phillybear 366 Posted September 11, 2011 Jay Cutler 300+ yards; 2 TDs....destroys the team everyone thought was going to take the league by storm after they added Julio Jones. Nobody is calling Atlanta a team going to take the league by storm. That would be the "Dream Team" the Eagles, or maybe New England. The game was a Pick'em, and I bet on Chicago, as Atlanta seems to suck ass on the road. 300+ and 2 TDs against that below average defense is kind of shitty. Did you know that Atlanta had more total yards than Chicago 386-377? Chicago won the turnover by 2 and got some alternative scoring (defensive TD), so Chicago was a bit lucky to win the game. Nice trade for TJax.... Free agent signing. Probably the biggest carrot on the string to sign Sydney Rice since they are buddies. that great trade and extension for Houshmandzadeh was great....oh wait.....at least they signed Sidney Rice to that great contract after he had one solid year and is always injured....oh wait.....at least they gave up a 2nd round draft pick for a QB and then extended him to a ridiculous 10M+ contract only to have him on the bench....oh wait.....at least they got the great Julius Jones to play RB to go with Lynch and Forsett and Washington...oh wait that was a shiatty deal too for the seahags TJ Housh was a free agent signing. A bad signing by that retard Ruskell, who is presently running your front office. Well, Rice missed one game, so he's definitely a bust. The trade was a 3rd round pick for Whitehurst (and a swap of 2nd rounders). Julius Jones was signed by the drooling retard Ruskell (who is currently running your front office), and was signed prior to Forsett, Washington, and Lynch joining the team; the playoff run by Lynch to clinch the win over the Saints is something I've seen replayed thousands of times on the networks; it's a play for the ages. You know, you might take some lessons on trash talking. It helps when you learn some facts, and it helps to avoid Downs Syndrome, you focking idiot. Is Walter Payton still dead from AIDS? BEEP. BEEP. HERE COMES THE SWEETNESS FAILDOZER. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
phillybear 366 Posted September 11, 2011 And furthermore, what kind of numbskull talks garbage at half time? You are such a lumpy forehead lunkhead, you could stick your tongue on a flagpole in August and it would get stuck. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Joey Gladstone 33 Posted September 11, 2011 Title of this thread right now: 49ers ready for a beating.... ============== Must be fun to be delusional and brain dead.... 49ers 16 seahags 0 at half time. But at least it MUST BE EXCITING to be a Seahawks fan .... that great trade and extension for Houshmandzadeh was great....oh wait.....at least they signed Sidney Rice to that great contract after he had one solid year and is always injured....oh wait.....at least they gave up a 2nd round draft pick for a QB and then extended him to a ridiculous 10M+ contract only to have him on the bench....oh wait.....at least they got the great Julius Jones to play RB to go with Lynch and Forsett and Washington...oh wait that was a shiatty deal too for the seahags Nice franchise! All those championship trophies look so good! Hey look another Tavaris Jackson int to end the half Somebody already beat me to it, but you need to take your lumps like a man poostard Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Joey Gladstone 33 Posted September 11, 2011 Ugly game (if you expected anything else you're retarded) but Seattle looks better then I was expecting. Probably the two worst starting quarterbacks in the league, but it's not like Seattle has anybody on the level of a Patrick Willis, Frank Gore, Vernon Davis or even a Mikey Crabtree. Plus they're on the road. They're hanging with them the entire way, and have nowhere to go but up. But yeah, this game is awful Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FlaHawker 24 Posted September 12, 2011 Ugly game (if you expected anything else you're retarded) but Seattle looks better then I was expecting. Probably the two worst starting quarterbacks in the league, but it's not like Seattle has anybody on the level of a Patrick Willis, Frank Gore, Vernon Davis or even a Mikey Crabtree. Plus they're on the road. They're hanging with them the entire way, and have nowhere to go but up. But yeah, this game is awful One game closer to Andrew Luck! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WhiteWonder 2,685 Posted September 12, 2011 Nobody is calling Atlanta a team going to take the league by storm. That would be the "Dream Team" the Eagles, or maybe New England. The game was a Pick'em, and I bet on Chicago, as Atlanta seems to suck ass on the road. 300+ and 2 TDs against that below average defense is kind of shitty. Did you know that Atlanta had more total yards than Chicago 386-377? Chicago won the turnover by 2 and got some alternative scoring (defensive TD), so Chicago was a bit lucky to win the game. i dont often agree with this sweetness character but you are pretty far off base here. With the addition of Julio and a few defensive additions, this Falcons team has been hyped up big time. Not sure how you call a team lucky to win 30-6. They thoroughly outplayed the Falcons on both sides of the ball. