and none of it has any merit whatsoever, so how is that of value??

so I guess it’s a little late to delete the comments since it’s sparked a long conversation. If the conversation was complete crap I would delete it but it looks as though some things need to be addressed. So I will in this thread.

Tex’s comments don’t violate the guidelines of the site when taken individually. But I agree with Raf wholeheartedly that hijacking threads is rude behavior and not something we want to do here on a regular basis. I get it that sometimes comments come up that take a thread in a totally different direction. But I also feel that when a thread is about something else (like Raf’s previous post), and a concerted effort is made to take that post in different direction that has nothing to do with the post and is obviously being done to satisfy one’s own need to discuss a pet subject, that’s not going to fly. Is it a judgment call? Sure. I just hope you guys trust me and Raf enough to make those calls in a sensible manner.

The issue of “first” is a non-issue with me. Like Raf also said, I don’t care for the practice but it’s certainly not done to hijack a thread and it hasn’t caused a food-fight in long time (excepting this thread). I see a big difference between that and hijacking threads intentionally. I can see that people writing “first” is annoying to you, and that’s OK, but I see comments everyday that annoy me but I just let them go. I think that “forced to deal with it” connotates that everybody on the board is against it, but I’ve found that most don’t care, only a few are truly annoyed enough to carry the grudge. Just my opinion.

I never decide what content is permissible and what isn’t based on how I personally feel about a person. It’s based on serious and sober judgment as to what is best for BTB. I think I’ve done a fair job of that even though I know I have critics.

I don’t think anyone will argue that you take a much more combative and abrasive tone with the “patrons” than Dave ever has, and the people running and writing the board have been altered quite a bit recently. It’s silly to say that if I haven’t figured it out by now that I never will, given that things have changed significantly even from when the sites merged to now.

This board has been here for 5 years, but a poster that did not use foul language, did not personally attack another poster, and did not engage in a political flame war was threatened with banning for posting about the Cowboys within the past 24 hours. And this is within a couple of weeks of you, an authority figure on the board, declaring the same poster “dead to you” for his opinions. Meanwhile, almost every single thread on this board since the merger has been cluttered with off topic “first” posts. That has not been happening for 5 years, by the way.

I’ll point out that in your same post about personally attacking other posters as a reason for banning, you are the one that uses insulting language to refer to other posters (“narcissistic, attention-whore punks”).

It’s equally insulting that you personally have not been a part of running this board for anywhere near 5 years but attempt to play it off that this is the way things have always been. There has been a definite shift in tone since you have been the primary “manager,” which is demonstrated in the language that you used in your post.

I’m not attempting to insult you, and definitely not this site which I love, or Dave. I just don’t understand what Tex did to violate the rules, particularly when there were 2 off-topic posts before his in this same thread. It seems like any intelligent poster would know to just skip his posts when they encounter them if they find his content objectionable.

I think most of the regulars know I check in from the Seahawks blog (mainly because this place has one of the most hilarious game threads around).

I’ve been lurking and digging through the archives and it seems Tex’s only motive is to say Romo sucks and the Simpson family is the scum.

That’s not even the least bit constructive and in fact it’s destructive to a site like this. If all of the writers wrote and researched their asses off only for someone to knowingly do a threadjack for their own agendas then it’s rude.

BTW whatever happened to Dave in Atlanta?

Look forward to playing you guys again in the new stadium in a few months.

He is funny but i know not to respond and let him think hes causing a stir if that is his true intention.

on the other hand i get hijacking threads. Before youd hear from him once a week and then it was ok but of lately its been every post. And fanpost.

you’d almost think they do considering they made zero effort in FA and through the draft.

It seems like they consider themselves set and are working harder to develop a guard than a tackle. Maybe that’s because they think they can just move Davis to tackle and then replace his spot with Holland.

It’s possibly even worse with him. And Eli. And Brees’ picks were about the same as Tony’s. Romo does have some bad games, but there aren’t really that many. Where he struggles the most is no suprise, when the team can’t handle the pressure. I say the team, because they also have trouble running in those games as well.

Where I think he needs work is (1) Not forcing the ball when the play isn’t there. That’s the [art that is Favre like (2) Holding the ball more securely in the pocket (3) Taking a few more dump-offs or runs rather than forcing a pass

I agree that Palmer is not clearly better than Romo, but based on the past 2 seasons, McNabb is, in my opinion. In another thread, I noted that Romo played worse against 2 of those 4 teams than the league average against them (more than 20% lower QB rating), slightly better against one of them (just under 10% higher QB rating than average against the Ravens), and absolutely picked apart the Giants (almost 50% higher QB rating than their average).

I think that to be considered in the top 5 QBs in the league, he needs to be significantly better than average against the top teams, and more consistent late in the season. I don’t think that it’s any secret that what lowers Romo’s value on these “best of” lists is not just the lack of playoff wins, but his inconsistent play, especially at the end of the season. Personally, I think that’s fair.