Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
That's an informative post... do you have any insights on the Ravens cap situation? I know we're paying Flacco more than we can afford, but it felt like we cut everything else to the bone this season... I guess we're hoping young prospects will develop, but that really didn't pan out at receive this year (although there were glimpses of hope for the future).
Ray Lewis has come out of retirement... Not to play MLB, but, in fact to play either Wide Receiver, or QB (putting Flacco on the bench). My sources weren't clear on which position it was though
You mean like that xbox one commercial with him and Urlacher?
DR:80+S++G+M+B+I+Pwmhd11#++D++A++++/sWD-R++++T(S)DM+ Ask me about Brushfire or Endless: Fantasy Tactics
That's an informative post... do you have any insights on the Ravens cap situation? I know we're paying Flacco more than we can afford, but it felt like we cut everything else to the bone this season... I guess we're hoping young prospects will develop, but that really didn't pan out at receive this year (although there were glimpses of hope for the future).
Ray Lewis has come out of retirement... Not to play MLB, but, in fact to play either Wide Receiver, or QB (putting Flacco on the bench). My sources weren't clear on which position it was though
Gruden, 46, the younger brother of ESPN Monday Night Football analyst and former Super Bowl-winning coach Jon Gruden, has spent the past three seasons as the Cincinnati Bengals' offensive coordinator.
Opinions? Thoughts?
I think if anybody can take a good coach and make him bad, it's Snyder.
RiTides wrote: That's an informative post... do you have any insights on the Ravens cap situation? I know we're paying Flacco more than we can afford, but it felt like we cut everything else to the bone this season... I guess we're hoping young prospects will develop, but that really didn't pan out at receive this year (although there were glimpses of hope for the future).
I'd say Marlon Brown (WR #14) turned out pretty well. Especially with the loss of Boldin to the Niners. (Frell you Ozzie. I'm still bitter about that.)
Alfndrate wrote: Still not sure why anyone would want to coach in Cleveland, besides the fact that you work for one year and get paid for 2 more.
I'd take that job.
On a more realistic note, it's because NFL head coach is a pinnacle position in ones chosen career, and there are only 32 of them. If you want to achieve that career step, you take what's out there.
Cleveland and Washington just happen to be available more often.
Alfndrate wrote: Still not sure why anyone would want to coach in Cleveland, besides the fact that you work for one year and get paid for 2 more.
I'd take that job.
On a more realistic note, it's because NFL head coach is a pinnacle position in ones chosen career, and there are only 32 of them. If you want to achieve that career step, you take what's out there.
Cleveland and Washington just happen to be available more often.
I mean I'd take it too, hell I'd take 500,000 for a 1 year contract from them as they finalized on their coaching search. I've got not coaching experience, but I was a baller as feth at Madden
Also, what happens if they don't hire a head coach? Who steps in?
DR:80+S++G+M+B+I+Pwmhd11#++D++A++++/sWD-R++++T(S)DM+ Ask me about Brushfire or Endless: Fantasy Tactics
We have Chris Long... don't get me wrong Clowney in rotation with Long is a nice upgrade, but it isn't needed.
Why would Clowney need to be on the same side as Long? sure it may kill overall stats, but that would make for one scary pass rush for sure.
Because he ain't replace Robert Quinn! Quinn is a fething beast!
Quarterback is obviously the most valuable position in the league by far. In second place comes pass rushers (more of a skill set I guess, since it could be one of two positions or a hybrid of the two). The Giants won a couple SBs by relentlessly drafting pass rushers. If you're in position to draft someone you think will be an elite pass rusher, you better think really hard about taking him. You can fill other needs with other picks this year or next. Trading down is nice and all, but impact players are what win you football games.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Alfndrate wrote: Josh McDaniels has bowed out of the Browns coaching search once he found out he was not the front runner for the job.
Still not sure why anyone would want to coach in Cleveland, besides the fact that you work for one year and get paid for 2 more.
A very low bar?
I realize that seems like a dumb statement considering Chudzinski got fired after one year, and some think he was wronged since the QB position was a mess. But the Browns had something like 5 Pro Bowlers -- including one of the most dynamic offensive players in the league -- and a defense that wasn't awful, and STILL were a blazing dumpster fire.
My outside perspective -- I didn't watch your team and think "well, they're not overly talented, but they're well-coached and there's no quit in them." It wasn't quite that kind of 4-12. A near-win over the Pats, and then losses to teams like the Jags and Jets, suggests to me that the effort level was uneven.
