Rushing the field

DwayneTwill said:
The field, then, I guess, is the part that makes them douchy. Rushing (or trickling) to the parking lot, to the bar, to the restroom, to their house -- those are all not douchy. Rushing (or trickling) onto the field = douchy.
Click to expand...

And you have STILL not answered the question. You've made it clear that you think rushing the field is d0uchey. You've yet to make it clear as to why it is.
 
tm3308 said:
And you have STILL not answered the question. You've made it clear that you think rushing the field is d0uchey. You've yet to make it clear as to why it is.
Click to expand...

Players, coaches, refs, cheerleaders, band members, mascots, other staff members all belong on the field. Fans belong in the stands.
 
tm3308 said:
"Just because.....Just because.....Just because....." Can't beat a rock solid argument like that! :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

You've brought no arguments whatsoever to this conversation. Probably to the entire history of this board, but that's beside the point.
 
DwayneTwill said:
He's never asked that question before.
Click to expand...

I asked it three times (though not worded clearly the first time, I admit), and with that answer, you have firmly entered the realm of telling others what they should and should not do. If you don't want to participate, fine. You've made your judgement of the people who do several times before (meaning previous "rushes"). No need to continue stating it each time a "rush" happens when everyone knows what your stance on the issue.
 
DwayneTwill said:
Players, coaches, refs, cheerleaders, band members, mascots, other staff members all belong on the field. Fans belong in the stands.
Click to expand...

cheerleaders are just glorified fans. they actually originated from a section of the general fans that were attending a game

"Princeton graduate Thomas Peebles introduced the idea of organized crowds cheering at football games to the University of Minnesota. However, it was not until 1898 that University of Minnesota student Johnny Campbell directed a crowd in cheering "Rah, Rah, Rah! Ski-u-mah, Hoo-Rah! Hoo-Rah! Varsity! Varsity! Varsity, Minn-e-So-Tah!”, making Campbell the very first cheerleader and November 2, 1898 the official birth date of organized cheerleading"

-wikipedia
 
tm3308 said:
I asked it three times (though not worded clearly the first time, I admit), and with that answer, you have firmly entered the realm of telling others what they should and should not do. If you don't want to participate, fine. You've made your judgement of the people who do several times before (meaning previous "rushes"). No need to continue stating it each time a "rush" happens when everyone knows what your stance on the issue.
Click to expand...

You didn't word it that way until the very last time. I've not told anyone to do or not do anything. I'm going to continue to make fun of stupid people who do stupid things. No need to open threads that talk about rushing the field, because non-douchebags will be making fun of the douchebags who rush. Obviously you take it pretty personally.
 
DwayneTwill said:
You've brought no arguments whatsoever to this conversation. Probably to the entire history of this board, but that's beside the point.
Click to expand...

Right, because I think rushing the field is okay, I know nothing on any sports-related subject. Nice conclusion.

It's about the relationship between this program and the fans. There were fans at Michigan surprised at how close our fans are with the team, when the team went over and celebrated with the fans that made the trip. You don't see that everywhere you go. The fans merely return the favor at home. There's no harm in that.
 
hawkfaninTX said:
cheerleaders are just glorified fans. they actually originated from a section of the general fans that were attending a game

"Princeton graduate Thomas Peebles introduced the idea of organized crowds cheering at football games to the University of Minnesota. However, it was not until 1898 that University of Minnesota student Johnny Campbell directed a crowd in cheering "Rah, Rah, Rah! Ski-u-mah, Hoo-Rah! Hoo-Rah! Varsity! Varsity! Varsity, Minn-e-So-Tah!â€￾, making Campbell the very first cheerleader and November 2, 1898 the official birth date of organized cheerleading"

-wikipedia
Click to expand...

None of that matters in 2010, when the cheerleaders are officially sanctioned and invited onto the field by the athletic department. I appreciate your going back 112 years to find something that's almost, kind of, sort of (but still isn't) relevant to your stupid point.
 
tm3308 said:
Right, because I think rushing the field is okay, I know nothing on any sports-related subject. Nice conclusion.

