Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,134 Neutral

About predator_05

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

4,419 profile views
  1. Completely agree. All the other venues, especially MSG get overcrowded. People are squashed up against each other when you're leaving a Rangers game in the evening. Even if the atmosphere is good (it usually is...or was anyway). Nowhere to move. Then its the same densely-packed environment when you're taking the LIRR back home from Penn, or the subway. Once you've been through that, you appreciate MetLife a lot more. Its more of a city thing i guess, space is at a premium.
  2. So....just to carry on the kid analogy, if your kid is...'ugly'...and he doesn't do well in school, you're willing to put him up for adoption? 😜
  3. "Look, this is the only guy we could hire, and the only one who'd actually be crazy enough to work here. So gimme a break..."
  4. The same emotional investment makes you more likely to forgive your kid. You're willing to overlook flaws, because...he's your kid, he's family. You wouldn't give a sh*t about the kid on the street, he's somebody else's problem. Yeah, stadium looks sh*tty to somebody else. But it 'looks' and more importantly feels alright to me. I have similar views on the US open, over in flushing. So many reasons to dislike the place, the commute, everything...but that didn't stop me from going every year. The experience of the game is what counts.
  5. While i don't like @SAR I questioning the authenticity of some posters' fandom, his comments hit the nail on the head. MetLife was built to be functional and fit for purpose. You don't need the bells and whistles of some sh*tty white elephant, especially in NY/NJ, where there's plenty else to do. SoFi is more of a waste of money than anything else, who the hell even watches the Rams in LA, there's no dedicated fanbase there. Stadiums should be recognized for their game atmosphere, not for all the extraneous crap. A stadium should primarily serve as a home for it's main occupants, in this case, the football fans on the east coast. MetLife does its job. Why would i be interested in the 'aesthetics' of a stadium when i'm there to watch a football game? If i want aesthetics, i have all of manhattan to stare at: New and old. At the risk of sounding 'snobby', I don't get my 'pseudo-intellectual' kicks from visiting stadiums. This is not f*cking Arlington, texas, where jerryworld is the biggest thing in town, with it's 'all-in-one' stadium transforming into a museum/restaurant/hospitality/misc event/big screen thing. It's not perfect, in fact i hated taking the train there on game days (if you're not driving, its a pain in the ass). But as someone who heard 'Giants stadium' taunts growing up, i'm more than satisfied with a stadium that feels truly ours. And we have - or at least used to have - excellent tailgating. It's different when you actually attend games, it's a sentiment that's hard to explain.
  6. I'd keep a tally on 'average' scores. Just to see how fickle our fanbase is
  7. Have to agree with this. I don't think they give a f*ck. I'll re-post what i wrote earlier about good owners and bad owners: You have 2 different types of owners in the NFL: 1. Owners who live and breathe the franchise, and are involved in every aspect of it. Much in the same way that a committed entrepreneur would familiarize himself with all the different aspects of his business. They build and maintain strong relationships with competent people, without letting ego get in the way (too often). They don't think highly of themselves for owning the franchise, they see it as their future. they work hard to maintain and improve their team's brand value and on-field product. They celebrate wins, lament losses and enjoy the game. I can imagine somebody like kraft or jerry jones taking out the trash as they leave the facility. Examples: kraft, kroenke, blank, even jerry jones. 2. Owners who use the franchise to enhance their personal reputation in social circles and burn money. For these guys, results are secondary. Involvement is minimal, decision-making is less strategic and more political; primarily aimed at 'maintaining order'. These owners, not surprisingly, see more turnover and fail to create strong bonds with competent people. They often work through others, and disassociate from poor results. They have very little respect for the game or the fans. I cannot imagine a person like woody johnson discussing football in any great detail, does he even know his players names? Examples: snyder, spanos, brown, and our own woody johnson.
  8. Nah. So many big time billionaires and celebrities don't use it. Our own QB doesn't use it. They know better. Especially with social media companies running 5000 bots on behalf of clients.
  9. This is how relationships work in 2020. We unfollow our ex on social media, delete all the pics, and leak the nudes to TMZ.
  10. It reminds me of Dak prescott and the cowboys in 2018. They were struggling to score points for the first 6 weeks of the season, then they traded for Amari cooper. Massively improved the team.

Content Partnership

Yes Network

Site Sponsor

MILE-Social - NJ Social Media & SEO company
  • Create New...