Cowboys To Face Charges In Preseason Opener Saturday

So what "charges" are the cowboys facing? lol...Spellcheck anyone?

Well, given the headlines and antics of some players we have seen over the past few years and their hiring practices of late, the Headline here may be entirely true! LOL

dang it i wanted to be the first to post the "charges" comment.

I had to go ahead and read the story because with today's pro athletes charges is just as likely to be right.

Think that was supposed to be ChargeRs. You'd think they'd hire a proofreader...

mmmmmkay wrote:

Well, given the headlines and antics of some players we have seen over the past few years and their hiring practices of late, the Headline here may be entirely true! LOL

Name one Dallas Cowboy who has been in trouble with the law (while under contract with Dallas) since the end of Dave Campo's tenure as head coach (2002)...

Of the 80 men on the Cowboys roster, only 3 of them have had any criminal history (and none while under contract in Dallas). Only 2 of them (Tank Johnson and Adam Jones) are likely to make the 53-man roster. Compare that to the 4 players in the last 5 months arrested while under contract with the New England Patriots.

That joke hasn't made any sense in about 12 years...Get over it.

wow! you took that joke way too serious... you sound like your butt hurts! watch the chargers put an ass whippin on the cowboys tonight...

cowboyfansince75 wrote:

<quoted text>Name one Dallas Cowboy who has been in trouble with the law (while under contract with Dallas) since the end of Dave Campo's tenure as head coach (2002)...
Of the 80 men on the Cowboys roster, only 3 of them have had any criminal history (and none while under contract in Dallas). Only 2 of them (Tank Johnson and Adam Jones) are likely to make the 53-man roster. Compare that to the 4 players in the last 5 months arrested while under contract with the New England Patriots.
That joke hasn't made any sense in about 12 years...Get over it.

cowboyfansince75 wrote:

<quoted text>Name one Dallas Cowboy who has been in trouble with the law (while under contract with Dallas) since the end of Dave Campo's tenure as head coach (2002)...
Of the 80 men on the Cowboys roster, only 3 of them have had any criminal history (and none while under contract in Dallas). Only 2 of them (Tank Johnson and Adam Jones) are likely to make the 53-man roster. Compare that to the 4 players in the last 5 months arrested while under contract with the New England Patriots.
That joke hasn't made any sense in about 12 years...Get over it.

DUDE!! get over yourself, I didn't say the Cowboys in particular,I said "some players" never specifically naming any team. However, if the shoe fits and you feel guilty about "your" team then go ahead and rant and rave

Can't NBC5i.com or topix afford someone to verify their lead in titles?
1. Cowboys to Face Charges (s/b Chargers).
2. Lake Work Fire Fighter (s/b Lake Worth).

That aside who cares what the Cowboys do or don't do? I sure don't. I didn't vote to put the cowboys stadium in Arlington either. A waist of my tax money and the bills keep coming. Roads - police - Utilities - interest on bond issues - cost of condemned property - etc. etc.

ROFL at face 'charges'. Facing charges OR chargers nothing new to them.

SDheisman wrote:

wow! you took that joke way too serious... you sound like your butt hurts! watch the chargers put an ass whippin on the cowboys tonight...
<quoted text>

An "ass whippin" in a preseason game? Have at it...who cares? It's all about seeing what the young guys and bottom dwellers on the 80-man roster can do. In the first preseason game, we're only likely to see the starters for a series or two anyway. Most of the action will be between guys who won't even make the teams.

With that said, I don't think this is the last we'll see of each other. I have the Cowboys and Chargers in the Super Bowl. They certainly have the two most talented rosters in the league.

mmmmmkay wrote:

<quoted text>
DUDE!! get over yourself, I didn't say the Cowboys in particular,I said "some players" never specifically naming any team. However, if the shoe fits and you feel guilty about "your" team then go ahead and rant and rave

Obviously, given their recent track record, I have no reason to "feel guilty".

But if you really meant the NFL in general, you did a poor job of conveying that.

The headline reads "Cowboys face charges...", and you said "some of the players", and "their hiring practices". I think you DID mean it towards Dallas, and you simply ended up with your foot in your mouth.

If you didn't, I bet if you read your comment all over again, you'd see how that would be easily misconstrued...

cowboyfansince75 wrote:

<quoted text>Obviously, given their recent track record, I have no reason to "feel guilty".
But if you really meant the NFL in general, you did a poor job of conveying that.
The headline reads "Cowboys face charges...", and you said "some of the players", and "their hiring practices". I think you DID mean it towards Dallas, and you simply ended up with your foot in your mouth.
If you didn't, I bet if you read your comment all over again, you'd see how that would be easily misconstrued...

How about this comment then. A large majority ov pro athletes in Football and other sports are simply thugs and criminals that other wannabe thugs and criminals try to emulate while none of them provide anything useful to society.

Doubts wrote:

<quoted text>
How about this comment then. A large majority ov pro athletes in Football and other sports are simply thugs and criminals that other wannabe thugs and criminals try to emulate while none of them provide anything useful to society.

A large majority? What facts do have to back that up?

Here are some facts for you:

There are 32 NFL teams. Each begins the regular season with 53-man rosters and 7 practice squad players. That is 1920 NFL players either on active rosters or a practice squad.

So let's say a "large" majority=60%...Are you telling me that at least 1152 of those players are criminals? It's more like 2%, or about 40 (a liberal estimate)guys who cause some degree of legal trouble every year.