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Hood 9 Posted September 12, 2011 i dont often agree with this sweetness character but you are pretty far off base here. With the addition of Julio and a few defensive additions, this Falcons team has been hyped up big time. Not sure how you call a team lucky to win 30-6. They thoroughly outplayed the Falcons on both sides of the ball. You'll have to excuse him.................as a life long Hawks fan he has no real concept of what good NFL football looks like. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
phillybear 366 Posted September 12, 2011 i dont often agree with this sweetness character but you are pretty far off base here. With the addition of Julio and a few defensive additions, this Falcons team has been hyped up big time. Not sure how you call a team lucky to win 30-6. They thoroughly outplayed the Falcons on both sides of the ball. I haven't heard any hype concerning Atlanta. I don't understand why they would be; I think they overachieved last year. But that's me and what I hear. You'd be surprised how often the game stats don't match up the final score. You can get an impression of one team dominating another, when actually it was a close game stat wise. And a close final score can hide the fact of a statistical blow out. It's a tool that degenerate gamblers like myself use. And the raw numbers indicate Chicago's win was misleading yesterday. Numbers are numbers. And the numbers say Atlanta had more total yards than the Bears, so the Bears absolutely did not out play them on both sides of the ball. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FlaHawker 24 Posted September 12, 2011 This isn't a Falcons or Bears thread--move on. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
phillybear 366 Posted September 12, 2011 You'll have to excuse him.................as a life long Hawks fan he has no real concept of what good NFL football looks like. Sometimes I find myself trying to teach life lessons to the unsophisticated, and it always ends in frustration. Fock Aristotle. Set fire to Stephen Hawking's hair. Here comes Professor phillybear. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fantasy Noob 10 Posted September 12, 2011 Horrible game, tons of penalties it was painful to watch. Our Defense looks good, it is only Alex Smith but they held strong in the red zone almost the entire first half and then just wore down when our offense went 3 and out on every single possesion in the first half. The defense must have spent 25mins on the field in the first half. We finally got some drives going in the second half, either great adjustments by the coaching staff or Tavaris remembered how to throw a pass further than a RB. We need some kind of a passing threat to help get that running game going. I was shocked when the stat came up at halftime Tavaris was 6/7 for 42 yards, as I had actually only remembered him completing one pass. I actually had to go back and look and thats when I noticed all those dump off passes to the RB. The defense looks stout but we desperately need to field a modestly competent offense to keep them from wearing out. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fantasy Noob 10 Posted September 12, 2011 Also how do I ignore someone on the boards? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Joey Gladstone 33 Posted September 12, 2011 On the plus side I started the 49ers defense/special teams. My play of the week and proof that drafting a defense is focking stoopid. Our beloved Steelers next week....I'm pretty sure that defense won't be available. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sho Nuff 720 Posted September 12, 2011 On the plus side I started the 49ers defense/special teams. My play of the week and proof that drafting a defense is focking stoopid. Our beloved Steelers next week....I'm pretty sure that defense won't be available. Tampa gets Minnesota.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WhiteWonder 2,685 Posted September 12, 2011 I haven't heard any hype concerning Atlanta. I don't understand why they would be; I think they overachieved last year. But that's me and what I hear. You'd be surprised how often the game stats don't match up the final score. You can get an impression of one team dominating another, when actually it was a close game stat wise. And a close final score can hide the fact of a statistical blow out. It's a tool that degenerate gamblers like myself use. And the raw numbers indicate Chicago's win was misleading yesterday. Numbers are numbers. And the numbers say Atlanta had more total yards than the Bears, so the Bears absolutely did not out play them on both sides of the ball. I saw 75% of the game so I'm not going by score or statistics. Statistics are often misleading. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