It's about the relationship between this program and the fans. There were fans at Michigan surprised at how close our fans are with the team, when the team went over and celebrated with the fans that made the trip. You don't see that everywhere you go. The fans merely return the favor at home. There's no harm in that.
Click to expand...

Probably no harm in that. Still douchy, though. Hopefully some exuberant fans don't knock over a goalpost onto a few players or trip a starter, causing an injury in their haste to say, "Hey ricky....good game out there...way to go...I have a crush on you....want to hang out sometime?" That'd be super douchy.
 
DwayneTwill said:
You didn't word it that way until the very last time. I've not told anyone to do or not do anything. I'm going to continue to make fun of stupid people who do stupid things. No need to open threads that talk about rushing the field, because non-douchebags will be making fun of the douchebags who rush. Obviously you take it pretty personally.
Click to expand...

"No, I mean what about rushing the field makes them d0uchebags? There must be some kind of standard that has to be met for an act to be d0uche-y."

That was what I said the 2nd time. Not too hard to figure out that I wanted to know what made rushing the field d0uchey. And you responded with a "Just because..." answer.

You said fans belong in the stands. I suppose it IS a huge leap of faith to think that that qualifies as telling people what they should do :rolleyes:
 
DwayneTwill said:
Probably no harm in that. Still douchy, though. Hopefully some exuberant fans don't knock over a goalpost onto a few players or trip a starter, causing an injury in their haste to say, "Hey ricky....good game out there...way to go...I have a crush on you....want to hang out sometime?" That'd be super douchy.
Click to expand...

And another exaggeration. The goalposts are taken down IMMEDIATELY after the clock expires, so nothing to worry about on that front. And your second point plays right into the RUSH/trickle argument. Players are hardly in any danger when fans are WALKING onto the field. They've got just about as much chance of tripping on their shoelaces and getting hurt.
 
tm3308 said:
And another exaggeration. The goalposts are taken down IMMEDIATELY after the clock expires, so nothing to worry about on that front. And your second point plays right into the RUSH/trickle argument. Players are hardly in any danger when fans are WALKING onto the field. They've got just about as much chance of tripping on their shoelaces and getting hurt.
Click to expand...

Players are in even less danger when there are no douchebags on the field at all, regardless of their speed in getting there.
 
DwayneTwill said:
None of that matters in 2010, when the cheerleaders are officially sanctioned and invited onto the field by the athletic department. I appreciate your going back 112 years to find something that's almost, kind of, sort of (but still isn't) relevant to your stupid point.
Click to expand...

actually it really isn't that stupid. just because i called you out on a point that you could not discredit, you have to say that because it happened 112 years ago it is irrelevant. the marbury vs madison decision by the supreme court determining the balance of power within the three branches of government, making the supreme court the supreme arbiter of the constitution, this happened in 1803 and is still very much relevant today. your point makes no sense.
 
Last edited:
DwayneTwill said:
Players are in even less danger when there are no douchebags on the field at all, regardless of their speed in getting there.
Click to expand...

Best keep the players locked in their rooms/apartments then. They are at just as much risk of getting hurt by walking to class. I mean, all those people around them, just walking, walking, probably offering some sort of congrats for their performance the previous weekend, and good luck for next weekend. They're just BOUND to get hurt!
 
hawkfaninTX said:
actually it really isn't that stupid. just because i called you out on a point that you could not discredit, you have to say that because it happened 112 years ago it is irrelevant. marbury vs madison decision by the supreme court and the balance of power within the three branches of government, making the supreme court the supreme arbiter of the constitution, this happened in 1803 and is still very much relevant today. your point makes no sense.
Click to expand...

LOL. Cheerleaders = A Supreme court-style precedent? You're really off the deep end now.
 
tm3308 said:
Best keep the players locked in their rooms/apartments then. They are at just as much risk of getting hurt by walking to class. I mean, all those people around them, just walking, walking, probably offering some sort of congrats for their performance the previous weekend, and good luck for next weekend. They're just BOUND to get hurt!
Click to expand...

Another absolutely ridiculous argument. WTG!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top