Now that he's won a SB with 2 teams...

bryanp56 on 02-07-2007 at 07:30 AM said:
Mike Haynes is listed equally for both the Pats and Raiders, because his career was split up pretty much down the middle.
Players don`t have a choice as to what team they represent...all teams are listed. Go to the HOF website, and click on any player, and all their teams are listed equally.

YEs, I know. I posted the quote from the Hall of Fame web site explaining that. I understand that the player is not officially inducted as a member of a specific team. But the players are still associated with a team unofficially. Although both the Pats and Raiders make claim to Haynes, most think of Haynes as a Raider. Part of the voting process is for the "home" representative to make the case for the player. It was the Oakland writer who made the case for Haynes.

However, the plaques that are created show a large picture of the player in uniform. Haynes is shown as a Raider with a smaller pic of him as a Pat also on the plaque. The same is true for Nick Buoniconti. He's shown as a Dolphin with a smaller pic of him as a Patriot.
 
Some players -- like Schilling, Petitte and a precious few others -- are on record as saying that they would not go to their team's biggest rival.

Damon and Vinatieri knew they were Boston icons.

I think it's perfectly fine to resent them for their choice to go to their former fans' most hated team.

OK, the Colts have competition with the Jets and Broncos, whereas the Yankees have no competition whatsoever in the hate department, but the point remains the same: Damon and Adam knew they were kicking their former fans in the balls and said "screw it, I'm doing what's best for me."

I'd like to think that I'd be more like Schilling than them if I had that choice.

And yes, I get it, I root for the laundry. If Jeter joined the Sox, I'd cheer for him as loud as anyone.
 
I hear ya Stingley, but look at it from Adams view...he had 3 rings already, and the Colts offered him a bigger payday. Football players careers aren`t that long, and at some point, most will go for the money.
That said...Screw Adam!
 
bryanp56 on 02-07-2007 at 08:26 AM said:
I hear ya Stingley, but look at it from Adams view...he had 3 rings already, and the Colts offered him a bigger payday. Football players careers aren`t that long, and at some point, most will go for the money.
That said...Screw Adam!
I hear you, but it's not like Adam struck it rich with that Colts contract. And with his endorsements in Boston, I'm not sure that there was much of a difference all in economically.

From that perspective, Damon was easier to understand for me, even while he sold his soul to play for the Other.

Net net, both of them either ignored the fans or said screw them, I want what I want.

So you're right, F Adam.
 
Damon committed a cardinal sin against Boston fans...said he would never play for the Yankees, then did anyway.
That makes him much worse in my book. Adam is a pretty hard guy to hate, though.
 
AV had a lousy Super bowl with the Colts. His short KO resulted in a TD return by the Bears.

The missed a PAT;

He missed a relatively chippie FG.

All in all, not a HOF performance. Most definitely not what the Colts paid for as the highest paid kicker in the league.

As Belichick often does: " ... Better one year too soon than one year too Late !!..."
 
#54 on 02-06-2007 at 06:37 PM said:
That's just it. He did not take the money. He gave up money to play inside a dome.

The Colts gave him 200 grand more than what the Pats offered. His commericals in NE would have more than made up for that.

He did not leave for the money.

He left to play half his games in a dome.


No. He lefted because the Pats are cheap MF'ers and they didn't sign him when they had numerous chances.
 
dashoe on 02-07-2007 at 05:24 PM said:
No. He lefted because the Pats are cheap MF'ers and they didn't sign him when they had numerous chances.

Patriots offered him good money for a kicker but he wanted more. Adam is dead to me. I hate him as much as Damon.
 
Back
Top