside is anyone's guess. If Seau and Bruschi come back, then maybe they can work something out like they had at the beginning of the year, with those two in to stop and run and AD in to either cover the middle or pass rush. So look for the Pats, if they keep the #7 pick, to take someone who can be a shut-down corner, or someone who can play an athletic ILB. It all depends, though, on what happens in March. Pats1 T/C 13:42, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
The funny part, now, is that nobody will talk about spygate or specter or any of that anymore. It would have been a justification for many fans if the Pats had won. Pats1 T/C 13:49, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Well yes, I admit that the most dominant team, the better team over the course of the season lost the Super Bowl, but based on how close Week 17 was, this game, and all the pressure, I'd have to say that the Giants were at least the closest team to being near the same level as the Patriots. The Giants were dominant last night; 14 points is the fewest scored by the Patriots this season, they had the fewest first-half total yards on the season for them, and again, the Giants' defensive line just destroyed Brady from the time between the 2nd-quarter touchdown on their opening drive to the drive in the fourth that resulted in Moss' touchdown catch.

The Patriots were the best team throughout the regular season, and the first two rounds of the playoffs. But although the score only indicates a 3-point swing, the Giants, the Giants were the more dominant team this time around. Ksy92003(talk) 14:18, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

The pats need to take there first round pick and draft Darren McFadden, Mike Hart, or Jamal Charles. Then they need to look at a MLB/DB. RC-0722 communicator/kills 15:48, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

The way Maroney has been running, there's no way the Pats take a RB that high. Pats1 T/C 15:51, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Well, Maroney's good, but he probably won't be great. But Darren McFadden, he has the possibility to be the next LJ or LT. This has always been my belief. You can't win championships by just passing. You have to be a balanced team; like the Steelers. Besides that, Charles and Hart will probably be there in the second or third round so there's no problem there. But you guys need to work on your running D. Now I don't know if he's leaving, but look at James Laurenaitis (is that how you spell it?) then. RC-0722 communicator/kills 16:33, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
BTW, you guys would have won if vince was your quarterback. And it's all because of the running ability (which vince needed to do more of this year). RC-0722 communicator/kills 17:01, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Or troy. RC-0722 communicator/kills 17:39, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Uh, yeah, I think I'll take Brady. Pats1 T/C 18:24, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Seriously. Brady is awesome. Vince Young is mildly retarded. Whether or not he could have escaped the pressure better, which I'm sure he could have, he's still so dumb he would've played a much worse game than Brady. When are teams going to realize that the really athletic but unintelligent quarterback is not the way to go?►Chris NelsonHolla! 18:38, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
I'd take Brady in a heartbeat too. GlassCobra 18:58, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Too bad McFadden will be long gone, while Charles and Hart won't go NEARLY that high.►Chris NelsonHolla! 18:18, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
A. If VY is "mildly retarded", then Brady is braindead. Maybe it's just because I've met them both and VY's a nice guy and Brady's a foul mouthed punk. B. I going out on a limb and say that back in 2006, you guys were rooting for USC and the seahawks. RC-0722 communicator/kills 20:14, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Vince Young SUCKS dude, deal with it.►Chris NelsonHolla! 21:05, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
I'd take Montana in his prime over Brady. Useight (talk) 21:23, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, the comeback kid, The Catch, Joe cool. Nelson, Lets see you run for over 200 yds. in the rose bowl against USC then turn around and pass for 200 in the same game. BTW, you don't have room to talk cuz your team (who only has two good players: Ginn and Ricky Williams) went 1-15. VY is a nice guy, I've met him. Brady is a foul mouthed punk. Besides, VY and troy have it where it really counts; they're both saved. Is Brady? No. Anywho, yeah montana is the best qb ever. RC-0722 communicator/kills 21:55, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Alright everybody, calm down. Lets not start throwing fuel to the fire. It was a great game. Nobody can deny that. But everybody has their opinions and not everybody thinks player A is a good player. Not to say that this has gotten uncivil, but let's make sure that we make our opinions and don't downplay the opinions of others. Ksy92003(talk) 23:17, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Amen. RC-0722 communicator/kills 23:24, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
It was a great game and I give the Pats all the credit they deserve. They had a great season and just couldn't finish it. I'm an Ohio State Buckeyes fan so I know all about teams that don't finish what they start. Burner0718(Jibba Jabba!) 23:29, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Requesting move