As someone said, there are 32 of those jobs in the entire world. You take it knowing that you have some talent on the team, and that with the right QB -- and you're in position to draft (another) one -- you can compete. It's a good football city and you'll be a popular guy if you make them respectable. Make the playoffs and they'll love you. Plus, you'll probably have some job security, which is what all coaches want.
The North might seem daunting, but is it really? The Steelers and Ravens are in transition. The Bengals are a talented "doughnut" team with a big hole at the most important position on the field. Things can change quickly.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/01/09 21:12:19
The problem is, the feds have the Browns owner by his short and curlies, meaning that if he goes down, the Browns will be owned by either his father (who much like the previous owner won't give a gak about the team) and run by Joe Banner, who doesn't want a head coach, he wants a puppet. Or the NFL will be running the team.
And you're right, whomever can turn this gakstorm of "professional football" around and start producing wild card and division wins will be set for life. Look at one of the last "great" Browns coaches, Sam Rutigliano. The man had a .420 win percentage, coached for 6 years and was coach during the Kardiac Kids era. Won coach of the year twice and won 1 Divisional title. Coach Sam is a legend in Cleveland, the man and his grandchildren can walk into any bar in town and wind up with more than a few free drinks.
I agree that the fact the Browns have 5 Pro Bowlers is a nice sign, and we're a Right Guard, another shut down CB (Though Skrine is getting better), a WR opposite Gordon, an RB and a QB away from being a solid team (like an 8-8 team) The problem with games like the Jags, Jets, and Pats game is that the Browns in the past 6 years have had this uncanny ability to hold their own with a team, so in games we should have been blown out, we had a close loss or barely won, but in games where we should have dominated, we stink it up royally. The Browns should have easily finished this season 7-9 based just on those 3 games, but with the exception of a few games, they weren't out of any of them, they just didn't have a quarterback that could lead them down the field, and like always when your defense has to do all the work, they're going to be gassed by the final 2-min warning.
The problem with taking the Browns head coaching job is that while there is talent on the team, and with the right QB we can compete. The problem is, who gets to make those decisions? From everything that I've been able to tell, Joe Banner and Mike Lombardi were controlling the show. Chud didn't have a say in most of the choices that would have affected his team on the field. When Brandon Weeden and Jason Campbell were both out, we didn't go out and sign a QB to give them time to recover, we said, "We're going to evaluate them, and see who gives us the best chance of winning." A week or so after getting a concussion, Jason Campbell was back under center. Why would they have not gone out and gotten someone? You pick someone up off of a practice squad and you have 3 weeks to sign them, if they don't work out, they don't work out.
It's a dream job in title only, Joe Banner is a manipulative weasel with power struggle issues, and it's reflecting poorly on this team.
DR:80+S++G+M+B+I+Pwmhd11#++D++A++++/sWD-R++++T(S)DM+ Ask me about Brushfire or Endless: Fantasy Tactics
That might be the narrative about Banner in Cleveland. But consider Andy Reid. Reid was the Eagles' HC, called all the offensive plays, AND was effectively the GM, having the final say on personnel. So maybe he just needs a HC he can trust?
Banner isn't a very likeable guy -- the fans didn't like him in Philly either. And the Eagles did replace him with Howie Roseman. Although it has to be said that Roseman and Reid then created a dumpster fire of their own by throwing money at every FA in sight, only to have most of those acquisitions underwhelm. Chip Kelly has done a lot to settle that organization down and get them back on a good track, IMO.
Banner always came across to me as an extremely cold-blooded dude, which has its downsides but also some upside for running an NFL franchise. I still think you need to be patient.
The Browns gave up 49 sacks, an average of 3 per game.
Each QB, other than Lanning, had a 52-60% completion rate, averaging 6.5 yards. Yes, Weeden threw 9 picks but he was also sacked 27 times in 8 games. Campbell was sacked 16 times in 9 games, Hoyer was sacked 6 times in three games.
They could have Peyton or Brady and still suck because they have no offensive line. Pressure on the Qb is the leading cause of interceptions on this team.
And while the Defense has been solid their Red Zone stats are among the worst in the league. They gave up 46 TDs, 13 to rushers.
The obsession with getting a top shelf QB borders on insanity. The Browns need O-line and Linebacker help more than a QB.
Of all the races of the universe the Squats have the longest memories and the shortest tempers. They are uncouth, unpredictably violent, and frequently drunk. Overall, I'm glad they're on our side!
Office of Naval Intelligence Research discovers 3 out of 4 sailors make up 75% of U.S. Navy.
"Madness is like gravity... All you need is a little push."
I've got not coaching experience, but I was a baller as feth at Madden
I think that a lot of the issues that a number of teams have with coaching is the idea that one guy needs to do everything.
The way I see it, there are three primary tasks that a head coach is responsible for:
1) Set the tone for the team, come up with overall strategy based on personnel available.
2) Install week-to-week game plan, break down opponent strengths and weaknesses and figure out how to attack them
3) Manage in-game decisions, manage clock, decide when to challenge, and so on.
I've seen any number of coaches who do well at one or two of these, but fail at the other. Lovie Smith, for example, was good at 1 and 2, but failed at 3. Andy Reid is similar, his teams always look prepared and have overall strategy, but he blows it with his mismanagement of in-game decisions. Mike Martz was good at 2 and 3, but couldn't alter his preferred approach to fit hit players - when he had players it worked, when not, it didn't.
Being good at Madden is essentially handling step 3 (and some joystick twiddling that bears no resemblance to football).
I understand why a head coach fears delegating any of these tasks, because while you can delegate responsibility, you cannot delegate accountability, and so the blame hits the head coach, even if/when a subordinate does a task. There's a significant conceptual difference between the three aspects (grand strategy, strategy, tactics), and it's a rare individual who can excel at all three levels.
helgrenze wrote: The Browns gave up 49 sacks, an average of 3 per game.
Each QB, other than Lanning, had a 52-60% completion rate, averaging 6.5 yards. Yes, Weeden threw 9 picks but he was also sacked 27 times in 8 games. Campbell was sacked 16 times in 9 games, Hoyer was sacked 6 times in three games.
They could have Peyton or Brady and still suck because they have no offensive line. Pressure on the Qb is the leading cause of interceptions on this team.
And while the Defense has been solid their Red Zone stats are among the worst in the league. They gave up 46 TDs, 13 to rushers.
The obsession with getting a top shelf QB borders on insanity. The Browns need O-line and Linebacker help more than a QB.
I would be curious to see which side the sacks came from. The left side has seemed solid for the past 3 years. Last year the Browns acquired Mitchell Schwartz, who was okay last year, and abysmal this year, and yes everyone in Cleveland (at least that pay attention to the Browns) know that they need to replace Schwartz, who did improve slightly over the course of the year (but not enough to keep him on the team). I would not be surprised if the O-Line let one or two guys through to sack Weeden. The players from the previous year knew how atrocious he was, and it seemed as if Chud didn't have control of the locker room (at least a few reports came out about that). And I agree that the Browns need an LB, but at the same time they need someone that at least lead the offense. I'm not convinced the long term starter is currently on the roster, but from what I saw of Hoyer (I realize it's a small sample size), I think Hoyer can be the starter next year. Browns draft a 'top tier' quarterback and let him sit behind Hoyer for the year, learn from him, etc... (Like Hoyer did from Brady), and then at the beginning of the 2015 season they have an honest to goodness quarterback competition for the job, not the half-arsed, "we're gonna evaluate and pick blah blah blah" that I've heard for the past 2 years.
DR:80+S++G+M+B+I+Pwmhd11#++D++A++++/sWD-R++++T(S)DM+ Ask me about Brushfire or Endless: Fantasy Tactics
helgrenze wrote: The Browns gave up 49 sacks, an average of 3 per game.
Each QB, other than Lanning, had a 52-60% completion rate, averaging 6.5 yards. Yes, Weeden threw 9 picks but he was also sacked 27 times in 8 games. Campbell was sacked 16 times in 9 games, Hoyer was sacked 6 times in three games.
They could have Peyton or Brady and still suck because they have no offensive line. Pressure on the Qb is the leading cause of interceptions on this team.
And while the Defense has been solid their Red Zone stats are among the worst in the league. They gave up 46 TDs, 13 to rushers.
The obsession with getting a top shelf QB borders on insanity. The Browns need O-line and Linebacker help more than a QB.
I don't agree with any of your opinions, LOL. The Steelers have won Super Bowls giving up about that many sacks. So have the Packers. They have quarterbacks who can make plays down the field under pressure.
The idea that the Browns don't need a QB is *lunacy*. Not one of their QBs broke the 60% completion mark, and YPA numbers at 6.5 or lower are NOT good numbers. Throwing nearly as many INTs as TDs is *horrendous* in the modern NFL. And all of this with one of the best WRs in the game on the roster? QBs dominate the NFL like never before, and the Browns haven't had one truly good one since their return. Case in point:
Ben Roethlisberger -- who's been the Steelers' QB for the better part of that period -- is I think now 17-1 as a starter vs. the Browns. QBs matter...a lot. You either have one or you're done.
I still think Manziel would be a great QB... he's got the leg to extend plays if the OL breaks down.
In his heisman year, he was able to do that because the Aggie's OL were crap. So, you know he's capable of doing that.
This year, their OL were a little better and Manziel became a more "pocket" passing QB. I'm guessing it's because he wanted to show NFL teams that he could do both.
whembly wrote: I still think Manziel would be a great QB... he's got the leg to extend plays if the OL breaks down.
In his heisman year, he was able to do that because the Aggie's OL were crap. So, you know he's capable of doing that.
This year, their OL were a little better and Manziel became a more "pocket" passing QB. I'm guessing it's because he wanted to show NFL teams that he could do both.
I agree that Manziel could be a great NFL QB, however, I think that he would seriously go the way of Ryan Leaf, if he went to the Browns. As I pretty much agree with Helgrenze. They have some kind of QB, perhaps not the best thats out there, but without a line to protect him, it's not going to matter who is under center.
Honestly, I really don't like how Manziel's game translates to the pro game. He's a short, slight-of-frame guy who likes to freelance too much. I guess the comparison people make to counter the doubters is Russell Wilson. Wilson did freelance a ton at NC State, although I'd argue that he showed he could play in a more structured offense at Wisky. HOWEVER, I have read stuff that says some scouts think Manziel's pure passing skills are pretty good. So I may end up being completely wrong. I don't think anyone disagrees with the idea that he'll have a lot to work on, from ditching bad habits and learning how to play within structure, to working on his body so he can absorb punishment.
Regarding the Browns -- you guys know that their offensive line has 2 Pro Bowlers on it, right? That doesn't mean that there aren't holes there, but they're very far from being the worst o-line in the league. Bad quarterbacking can LEAD to sacks.
Andrew Luck got sacked 40 times in 2012. And all he did was lead the team to the playoffs and one of the biggest turnarounds in NFL history. Because he's a really good quarterback, and that's the bottom line.
gorgon wrote: Honestly, I really don't like how Manziel's game translates to the pro game. He's a short, slight-of-frame guy who likes to freelance too much. I guess the comparison people make to counter the doubters is Russell Wilson. Wilson did freelance a ton at NC State, although I'd argue that he showed he could play in a more structured offense at Wisky. HOWEVER, I have read stuff that says some scouts think Manziel's pure passing skills are pretty good. So I may end up being completely wrong. I don't think anyone disagrees with the idea that he'll have a lot to work on, from ditching bad habits and learning how to play within structure, to working on his body so he can absorb punishment.
Glad you mentioned Wilson, I'm so sad the Browns didn't draft him :-\ He would have been a far better choice for Shurmur's offense than Weeden, not that I liked Shurmur, but Russell would have done better than that sack of gak.
Regarding the Browns -- you guys know that their offensive line has 2 Pro Bowlers on it, right? That doesn't mean that there aren't holes there, but they're very far from being the worst o-line in the league. Bad quarterbacking can LEAD to sacks.
One of those two Pro Bowlers is a 6 time Pro Bowler, most of our issues are on the right side, which is all down to Mitchell Schwartz
Andrew Luck got sacked 40 times in 2012. And all he did was lead the team to the playoffs and one of the biggest turnarounds in NFL history. Because he's a really good quarterback, and that's the bottom line.
Cause Stone Cold said so?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/01/10 15:05:27
DR:80+S++G+M+B+I+Pwmhd11#++D++A++++/sWD-R++++T(S)DM+ Ask me about Brushfire or Endless: Fantasy Tactics
gorgon wrote: Honestly, I really don't like how Manziel's game translates to the pro game. He's a short, slight-of-frame guy who likes to freelance too much. I guess the comparison people make to counter the doubters is Russell Wilson. Wilson did freelance a ton at NC State, although I'd argue that he showed he could play in a more structured offense at Wisky. HOWEVER, I have read stuff that says some scouts think Manziel's pure passing skills are pretty good. So I may end up being completely wrong. I don't think anyone disagrees with the idea that he'll have a lot to work on, from ditching bad habits and learning how to play within structure, to working on his body so he can absorb punishment.
Regarding the Browns -- you guys know that their offensive line has 2 Pro Bowlers on it, right? That doesn't mean that there aren't holes there, but they're very far from being the worst o-line in the league. Bad quarterbacking can LEAD to sacks.
Andrew Luck got sacked 40 times in 2012. And all he did was lead the team to the playoffs and one of the biggest turnarounds in NFL history. Because he's a really good quarterback, and that's the bottom line.
Hmm lets see... The Browns finished 9th in Passing Offense, behind Philadelphia, Averaging 11.5 yds per pass, 273yds per game, and 26 passing TDs. Yep, Bad QBing right there..
They also tied for 5th worst in rushing yards, and per game yards (With Pitt). Dead Last for Rushing TDs (4, Tied by their own Defense) behind Tampa Bay, Jacksonville and Houston. They did average 4 yards per attempt, but that is misleading since the range over the NFL is 5.1 (Philly) to 3.1 (Ravens).
So Yeah.. Awful QB play is what really hurt the Browns... Not Awful O-line play.
Of all the races of the universe the Squats have the longest memories and the shortest tempers. They are uncouth, unpredictably violent, and frequently drunk. Overall, I'm glad they're on our side!
Office of Naval Intelligence Research discovers 3 out of 4 sailors make up 75% of U.S. Navy.
"Madness is like gravity... All you need is a little push."
gorgon wrote: Honestly, I really don't like how Manziel's game translates to the pro game. He's a short, slight-of-frame guy who likes to freelance too much. I guess the comparison people make to counter the doubters is Russell Wilson. Wilson did freelance a ton at NC State, although I'd argue that he showed he could play in a more structured offense at Wisky. HOWEVER, I have read stuff that says some scouts think Manziel's pure passing skills are pretty good. So I may end up being completely wrong. I don't think anyone disagrees with the idea that he'll have a lot to work on, from ditching bad habits and learning how to play within structure, to working on his body so he can absorb punishment.
Regarding the Browns -- you guys know that their offensive line has 2 Pro Bowlers on it, right? That doesn't mean that there aren't holes there, but they're very far from being the worst o-line in the league. Bad quarterbacking can LEAD to sacks.
Andrew Luck got sacked 40 times in 2012. And all he did was lead the team to the playoffs and one of the biggest turnarounds in NFL history. Because he's a really good quarterback, and that's the bottom line.
Hmm lets see... The Browns finished 9th in Passing Offense, behind Philadelphia, Averaging 11.5 yds per pass, 273yds per game, and 26 passing TDs. Yep, Bad QBing right there..
They also tied for 5th worst in rushing yards, and per game yards (With Pitt). Dead Last for Rushing TDs (4, Tied by their own Defense) behind Tampa Bay, Jacksonville and Houston. They did average 4 yards per attempt, but that is misleading since the range over the NFL is 5.1 (Philly) to 3.1 (Ravens).
So Yeah.. Awful QB play is what really hurt the Browns... Not Awful O-line play.
You're ignoring most of the passing stats, and instead looking at others and not understanding context. They were a 4-12 team that traded away their featured back, and was behind in games more often than they were ahead. They're going to put up some passing yards (albeit inefficiently as the rest of the stats obviously illustrate).
Really, I can't even have a conversation with you if you're going to look at their QB ratings, completion %, YPA, INTs, etc -- and watch Browns games with your own eyes -- and somehow come away with the conclusion that the quarterbacking issues are primarily the fault of the o-line with a pair of Pro Bowlers. That's categorically *bizarre* to me.
Like with many teams, their o-line could use some help. But you're 100% wrong that throwing Tom Brady or Peyton Manning on that team wouldn't change a thing. It'd change everything, including the sack total that you seem overly focused on. Good quarterbacking changes everything. I know this because I've watched Terry Bradshaw, Ben Roethlisberger, AND all the ugliness that came between and seen the results.
Our featured back was averaging 2.9 yards per carry... Trading him was a good thing, sadly we didn't replace him with much. Though Edwin Backer, the Touchdown Maker, has promise.
DR:80+S++G+M+B+I+Pwmhd11#++D++A++++/sWD-R++++T(S)DM+ Ask me about Brushfire or Endless: Fantasy Tactics
The Bears lost all their DTs, and six defensive starters, including 4 pro-bowlers, for most of the year, as well as their starting QB for a significant stretch. Fortunately we had a capable backup QB, but our defense was a shambles, and it's no surprise it was the worst defense in the history of the franchise with who we lost. We were starting a DE at DT for most of the season (and it showed too - giving up 50+ pounds in the center of the d-line, no surprise that we were making every RB we faced look like Peterson.
This week:
Saints over Seattle
Denver over San Diego
New England over Indy
San Fran over Carolina
Not to mention, they "lost" one of their key starters before the season even started in Brian Urlacher
And I will have to say, I am greatly displeased with your Saints/Seattle pick... I honestly don't think the Saints can deal with the 12th man, again
After that Philly game, the Saints showed they can play outside on the road and win (In extreme cold no less).
all 5 losses in the regular season were on the road and the saints have not lost at home this season.
The Seahawks are a good team, but I think the Saints can shut them down and come out with a win.
"Did you notice a sign out in front of my chapel that said "Land Raider Storage"?" -High Chaplain Astorath the Grim Redeemer of the Lost.
I sold my soul to the devil and now the bastard is demanding a refund!
We do not have an attorney-client relationship. I am not your lawyer. The statements I make do not constitute legal advice. Any statements made by me are based upon the limited facts you have presented, and under the premise that you will consult with a local attorney. This is not an attempt to solicit business. This disclaimer is in addition to any disclaimers that this website has made.
After that Philly game, the Saints showed they can play outside on the road and win (In extreme cold no less).
all 5 losses in the regular season were on the road and the saints have not lost at home this season.
The Seahawks are a good team, but I think the Saints can shut them down and come out with a win.
Yes the Saints proved they can win in weather.... But the one thing that I don't think they can overcome is the 12th Man. You probably have no clue just how loud that place can get when the fans want it to be loud. Heck, I think the stadium is designed to do that. and IIRC, the last time the Saints went up to Seattle they lost. Whether that's down to the fan/crowd noise, the weather or just Seattle being a better team, I can't really say. But what I can say is that dealing with weather is one thing, and different teams have shown a great ability to adapt or not, to it; but dealing with crowd noise when the fans are really going is a whole other bag of worms that teams just cannot prepare for.
What do you guys think of coaches (like Whisenhunt) who are actively coaching playoff teams interviewing for coaching jobs with other teams....?
Do you think it's "No distraction" as teams claim?
Do you think it actually is a distraction and will make a difference?
Personally, I find it ridiculous that coaches who are under contract to a team and who are actively coaching their teams in the playoffs would go out and interview for head coaching jobs.
Take Whisenhunt for example.
He had 3 different interviews this week. How many hours do you think he spent either traveling or on the phone with those other teams? 5? 6? More?
As it is, they only have 4, maybe 5 days to practice. If they played on Sunday, they travel back Monday (lost day) practice Tues, Wed, Thurs...maybe a little Friday...then another travel day if they play Sunday. Otherwise, travel on Friday for a Saturday game.
All the hours at this time are so valuable to your team....so to go and do interviews, either you really have no respect for your team, no faith in your team, or you're ambition is such that you don't care what it takes to get to the top.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/01/11 02:50:43
I thought they had rules against people from play off teams being talked to until after they were out.
Of all the races of the universe the Squats have the longest memories and the shortest tempers. They are uncouth, unpredictably violent, and frequently drunk. Overall, I'm glad they're on our side!
Office of Naval Intelligence Research discovers 3 out of 4 sailors make up 75% of U.S. Navy.
"Madness is like gravity... All you need is a little push."
Chancetragedy wrote: Seattle lookin good so far. Skittles raining from the sky in Seattle lol.
Good... and it was pointed out during the half time show, Seattle aint lost at home, when leading at the half since Wilson became the QB. This bodes well for those of us from the NW who want to see our team do well
I got annoyed by the Saints 4th down attempt, their third down play was really getting a 4th & short instead of trying to convert it. If you're going to do that run the 4th down play on 3rd and if it doesn't work kick the field goal and take the fething points so you're not being shut out: at the very least it's a moral victory
Currently debating whether to study for my exams or paint some Deathwing
