Jump to content

Jocky Balboa

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

440 Excellent

About Jocky Balboa

  • Rank
    Dons Legend
  • Birthday 04/13/1980

Contact Methods

  • MSN
  • ICQ

Recent Profile Visitors

5,448 profile views
  1. Thanks, I'm just trying to get across that it's possible to laud Tyson for his achievements (youngest ever heavyweight champion, a record unlikely to ever be beaten) while also recognising that he is, in many respects, overrated.
  2. Yeah, it just takes some massive left turns and IMHO disappears up its own arse.
  3. Does Bond get bummed to death after Rami Malek gets a blow to the head, forgets where he is and still thinks he's in Freddie Mercury mode? I liked the last reboot, bringing back Curtis was a good move and she did well. I've reasonably high hopes for this one, after being slightly disappointed with the Rob Zombie reboots (too much mystique was killed IMHO).
  4. Been watching through Lost again lately. I don't know if I'm in a minority, but it lost (pun intended) the plot for me after Season 3. To my mind, what started out as a semi-believable survival drama with good character development just jumped the shark and meandered into pseudo-scientific mumbo jumbo. ...and people wonder why we didn't foresee JJ Abrams destroying the Star Trek and Star Wars franchises!
  5. Again, it's supposition on both sides. People do forget however, that also Ali had a 3+ year layoff and came back to conquer all, despite an initially sluggish start. He also had to contend with Foreman, who was arguably as ferocious as Tyson ever was (see how he demolished guys who went the distance with Ali and how he lifted Frazier off the floor) and prevailed. I think Ali would have beaten a prime Tyson and there is little doubt he is the GOAT in the heavyweight ranks at least. I think a young Foreman would have also beaten Tyson. The Douglas fight was a perfect storm IMHO; Douglas was no mug and a decent contender, completely written off by the Tyson hype machine (and Tyson himself) who fought the fight of his life for his recently departed mother (notable that he lost his first defence to Holyfield and faded into obscurity after, though). What it did do however, is expose the fact that Tyson, for all his devastating knockout power, didn't have a Plan B and really struggled when someone really, really stood up to him. Baddest man on the planet? No, biggest bully, who struggled when his opponent had no fear. I still agree with Teddy Atlas and co. who have pointed out that he never actually beat an all-time great at their peak, never got off the canvas to win a fight (most recently, Fury is seemingly an expert at this) and never avenged any of his defeats (he was on his way to another defeat by Holyfield, hence his ear-biting tactic to get out of it). Lewis was also the type Tyson always struggled with, even in his early years and IMHO would still have won (why did Tyson's camp pay Lewis "step aside money" in the 90's??) Top 10 heavyweight for sure, maybe even top 6, but nowhere near GOAT.
  6. Respectfully disagree. Tyson was exciting in his day, that is for sure, but his record - when properly scrutinised - doesn't support this. He deserves massive credit for cleaning up a weak division and for his early 4 year spell, but the cold, hard fact is that the heavyweight opposition was poor and he never beat an all-time great at the top of their game (Larry Holmes was 38, semi-retired and coming off the back of two defeats). On paper, I'd say his victories against the dangerous and underrated Razor Ruddock were his best. He was also taken the distance in his prime by several larger guys, who could hold him at bay, guys who weren't in the same league as Holyfield and Lewis. IMHO the latter two (who are both older than Tyson, let's not forget, before people use the age excuse for him again) would have still beaten him had he remained at the top of his game. A great fighter for sure, but as people like Teddy Atlas and many other top pundits have said, he came undone when he faced people who weren't afraid of him and who really, really stood up to him. Douglas was the first and despite being an underdog, was no mug and having lost his mother just before the fight, gave the performance of his life. He was probably the first to out-bully the bully and thus destroyed the hype and mystique.
  7. Would Derek Adams really be such a bad choice? I know some dismissed him in the past, but he has experience and seems to know what he's doing...
  8. Fury hasn't had the best preparation this time, but if the right Fury turns up I think he'll win. On his day he's the best heavyweight out there and although not quite an all-time great, he's got heart and should dominate the division for a few more years.
  9. Jocky Balboa


    Regardless of what the truth may be about the virus and it's threat level, the level of compliance among the masses has been the scariest thing for me. As time went on, not only have we seen multiple crackpot conspiracy theories, there have been just as many complicity theorists who have hung on every word and barmy restriction put forth by power mad politicians. We've certainly seen who the would-be Nazi / Stasi collaborators among us are.
  10. Exactly, our stock was pretty decent at the end of McInnes's tenure, all things considered. I said at the time that, with the money being spent on his wages, we could have sourced a more than adequate replacement to at least make a good fist of the job. Glass was no-ones first choice and the pressure is already on. I hope he turns it around and still give him until the next transfer window to identify and deal with the weaknesses/imbalances in the squad, but it's looking like a forlorn hope at this point.
  11. Yes, he hung on for a few more games after that, inexplicably.
  12. I accept what the posters above said about individual errors being costly, but taking a step back, it's clear the second half of the Raith game was pivotal in destroying all early (albeit modest) momentum. Clearly there has been a failure to motivate the squad and turn things around, to a point where we have since been losing to teams we should - given the vast gulf in resources and budget - be beating, regardless of a few Clangers (TM) or individual errors. I'm just puzzled as to why a poor 45 min against a lower league side was enough to derail everything and why the team hasn't rallied at all since then. I'm still clinging to the hope Glass will come good (Davidson at St Johnstone and O'Neill at Northern Ireland are two good examples) and want to give him the next transfer window as well, to balance the team, but I concede he will need to show us something before January in order to retain enough goodwill of the fans to allow that time.
  13. Who was less convincing than Glass??? I'm sorry, but with the wages McInnes commanded (which, let's face it, are the best he'll ever get) we should have been more than capable of attracting a decent football manager. If we hadn't been so slow to end McInnes's reign, we could have landed Jack Ross. Hell, even Tommy Wright and Derek Adams are better candidates than a complete rookie who, despite his obvious intelligence and passion for the game, had nothing in his employment history to suggest he could take us up a level. Agreed. If not for bad finishing, his Falkirk team would have buried us that year under Calderwood, when we just scraped past them to clinch the Top 6 trophy. John Collins also made a good fist of it at Hibs in a similar timeframe and, unlike McInnes, gave youth a chance.
  14. This I disagree with. With the money we paid McInnes, we should have been more than capable of sourcing a competent and experienced man for the job. Regardless of whether Glass fails, McInnes's time was up and I suspect even he knew this deep down. Ending his reign is not the issue, the failure to replace him with the best possible replacement is. We have Cormack's man instead.
  15. Care to explain? Again, it comes back to the blind faith so many have in the Krankie Kabal to deliver. She and her cronies have stuck steadfastly to the Section 30 order route, which in practice means relying on the permission of the very people whose rule you wish to escape from under. The logical fallacy of this aside, the practicality is that we are looking at a Tory victory in 2024 as a shoo-in, then barring an absolute miraculous turnaround for Labour, another Tory PM in 2029 as well. As long as a UK PM has a majority in Parliament and does NOT run on a manifesto pledge to allow such an order (and which UK PM would have their legacy be the end of their precious "Union"?!) there will be an indefinite impasse. Bottom line, there won't be another referendum, unless the UK PM is legally compelled to accede to one. Martin Keating and many grassroots campaigners know this, yet one has to ask why they are doing what Sturgeon and co. should have been pursuing since June 2016?
  • Create New...