phillybear 366 Posted September 12, 2011 I saw 75% of the game so I'm not going by score or statistics. Statistics are often misleading. I'm a data analyst, so I'll say that statistics are mostly accurate. The way they are presented can be misleading. For instance, second hand smoke. But that's another topic for the other bored. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diomed1 0 Posted September 12, 2011 Jackson will never be any good. If the Hawks are going to be really bad this year, I hope they get Luck in the draft. They need a franchise QB for the future. Anyways, the game.....The only players I thought that looked good for Seattle were on D. Chancellor and Thomas. They have really upgraded their safeties. The offense? Ugh.. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diomed1 0 Posted September 12, 2011 On the plus side I started the 49ers defense/special teams. My play of the week and proof that drafting a defense is focking stoopid. Our beloved Steelers next week....I'm pretty sure that defense won't be available. I agree. That's why I only play in leagues that use IDP's instead. I kinda got screwed this week though. Berry out for the year and D. Hawthorne was listed as probable but didn't play. Two big fat zeros in my one league. It sucked!!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kopy 559 Posted September 13, 2011 I'm gonna have to order my Doug Baldwin jersey. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sweetness_34 0 Posted September 14, 2011 Nobody is calling Atlanta a team going to take the league by storm. That would be the "Dream Team" the Eagles, or maybe New England. The game was a Pick'em, and I bet on Chicago, as Atlanta seems to suck ass on the road. 300+ and 2 TDs against that below average defense is kind of shitty. Did you know that Atlanta had more total yards than Chicago 386-377? Chicago won the turnover by 2 and got some alternative scoring (defensive TD), so Chicago was a bit lucky to win the game. Free agent signing. Probably the biggest carrot on the string to sign Sydney Rice since they are buddies. TJ Housh was a free agent signing. A bad signing by that retard Ruskell, who is presently running your front office. Well, Rice missed one game, so he's definitely a bust. The trade was a 3rd round pick for Whitehurst (and a swap of 2nd rounders). Julius Jones was signed by the drooling retard Ruskell (who is currently running your front office), and was signed prior to Forsett, Washington, and Lynch joining the team; the playoff run by Lynch to clinch the win over the Saints is something I've seen replayed thousands of times on the networks; it's a play for the ages. You know, you might take some lessons on trash talking. It helps when you learn some facts, and it helps to avoid Downs Syndrome, you focking idiot. Is Walter Payton still dead from AIDS? BEEP. BEEP. HERE COMES THE SWEETNESS FAILDOZER. Bears were lucky to win 30-12 (30-6 other than a fluky pick 6 because of a tipped ball)???? LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL You are such a retard. I bet you thought the Bears were lucky to azz-fock your precious seahags last year too in the playoffs when you heard all of America turn their TV sets off after the 1st freaking quarter because they saw how one sided that game was on both sides of the ball. Enjoy the shiat that is your franchise....a cesspool .... a joke in the NFL. At least Bengals won a game...at least the Lydowns are now relevant too....but your precious franchise is the ugliest arm pit in the entire NFL. But there is nothing more entertaining than a delusional brain dead seahag fan start a thread telling us how EXCITING it is to watch this garbage of a team. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sweetness_34 0 Posted September 14, 2011 This isn't a Falcons or Bears thread--move on. Looks like your precious feelings got hurt watching your franchise go up in smokes OTOH Bears dominate and destroy a team that was favored to beat them. You should know what that means .... we did the same to your team last year in the playoffs too. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sweetness_34 0 Posted September 14, 2011 I haven't heard any hype concerning Atlanta. I don't understand why they would be; I think they overachieved last year. But that's me and what I hear. You'd be surprised how often the game stats don't match up the final score. You can get an impression of one team dominating another, when actually it was a close game stat wise. And a close final score can hide the fact of a statistical blow out. It's a tool that degenerate gamblers like myself use. And the raw numbers indicate Chicago's win was misleading yesterday. Numbers are numbers. And the numbers say Atlanta had more total yards than the Bears, so the Bears absolutely did not out play them on both sides of the ball. Whatever makes you sleep better at night, princess. Bears destroyed the Falcons on both sides of the ball. But you keep believing what you want.... Do not cry your self to sleep.... it is only a game. Someone has to be a loser....turns out Seattle is very good at it. Your precious Mariners are calling ....so are the Oklahoma Thunders. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sweetness_34 0 Posted September 14, 2011 Hey look ...Peter King agrees with you and thinks the Bears got lucky. After all he saw the entire game live at the stadium. Yup - filthybear is your crassic delusional brain dead seahag fan =================================== 11. Don't sleep on the Bears. As I have, of course. The Bills and Texans were dominant Sunday, but Chicago's foe, Atlanta, makes its performance -- it was 30-6 after three quarters, ended 30-12, and could have been worse -- so impressive. The Falcons got 386 yards, but the swarming Bear defense, led by Brian Urlacher, pestered Matt Ryan all day. And though Jay Cutler got hit too much and was sacked five times, he had enough time to throw for 312 yards and get the Bears in position to score on five of their first seven possessions. "As long as I've been here, the pressure's been on the offensive line,'' said Roberto Garza. "We know that. We accept it. It's up to us to come through and keep Jay clean. We're ready for that challenge.'' ============================================ 4. Chicago (1-0). Don't see how a team can be more impressive than the Bears were Sunday, and they'll give the Pack a run if they can keep Jay Cutler relatively clean. ============================================== Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/peter_king/09/11/week.1/index.html#ixzz1XtCkCTu4 Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/peter_king/09/11/week.1/index.html#ixzz1XtCVbBKl Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mahoney 9 Posted September 14, 2011 Bears were lucky to win 30-12 (30-6 other than a fluky pick 6 because of a tipped ball)???? LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL You are such a retard. I bet you thought the Bears were lucky to azz-fock your precious seahags last year too in the playoffs when you heard all of America turn their TV sets off after the 1st freaking quarter because they saw how one sided that game was on both sides of the ball. Enjoy the shiat that is your franchise....a cesspool .... a joke in the NFL. At least Bengals won a game...at least the Lydowns are now relevant too....but your precious franchise is the ugliest arm pit in the entire NFL. But there is nothing more entertaining than a delusional brain dead seahag fan start a thread telling us how EXCITING it is to watch this garbage of a team. Oh yeah...remember Sweetness can say this because he lives in the NW Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Joey Gladstone 33 Posted September 14, 2011 Hey look ...Peter King agrees with you and thinks the Bears got lucky. After all he saw the entire game live at the stadium. Yup - filthybear is your crassic delusional brain dead seahag fan =================================== 11. Don't sleep on the Bears. As I have, of course. The Bills and Texans were dominant Sunday, but Chicago's foe, Atlanta, makes its performance -- it was 30-6 after three quarters, ended 30-12, and could have been worse -- so impressive. The Falcons got 386 yards, but the swarming Bear defense, led by Brian Urlacher, pestered Matt Ryan all day. And though Jay Cutler got hit too much and was sacked five times, he had enough time to throw for 312 yards and get the Bears in position to score on five of their first seven possessions. "As long as I've been here, the pressure's been on the offensive line,'' said Roberto Garza. "We know that. We accept it. It's up to us to come through and keep Jay clean. We're ready for that challenge.'' ============================================ 4. Chicago (1-0). Don't see how a team can be more impressive than the Bears were Sunday, and they'll give the Pack a run if they can keep Jay Cutler relatively clean. ============================================== Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/peter_king/09/11/week.1/index.html#ixzz1XtCkCTu4 Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/peter_king/09/11/week.1/index.html#ixzz1XtCVbBKl Chicago is still the 3rd best team in that division at best. When Duh Bears show us who they really are, you'll be MIA for the rest of the year. It's an annual thing. Remember last year when Seattle went into Chicago and kicked the fock out of the Bears? Your queer-ass handle didn't show back up around here until after the Seattle playoff game, only to disappear the following week, just like your boy Jay Cutler (1 career playoff win...against a 7-9 team!). You are the epitome of a chicken-sh!t, fair-weather fan and there is no beating brutal enough to correct what's wrong with you. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jgcrawfish 232 Posted September 14, 2011 I haven't heard any hype concerning Atlanta. I don't understand why they would be; I think they overachieved last year. But that's me and what I hear. You'd be surprised how often the game stats don't match up the final score. You can get an impression of one team dominating another, when actually it was a close game stat wise. And a close final score can hide the fact of a statistical blow out. It's a tool that degenerate gamblers like myself use. And the raw numbers indicate Chicago's win was misleading yesterday. Numbers are numbers. And the numbers say Atlanta had more total yards than the Bears, so the Bears absolutely did not out play them on both sides of the ball. This is pretty much the logic of a loser. Nobody gives a flying fock if the #'s were 1000 yrds of offense to 50 yrds of offense, if the team with 50 yrds of offense won 30-6. Losers try to justify it with the "we won on paper" argument that holds absolutely no weight. You are what the final score says you are. The only number both Chicago and Atlanta care about is "1"...as in the number of wins Chicago has and the number of losses Atlanta has after the number of weeks they've been playing. You don't win it in the stat sheet. Devaluing turnovers, as you did in an earlier statement, is probably the single most idiotic thing you can do. "Chicago was a bit lucky" because they got turnovers? Um, ok Mr. Statistician, if there is one "stat" that determines who wins games more often than not (other than the obvious dumbass answer of "whoever has more points at the end") what stat would that be? Um, turnovers. And "Atlanta hasn't been hyped"? Please. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Joey Gladstone 33 Posted September 14, 2011 This is pretty much the logic of a loser. Nobody gives a flying fock if the #'s were 1000 yrds of offense to 50 yrds of offense, if the team with 50 yrds of offense won 30-6. Losers try to justify it with the "we won on paper" argument that holds absolutely no weight. You are what the final score says you are. The only number both Chicago and Atlanta care about is "1"...as in the number of wins Chicago has and the number of losses Atlanta has after the number of weeks they've been playing. You don't win it in the stat sheet. Devaluing turnovers, as you did in an earlier statement, is probably the single most idiotic thing you can do. "Chicago was a bit lucky" because they got turnovers? Um, ok Mr. Statistician, if there is one "stat" that determines who wins games more often than not (other than the obvious dumbass answer of "whoever has more points at the end") what stat would that be? Um, turnovers. And "Atlanta hasn't been hyped"? Please. The sad thing is, this isn't the first time you've defended Sweetness. Do statements like this make you feel better about the ass-pounding Pittsburgh took Sunday? Will your heart be uplifted next Sunday when the media proclaims The Steelers "back on track" after a rousing win over the Seahawks? All that matters are wins and losses right? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jgcrawfish 232 Posted September 14, 2011 The sad thing is, this isn't the first time you've defended Sweetness. Do statements like this make you feel better about the ass-pounding Pittsburgh took Sunday? Will your heart be uplifted next Sunday when the media proclaims The Steelers "back on track" after a rousing win over the Seahawks? All that matters are wins and losses right? I'm not defending Sweetness, I really can't stand him. Nor was I attacking the Seahawks. I was pointing out one of the laziest and most half-hearted attempts at defending one's position I've seen on the board. Phillybear should stick to his modus operandi of heads in buckets of AIDS and not-so-veiled threats instead of attempting, and failing, to partake in conventional conversations then trying to justify it with "I'm a data analyst". I was simply reading through a thread and noticed a guy talking out his arse and decided to point it out. If the Steelers play even half as bad this weekend against the Hawks as they did against the Ravens they'll get their ass handed to them again. I don't really care what the media says about them, and I personally won't count them as "back on track" unless they beat the Ravens on 11/6 after beating the Patriots the prior weekend and are sitting in 1st place. Based on what I saw this past weekend, I consider all of those requirements highly unlikely. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