Hey, can you move Taitusi Lutui back to Deuce Lutui? He's the latter on the official site and NFL.com.►Chris NelsonHolla! 21:05, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

can you also move D. J. Williams (American football) to D.J. Williams and Sean Taylor (American football) to Sean Taylor, its pointless that the American football part is there--Yankees10 01:05, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

I did Sean Taylor--Yankees10 01:11, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

SB Parade

Re ack of ticker-tape parade on SB XXLII page: Since it flows from the paragraph re NYC's celebration, shouldn't it be allowed? (I do agree it belongs in the Giants season page too.) Anyway, just a thought: I put it back in, but if you still object, feel free to expunge it; I'm not vain. :-D –TashTish (talk) 06:15, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Addendum: I was reviewing the Giants season page, and considering it's all serious football, "on further review" it seemed really out of place there. IMHO, natch. –TashTish (talk) 06:24, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

3RR violation

Ecoleman56 (contribs)continues to edit war and revert edits even though myself and a couple of other editors have expressed why his edits are being reverted. In this process they have violated 3RR. Indianapolis City-County Council is the page in question. Thanks. HoosierStateTalk 23:07, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Meet the Press

FYI, I didn't know they said WAPAAH! on meet the press. :-D Sorry, I couldn't resist. Burner0718(Jibba Jabba!) 04:25, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Or make constant references to combines... BTW, you seem like you could use a break. Why don't you get a combine and go race the Amish? RC-0722 communicator/kills 16:25, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

New England Pats up for FAR

New England Patriots has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. AlexJ (talk) 20:30, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

1951 NFL Season by Team Template

Pats1-

Yes -- it was withdrawn by the nominator. I guess that he missed it.

Fruminous (talk) 03:41, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Further Allegations Section

I responded to your last entry on the 2008 season citing why I felt it was necessary. I asked that you start open a mediation cabal to just address the issue. You neither addressed my point nor did you start a mediation cabal. Please do not remove information without discussing it first. I am more than willing to compromise, but please answer my point about the timing of when the alleged incident was first reported on the articles talk page. Arnabdas (talk) 16:59, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. I still though didn't see your thoughts written on the discussion page regarding the timing of when the allegations were made. I agree with you on all points given, as stated on the discussion page, but felt that it should be included in the article with proper weight (small) simply because of the timing of when it occurred. The allegations did come forth during THIS season. Since you are an admin, I know you are obviously trying to do what's best. I think that as an admin though, you should step aside on this matter and defer it to someone else because there definitely is a conflict of interest on your part given your username and all. I am not saying that you are POV pushing at all, neither am I as someone who does admire Brady and the Patriots from teh Bledsoe/Parcells days despite my fandom of the Giants. I am just saying since we seem to be at an impasse we should have a 3rd opinion on it through mediation. If he or she agrees one way or the other I personally am ok with it either way. From an article's standpoint of the season, I think this is notable enough though. Arnabdas (talk) 15:32, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Requested move