I wonder what percentage of people in your profession or the average American profession experience the same type of arrests---DUI, marijuana/cocaine, domestic battery, etc.

Chances are, it's probably more than 2%!!!

You can "comment" all you want, but that doesn't make it a supportable argument. A "large majority"---uh...not even close.

cowboyfansince75 wrote:

<quoted text>A large majority? What facts do have to back that up?
Here are some facts for you:
There are 32 NFL teams. Each begins the regular season with 53-man rosters and 7 practice squad players. That is 1920 NFL players either on active rosters or a practice squad.
So let's say a "large" majority=60%...Are you telling me that at least 1152 of those players are criminals? It's more like 2%, or about 40 (a liberal estimate)guys who cause some degree of legal trouble every year.
I wonder what percentage of people in your profession or the average American profession experience the same type of arrests---DUI, marijuana/cocaine, domestic battery, etc.
Chances are, it's probably more than 2%!!!
You can "comment" all you want, but that doesn't make it a supportable argument. A "large majority"---uh...not even close.

You are correct I meant Thugs OR criminals not thugs AND criminals. My basic point remains unchanged.
No use to society aside from providing negative role models. "look kids you don't need to learn to read if you can catch a ball and use the phrase "ya know what I mean?" mumbled 3 times in every sentence.

Doubts wrote:

<quoted text>
You are correct I meant Thugs OR criminals not thugs AND criminals. My basic point remains unchanged.
No use to society aside from providing negative role models. "look kids you don't need to learn to read if you can catch a ball and use the phrase "ya know what I mean?" mumbled 3 times in every sentence.

What exactly constitutes a thug if not a criminal?

thug:
1. a cruel or vicious ruffian, robber, or murderer.
2.(sometimes initial capital letter) one of a former group of professional robbers and murderers in India who strangled their victims.

If you value education as much as you claim, how do you justify abusing the English language by referring to athletes as "thugs"?

John Gotti was a "thug". Let's not get confused...

As far as being role models for children, are you serious?

I am my children's role model...If a child holds up a professional athlete as a role model, then that--IMO, is the fault of the parents. My boys love football as much as I do, but I (as any responsible parent would) keep things in proper perspective. They are under no illusions that they can forgo their educations on the thin hopes of a professional football career. NFL players are entertainers, no different from singers or actors.
They are NOT role models in my home, and I hope they are not in yours. It is up to the parents to provide examples for how to live well. Allowing pro football players to substitute is lazy, and the sign of poor parenting (not to mention a convenient excuse to blame someone else for the poor behavior and decision-making of their children).

NFL players also contribute about $50-60 million in charity work each and every season (and are the bread and butter of the highly respected United Way). I hardly think that qualifies them as "no use to society". I'm having a difficult time understanding your aversion to the NFL.

it is not just the NFL. it is the entire concept of putting people who play games up on pedastals. It is all the kids who will graduate from HS and college functionally illiterate who passed their classes because they could play basketball, run fast, or catch a football. It is putting national media spotlights on 18-22 year old college athletes who should have thier sport as a part time elective instead having their academics as a part time elective. Pro sports are a cancer on our society.

They're all felons anyway. Sooner or later there will be charges!

Doubts wrote:

it is not just the NFL. it is the entire concept of putting people who play games up on pedastals. It is all the kids who will graduate from HS and college functionally illiterate who passed their classes because they could play basketball, run fast, or catch a football. It is putting national media spotlights on 18-22 year old college athletes who should have thier sport as a part time elective instead having their academics as a part time elective. Pro sports are a cancer on our society.

A cancer on our society?

Those college sports you mention, like football, bring in millions of dollars to the universities each year. Those universities are able to apply those funds any way they see fit. Some schools use more of the money for their academic facilities and programs than others, but all of them use some of it. Your son or daughter may directly benefit from some of the funding provided by those sports.

Beyond that, professional sports are a significant boost to the economies of the cities who have teams in the 3 major pro sports in the U.S.

There are far greater issues in society than any negative effects from pro sports.

Furthermore, those "functionally illiterate" kids you speak of---would they even go to college if they had no athletic talent? What about those who do graduate? Playing football (even professionally) did not hinder Steve Young as he earned a law degree, nor will it likely hinder Brady Quinn from doing the same. What about the thousands who graduate every year legitimately that are only able to go to college because of an athletic scholarship?
So, in your mind, because some do not take their academic committments seriously---the whole thing is bad?
I already mentioned the $50-60 million directly derived from NFL players incomes that go back into the communities they play in through charitable work and community improvement programs (and that does not include what the team owners spend on the same).

Professional sports are a part of American culture and society, not a cancer on it.

I am an educated American male with a family. I played high school football, served in the Marine Corps and later earned a degree. I now own a chain of retail stores. I love football (and attribute much of my developed character to it), and I wouldn't trade the thrill of taking my boys to a Cowboys game for much of anything. It is something we do as a family every season at least twice. Both of my older boys play baseball and football. It is not the center of their lives, rather it is a small part of their education.

Not many people get to play at the pro level. But whether you like it or not, America has a passion for pro football. It is an industry worth billions every year to our economy. I don't see "thugs". I see young men as diverse as anywhere else. Some are intelligent. Some...not so much. Some come from good families, others from broken homes.

You, my friend, paint with a very broad brush, and seem to have a highly exaggerated sense of what little negative impact it has on any of us.