phillybear 366 Posted September 14, 2011 This is pretty much the logic of a loser. Nobody gives a flying fock if the #'s were 1000 yrds of offense to 50 yrds of offense, if the team with 50 yrds of offense won 30-6. Losers try to justify it with the "we won on paper" argument that holds absolutely no weight. You are what the final score says you are. The only number both Chicago and Atlanta care about is "1"...as in the number of wins Chicago has and the number of losses Atlanta has after the number of weeks they've been playing. You don't win it in the stat sheet. Devaluing turnovers, as you did in an earlier statement, is probably the single most idiotic thing you can do. "Chicago was a bit lucky" because they got turnovers? Um, ok Mr. Statistician, if there is one "stat" that determines who wins games more often than not (other than the obvious dumbass answer of "whoever has more points at the end") what stat would that be? Um, turnovers. And "Atlanta hasn't been hyped"? Please. If you choose to ignore the box scores, then you are quite close minded when it comes to truth. You've made up your mind before seeing any evidence. You's be great in a jury pool. Turnovers are the product of luck. Thank you for making my point. You should think about watching a different hobby, one that doesn't require actual thought. Maybe car racing. Cars go left. Wheeeeee!!!! Even the people in Atlanta aren't hyping Atlanta. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
phillybear 366 Posted September 14, 2011 I'm not defending Sweetness, I really can't stand him. Nor was I attacking the Seahawks. I was pointing out one of the laziest and most half-hearted attempts at defending one's position I've seen on the board. Phillybear should stick to his modus operandi of heads in buckets of AIDS and not-so-veiled threats instead of attempting, and failing, to partake in conventional conversations then trying to justify it with "I'm a data analyst". I was simply reading through a thread and noticed a guy talking out his arse and decided to point it out. If the Steelers play even half as bad this weekend against the Hawks as they did against the Ravens they'll get their ass handed to them again. I don't really care what the media says about them, and I personally won't count them as "back on track" unless they beat the Ravens on 11/6 after beating the Patriots the prior weekend and are sitting in 1st place. Based on what I saw this past weekend, I consider all of those requirements highly unlikely. You are quite the numbskull. Can you be honest for a second? Do you have Downs Syndrome? Seriously. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
phillybear 366 Posted September 14, 2011 Hey look ...Peter King agrees with you and thinks the Bears got lucky. After all he saw the entire game live at the stadium. Yup - filthybear is your crassic delusional brain dead seahag fan =================================== 11. Don't sleep on the Bears. As I have, of course. The Bills and Texans were dominant Sunday, but Chicago's foe, Atlanta, makes its performance -- it was 30-6 after three quarters, ended 30-12, and could have been worse -- so impressive. The Falcons got 386 yards, but the swarming Bear defense, led by Brian Urlacher, pestered Matt Ryan all day. And though Jay Cutler got hit too much and was sacked five times, he had enough time to throw for 312 yards and get the Bears in position to score on five of their first seven possessions. "As long as I've been here, the pressure's been on the offensive line,'' said Roberto Garza. "We know that. We accept it. It's up to us to come through and keep Jay clean. We're ready for that challenge.'' ============================================ 4. Chicago (1-0). Don't see how a team can be more impressive than the Bears were Sunday, and they'll give the Pack a run if they can keep Jay Cutler relatively clean. ============================================== Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/peter_king/09/11/week.1/index.html#ixzz1XtCkCTu4 Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/peter_king/09/11/week.1/index.html#ixzz1XtCVbBKl Peter King writes with the logic of a 5 year old. Which explains why you read his drivel. The Bears defense gives up nearly 400 yards of offense, but they were pestering. I wonder if they would have given up 1,000 yards if they weren't on top of their game. Jay Cutler spend the game lying on his back, but he was impressive. I'm impressed too. He just went one game in a row without pulling himself out of a game with a phantom injury. Well, at least that's what his girlfriend has been insisting the last few months. He's a faker. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diomed1 0 Posted September 14, 2011 I thought this thread was about Seattle. Perhaps someone could start a Chicago thread? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FlaHawker 24 Posted September 14, 2011 I thought this thread was about Seattle. Perhaps someone could start a Chicago thread? Or a Pittsburgh thread, or a Jets thread or a Packers thread and get these stalker losers the fock out of here... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Hood 9 Posted September 14, 2011 I thought this thread was about Seattle. Perhaps someone could start a Chicago thread? Oh no. These other Seattle retards decided it was a great idea to chase after Sweatness years ago and that's why he's back again posting this crap in here. You guys wanted him you got him. Bears fans realize he is a moron and just ignore him. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