Can you move kickoff returner to kick returner? I'll write in the article how it's technically a "kickoff returner" but the phrase "kick returner" is vastly more common. A quick search of Google returned about 26,000 results for "kickoff returner" and 457,000 for "kick returner."►Chris NelsonHolla! 04:40, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Also, can you move José F. Capellán to José Capellán? There is a José M. Capellán, but José F. Capellán has pitched 121 innings in the Majors since 2004 while José M. Capellán has never been out of the minors. As of now, one is clearly more notable than the other.►Chris NelsonHolla! 15:23, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Um nelson, I hate to barge in here like this but, Kickoff returner is the official name given to the position by the NFL. Henceforth, the article should be named "Kickoff returner" RC-0722 communicator/kills 17:23, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
It's also a far less common term and therefore one people are far less likely to search.►Chris NelsonHolla! 18:35, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
If you type 'em in the search box, they take you to the same place, so why shouldn't we use the official name? If we go with "Kick returner", then we'd have to merge the Punt returner article into it. Get my drift? RC-0722 communicator/kills 18:45, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
You are mistaken.►Chris NelsonHolla! 18:49, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Wea-ther man. How am I mistaken? A punt is a kick (drop kick); henceforth the person can technically be called a "kick returner". Now if we renamed the kickoff returner article kick returner, we would have to merge the punt retuner article into it because a punt is a kick; a drop kick. RC-0722 communicator/kills 19:08, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Except in football, a punt is not referred to as a kick. Therefore there is no confusion, because a punt return is always the return of a punt, and a kick return is always the return of a kickoff.►Chris NelsonHolla! 19:13, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
No, that includes football. Acording the official websters dictionary, a kick (in football) is defined as "To punt" Now, the NFL does not have the power to redefine words, so a punt can officially be classified as a kick; meaning it would have to be merged in to your "kick returner" article because the person returning the punt can be classified as a kick returner. Also, punt is football... jargon, if you will. Someone in europe or south america would classify a punt as a kick. We must remember that the english WP does not just serve the USA. Since this is pats1 talk page, why don't we ask him what he thinks. RC-0722 communicator/kills 19:22, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
The more common name takes precedent over the official name. See Burma for an example. Pats1 T/C 21:28, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Then, I think we should merge the punt returner article into the kick returner article (a merge I am not against); as metioned above. RC-0722 communicator/kills 03:43, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Not a good idea.►Chris NelsonHolla! 03:57, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Care to explain? RC-0722 communicator/kills 03:58, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Already have. Punt returners and kick returners are separate things in the football world, therefore it makes no sense to merge.►Chris NelsonHolla! 04:00, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Ahh, but the rest of the world (e.g. europeans) wouldn't know the difference. As I said before, the EN WP does not just serve the USA. Also, I would like to hear what pats1 has to say about the merge. RC-0722 communicator/kills 04:08, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Sorry to butt in here, but I think you should move this conversation to Talk:Kickoff returner. That way, more eyes can see it, and you wouldn't have to crowd Pats1's talk page. Ksy92003 (talk) 04:18, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Thread started. RC-0722 communicator/kills 04:23, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Zach

Okay man, listen to be very carefully. I am dead serious here. If Zach signs with New England, or if there is any news in that area leading up to him signing with someone, do not talk to me about it. Ever. Do not talk about Zach Thomas to me ever, as long as we both live. Ok?►Chris NelsonHolla! 03:14, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

So if he does sign, will you hate him, or will you ignore him and deny that he ever left? Pats1 T/C 12:31, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Neither. I just don't want to discuss it with you.►Chris NelsonHolla! 13:45, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
I'll take the latter then :D Pats1 T/C 21:21, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

RE:Green Bay Packers seasons

I am going to revert this edit [1]. When the parameter in the NFL project is filled in with "Template" then the template is categorized in Category:Unassessed National Football League articles but the NFL project template is set up so any non-article should be filled in with "NA" and then the template automatically reads the namespace and places it in Category:National Football League template pages or Category:National Football League image pages etc. Just wanted to let you know. – Gonzo fan2007 talk ♦ contribs 04:27, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Gotcha, feel free to revert me. Also, I added list-class parameter to the NFLproject template so Category:List-Class National Football League articles is slowly being filled. Hope that helps a little. « Gonzo fan2007 talk ♦ contribs 16:05, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
Ok Ill see what I can do in a couple hours, I gotta get going now, but Ill keep you updated! « Gonzo fan2007 talk ♦ contribs 16:07, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
Ok, I made it so you can either fill the parameter in with "NA" which will still do look for the articlespace and categorize it accordingly, or you can fill the parameter directly with "Template" which will also categorize the template in Category:National Football League template pages (I also made it so you can fill in "Category" directly, but again "NA" still works). If there is any other parameters you want, feel free to ask! « Gonzo fan2007 talk ♦ contribs 18:12, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Invite

Please accept this invite to join the Bruins WikiProject, a WikiProject dedicated to improving all articles associated with the Boston Bruins. Simply click here to accept!

STORMTRACKER 94 Go Sox! 17:12, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

AIM

Yo get on AIM when you see this, I got a question.►Chris NelsonHolla! 21:57, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Great new photos, but they need formatting

A new user has posted some great photos of Kellen Winslow II and Ken Dorsey on their respective pages. They need some formatting and maybe some cropping, but htey sure beat what we had before (no photo of Winslow and a pic of Dorsey's ass). As Wikipedia's top admin for NFL articles, can you take a look at them? I figure that you would know best how to fit them in. y'amer'can (wtf?) 13:30, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Y Done Pats1 T/C 22:25, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
Muchos grassy-ass. y'american (wtf?) 14:58, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Disruptive user

I think User:Stealing.Seconds could use a block. Check out some of his recent edits here. He's been uploading random pictures and using them, in part, to vandalize articles such as Matt Sinclair, J. R. Niklos and David Kimball.►Chris NelsonHolla! 21:40, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Come on man, don't be a slimy little shit like Florio.►Chris NelsonHolla! 23:01, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
No, it's more of the fact that I'd like to see some team busted for tampering. Sometime. One day. Maybe. Definitely maybe. Maybe they'll, you know, investigate it, fine them, take away a draft pick, question all of their past wins, call for their coach to be suspended, boo their players at the pro bowl, put asterisks next to all their records, feed a constant stream of stories through the media, be the most-talked about topic on all teams' message boards, have a senator call for an investigation, call them "cheaters," have past employees come out of the woodwork with baseless accusations, etc. You know. That kind of stuff that happens when a team breaks an NFL rule. Pats1 T/C 23:12, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Boo-fucking-hoo.►Chris NelsonHolla! 23:17, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Just sayin'. Seems pretty hypocritical of the NFL fan base. Pats1 T/C 23:18, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Every team tampers. Every one. Therefore no one loses any edge. Not every team films the other team for years and uses it to cheat. You need to just accept that this hatred for the Patriots is warranted because Belichick is an uber-douchebag. And you KNOW it's true. He knows it's true. So accept the repercussions.►Chris NelsonHolla! 23:26, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
All teams participate in some of form of questionable activity, whether its tampering, taping, artificial crowd noise, messing with the field, or what-not. I don't think the NFL should discriminate between what's acceptable rule-breaking and what isn't. They let the fans, licking their chops at the opportunity to take a whack at the Pats, dictate some of their actions. Goodell has even half-admitted to that -- he came down hard on the criminals and the Pats because it was hurting their public image. Or, consider this. Most (educated) think the Patriots believed they were operating within the letter of the rule, but not within the spirit of the rule. They did have a decent case, too. However, teams who are tampering sure as hell know they aren't operating within the letter of the rule. Yet the Patriots get the biggest penalty in league history, and no teams to date have been penalized for tampering. Pats1 T/C 23:37, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Wah.►Chris NelsonHolla! 23:39, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
As in "what" or as in "boo-hoo?" Pats1 T/C 00:17, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
As in "Waaaah" like a baby crying. You guys are like murderers bitching about people jaywalking.►Chris NelsonHolla! 00:20, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
More like jaywalkers bitching about people jaywalking. Pats1 T/C 00:20, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
Whatever you want to tell yourself.►Chris NelsonHolla! 00:27, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Jcurtis

Man, I wish you could block him just for being obviously, haha. It almost pisses me off that he could be like that!►Chris NelsonHolla! 02:39, 27 February 2008 (UTC)