phillybear 366 Posted September 14, 2011 I thought this thread was about Seattle. Perhaps someone could start a Chicago thread? It's not an accident that the Seattle threads get over 50 pages long every year. It's mostly mud slinging, conspiracy theories, and occasional Seahawk discussion. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
phillybear 366 Posted September 14, 2011 Well, let the Superbowl talk rekindle. As some of you may already know, the same crew that officiated the Seattle Pittsburgh debacle of a Superbowl will be officiating the game this week. Irony? Coincidence? Tearing off scar tissue? Well, we do have Bill Leavy on the record as apologizing for the calls made during the Superbowl, how he blew it, and apologized to Seahawk fans. Will the media give this apology from a year ago any mention? Nope. Because you can't report on the facts of an NFL game being fixed. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jgcrawfish 232 Posted September 14, 2011 If you choose to ignore the box scores, then you are quite close minded when it comes to truth. You've made up your mind before seeing any evidence. You's be great in a jury pool. Turnovers are the product of luck. Thank you for making my point. You should think about watching a different hobby, one that doesn't require actual thought. Maybe car racing. Cars go left. Wheeeeee!!!! Even the people in Atlanta aren't hyping Atlanta. 6th in ESPN http://espn.go.com/nfl/powerrankings/_/year/2011/week/1 3rd in CBS (last week) http://www.cbssports.com/#!/nfl/story/15573518/power-rankings-catch-your-breath-theres-15-to-go Peter King picking the Falcons for SB http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/football/nfl/09/05/peter.king.predictions/index.html Brian Billick - 5th http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/powerRankings/2011/PRE Random other site 7th: http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2011/9/6/2407741/nfl-power-rankings-2011-green-bay-packers I'm even going to address the idiocy of your turnover statement cause it's clear you give dipsh!ts a bad name. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
donhaas 18 Posted September 14, 2011 Sweetness finally found his log-in password? This is an anonymous board..... don't be such a coward.... Take your lumps on "Dumb & Dumber" and take your lumps on the Packers punking the Bears twice.... Stop just popping up when the Bears win.... Now that Swampdog is proving to be a semi-stand-up guy [can't believe I just typed that].... you are the saddest, most-pathetic poster we have at FFToday.... May SkyGhost have mercy on your soul! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FlaHawker 24 Posted September 14, 2011 Well, let the Superbowl talk rekindle. As some of you may already know, the same crew that officiated the Seattle Pittsburgh debacle of a Superbowl will be officiating the game this week. Irony? Coincidence? Tearing off scar tissue? Well, we do have Bill Leavy on the record as apologizing for the calls made during the Superbowl, how he blew it, and apologized to Seahawk fans. Will the media give this apology from a year ago any mention? Nope. Because you can't report on the facts of an NFL game being fixed. Bill Leavy did admit he cost the Hawks the game which vindicated Seahawk Nation and spit right in the face of most retard Steeler bandwagon idiots who claimed that game was perfectly oficiated. The * lives! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
phillybear 366 Posted September 14, 2011 6th in ESPN http://espn.go.com/nfl/powerrankings/_/year/2011/week/1 3rd in CBS (last week) http://www.cbssports.com/#!/nfl/story/15573518/power-rankings-catch-your-breath-theres-15-to-go Peter King picking the Falcons for SB http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/football/nfl/09/05/peter.king.predictions/index.html Brian Billick - 5th http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/powerRankings/2011/PRE Random other site 7th: http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2011/9/6/2407741/nfl-power-rankings-2011-green-bay-packers I'm even going to address the idiocy of your turnover statement cause it's clear you give dipsh!ts a bad name. jgcrawfish's thoughts to live by...Always judge a book by its cover. Go ahead and rush to conclusions. Appearances are never deceiving. First impression is forever. Judge a man by the color of his skin. There is no point to seeing the whole picture. Why would anyone ever need to dig beneath the surface? Eyes never play tricks on you. Turnovers in football are predictable and planned. The spread makers in Vegas study the numbers and stats. They don't look at a scoreboard and call the Bears a top 3 team. Because they have to be right. Pundits on TV have to make controversial statements and entertain while angering. Also, using numbers is more of an accurate predictor of future results than using a final score only. Stop being a lazy thinker. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites