Text Size

Cleveland Browns & The NFL

Walrus Has No Balls - RG3 a Redskin

Talk Browns football and discuss the NFL here.

Moderators: peeker643, jb, swerb, pup

Re: Walrus Has No Balls - RG3 a Redskin

Unread postby peeker643 » Thu Mar 15, 2012 4:20 pm

JCoz wrote:No Peeker response?



Nothing other than to ask the fellas here if there's anything to this 'old boys club' that Chubby is referring to.

It would seem to me dismissing Chubby's claim that this was a deal between friends and old boys would have to lead to dismissing some of the Lamonte Club bullshit that's prevalent here.

No?

Or is it completely different in that the popular agenda simply isn't served? ;-) ;) :wink: :tfh:
"Great minds think alike. The opposite is also true."

"None of us is as dumb as all of us."


I'm on Twitter at http://twitter.com/peeker643
User avatar
peeker643
Duly Noted
 
Posts: 22741
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: Walrus Has No Balls - RG3 a Redskin

Unread postby Hikohadon » Thu Mar 15, 2012 4:31 pm

peeker643 wrote:Or is it completely different in that the popular agenda simply isn't served? ;-) ;) :wink: :tfh:


That.

It isn't wrong unless Holmgren did it.
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4340
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: Walrus Has No Balls - RG3 a Redskin

Unread postby Triple-S » Thu Mar 15, 2012 4:36 pm

I don't doubt the good ol' boy angle.

it does piss me off though.

anyway we can screw St. Louis over is fine by me at this point.
Swerb wrote:Go start a blog if you want to tell the world your incomprehendible ramblings.


Cerebral_DownTime wrote:I have a big arm and can throw the ball pretty damn far...... maybe even over those moutains. The Browns should sign me, i'll let you all in locker room to drink beer. Then we can all go out the parking lot to watch me do motorcycle stunts.
User avatar
Triple-S
All-time leader in moral victories
 
Posts: 6379
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2008 6:26 pm
Location: Kent-Green, Ohio
Favorite Player: Yuengling
Least Favorite Player: Nati Light.

Re: Walrus Has No Balls - RG3 a Redskin

Unread postby peeker643 » Thu Mar 15, 2012 4:42 pm

Hikohadon wrote:
peeker643 wrote:Or is it completely different in that the popular agenda simply isn't served? ;-) ;) :wink: :tfh:


That.

It isn't wrong unless Holmgren did it.


We need to add the actual Holmgren transgressions to our sig lines because we're in danger of polarity striking us down and turning us into Lamonte clients in the eyes of others. :dingle:
"Great minds think alike. The opposite is also true."

"None of us is as dumb as all of us."


I'm on Twitter at http://twitter.com/peeker643
User avatar
peeker643
Duly Noted
 
Posts: 22741
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: Walrus Has No Balls - RG3 a Redskin

Unread postby Hikohadon » Thu Mar 15, 2012 4:44 pm

peeker643 wrote:
Hikohadon wrote:
peeker643 wrote:Or is it completely different in that the popular agenda simply isn't served? ;-) ;) :wink: :tfh:


That.

It isn't wrong unless Holmgren did it.


We need to add the actual Holmgren transgressions to our sig lines because we're in danger of polarity striking us down and turning us into Lamonte clients in the eyes of others. :dingle:


Done.
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4340
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: Walrus Has No Balls - RG3 a Redskin

Unread postby motherscratcher » Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:00 pm

It seems that I'm in the ever shinking minority of people who don't think that Holgren has been an epic fuckup. There are definite things that he should have done different, (the biggest in hindsight is retaining Mangini) but I'm not sure anyone should be held to the standard of NEVER doing something that anyone disagrees with.

Is Shurmer a fuck up? It sure as shit looks like it. But then again maybe it would behoove us to give it more than 1 year. Heckert seems like a good GM to me. I like what I've seen out of him as far as the draft is concerned for the most part.

The lack of utilizing free agency is kind of baffling, definitely frustrating, and quite possibly the wrong approach. However, what it IS is the exact thing that they said they would do from the day they were hired.

I don't know. I'm still not ready to call them a lost cause. Of course I am the guy who is probably the last guy standing who likes Mark Shapiro.
According to my sources CDT farts in the tub and bites the bubbles.
User avatar
motherscratcher
Little Larry Sellers
 
Posts: 7748
Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2009 9:14 pm
Location: La La Land
Favorite Player: Ernie Camacho
Least Favorite Player: Jose Mesa

Re: Walrus Has No Balls - RG3 a Redskin

Unread postby pup » Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:03 pm

I'd say it, but you guys are just soooo much smarter than than I it would be pointless.

I am sure we are moments away from Jeff Fisher providing documentation of all the offers he received to prove or disprove Mike's lying ass.

NFL, where people take worse trade offers and less money just to spite the Cleveland Browns.
Home Run Leaders as RHB 5/7/13

Mark Reynolds (10)
User avatar
pup
Closet Shapiro Fan
 
Posts: 12020
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:15 pm
Location: Eastlake, Ohio
Favorite Player: Vince Shubrownicek
Least Favorite Player: Any other coach

Re: Walrus Has No Balls - RG3 a Redskin

Unread postby JCoz » Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:12 pm

I dont think he said his offer was better than the Skins.

So does that mean you think Hillis got the best deal he could get this offseason? He must be a game breaker for that kind of cheddar.
User avatar
JCoz
Donnie, you're out of your element
 
Posts: 4158
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:57 am
Favorite Player: Competency
Least Favorite Player: Gene Smith

Re: Walrus Has No Balls - RG3 a Redskin

Unread postby Hikohadon » Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:13 pm

pup wrote:I'd say it, but you guys are just soooo much smarter than than I it would be pointless.

I am sure we are moments away from Jeff Fisher providing documentation of all the offers he received to prove or disprove Mike's lying ass.

NFL, where people take worse trade offers and less money just to spite the Cleveland Browns.


At this point, it doesn't matter what Holmgren says. They wanted RG3 enough to pay the price. They didn't get him. They failed.
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4340
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: Walrus Has No Balls - RG3 a Redskin

Unread postby peeker643 » Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:29 pm

pup wrote:I'd say it, but you guys are just soooo much smarter than than I it would be pointless.

I am sure we are moments away from Jeff Fisher providing documentation of all the offers he received to prove or disprove Mike's lying ass.

NFL, where people take worse trade offers and less money just to spite the Cleveland Browns.


If you offered me $50 for my ticket and some hump from RCF offered me $50 for my ticket who you think I'd sell my ticket to?

If you offered me $50 and someone from OBR offered me $55 for my ticket, who you think I'd sell it to? Point is, if you're close, you're getting it over a stranger.

You understand that's true, and you'd agree to it, but pride keeps fucking with ya. And you all you see is a livid shade of red where Chubby is concerned.

Should he have known 'ties lose'? Sure. Probably. Should have you gone where he knew he couldn't be tied?

Not in my opinion.

I know, I know.... only Lamonte clients are clique-ish.
"Great minds think alike. The opposite is also true."

"None of us is as dumb as all of us."


I'm on Twitter at http://twitter.com/peeker643
User avatar
peeker643
Duly Noted
 
Posts: 22741
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: Walrus Has No Balls - RG3 a Redskin

Unread postby Hikohadon » Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:47 pm

If it were a true tie, I could see it going to WAS for friendship's sake. But the 4 is worth a lot more than the 6, so unless STL felt that the Redskins would be worse than the Browns the next couple years (doubtful), the Rams would be criminally incompetent to take a lesser offer just to be a pal.

I'm guessing the Browns did offer the 3 1's, and Holmgren feels that their 3 1's are better than Washington's 3 1's and a 2. But STL felt differently, or felt it was tie enough to give it to Shanny.
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4340
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: Walrus Has No Balls - RG3 a Redskin

Unread postby peeker643 » Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:51 pm

Hikohadon wrote:If it were a true tie, I could see it going to WAS for friendship's sake. But the 4 is worth a lot more than the 6, so unless STL felt that the Redskins would be worse than the Browns the next couple years (doubtful), the Rams would be criminally incompetent to take a lesser offer just to be a pal.

I'm guessing the Browns did offer the 3 1's, and Holmgren feels that their 3 1's are better than Washington's 3 1's and a 2. But STL felt differently, or felt it was tie enough to give it to Shanny.


Yeah...whatever...the important thing is you and I being Lamonte-like in our signature presentation. We can no longer disagree and everything we do must be done to benefit either us as an entity or individually.
"Great minds think alike. The opposite is also true."

"None of us is as dumb as all of us."


I'm on Twitter at http://twitter.com/peeker643
User avatar
peeker643
Duly Noted
 
Posts: 22741
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: Walrus Has No Balls - RG3 a Redskin

Unread postby Hikohadon » Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:54 pm

peeker643 wrote:
Hikohadon wrote:If it were a true tie, I could see it going to WAS for friendship's sake. But the 4 is worth a lot more than the 6, so unless STL felt that the Redskins would be worse than the Browns the next couple years (doubtful), the Rams would be criminally incompetent to take a lesser offer just to be a pal.

I'm guessing the Browns did offer the 3 1's, and Holmgren feels that their 3 1's are better than Washington's 3 1's and a 2. But STL felt differently, or felt it was tie enough to give it to Shanny.


Yeah...whatever...the important thing is you and I being Lamonte-like in our signature presentation. We can no longer disagree and everything we do must be done to benefit either us as an entity or individually.


I concur. Everything you say makes sense.
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4340
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: Walrus Has No Balls - RG3 a Redskin

Unread postby peeker643 » Thu Mar 15, 2012 6:09 pm

Hikohadon wrote:
peeker643 wrote:
Hikohadon wrote:If it were a true tie, I could see it going to WAS for friendship's sake. But the 4 is worth a lot more than the 6, so unless STL felt that the Redskins would be worse than the Browns the next couple years (doubtful), the Rams would be criminally incompetent to take a lesser offer just to be a pal.

I'm guessing the Browns did offer the 3 1's, and Holmgren feels that their 3 1's are better than Washington's 3 1's and a 2. But STL felt differently, or felt it was tie enough to give it to Shanny.


Yeah...whatever...the important thing is you and I being Lamonte-like in our signature presentation. We can no longer disagree and everything we do must be done to benefit either us as an entity or individually.


I concur. Everything you say makes sense.


Stunning new avatar you went with. Great choice. Unless you change it to something else. I'll support that strongly as well regardless of your choice. Be well.

You need a job or anything?

I could do a 'consultant' thing too if you'd rather do nothing and get cash.
"Great minds think alike. The opposite is also true."

"None of us is as dumb as all of us."


I'm on Twitter at http://twitter.com/peeker643
User avatar
peeker643
Duly Noted
 
Posts: 22741
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: Walrus Has No Balls - RG3 a Redskin

Unread postby Hikohadon » Thu Mar 15, 2012 6:38 pm

peeker643 wrote:You need a job or anything?

I could do a 'consultant' thing too if you'd rather do nothing and get cash.


Do you have anything where I can come in the office once a week, watch a little film, flirt with the secretary, then fall asleep on the couch? I can give you player insight that you probably haven't heard. Stuff like "You have to watch out for Tom Brady." Then break out the midget jokes.
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4340
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: Walrus Has No Balls - RG3 a Redskin

Unread postby CleSportsTruth » Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:04 pm

Four Peter King tweets:


Peter King‏@SI_PeterKingReply
Retweet

Favorite
· Open

-----Les Snead told each team, 'Make your best offer. This is it.' Both teams made an offer, and Wash's was better. Cle has no beef, IMO.

1h Peter King‏@SI_PeterKing

RT @A_Gabriele729: Makes no sense. If browns called back with better offer, you take it. How can rams tell fans otherwise? ... Because-----

1h Peter King‏@SI_PeterKing

------Cle wanted to make another offer. StL said it was taking Wash's offer. Totally fair to me.

1h Peter King‏@SI_PeterKing

RT @espn_nfcwest: Holmgren: Redskins had an in with Rams ... Rams said, 'Make best offer.' Wash did. Cle did. Wash's was better. Then------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Think I'll take Peter's word on this vs. Holmgren's CYA job to lapdog fans.
CleSportsTruth
 
Posts: 222
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 8:07 pm

Re: Walrus Has No Balls - RG3 a Redskin

Unread postby Triple-S » Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:10 pm

CleSportsTruth wrote:Think I'll take Peter's word on this vs. Holmgren's CYA job to lapdog fans.


really?

http://kissingsuzykolber.uproxx.com/200 ... story.html

http://kissingsuzykolber.uproxx.com/200 ... story.html
Swerb wrote:Go start a blog if you want to tell the world your incomprehendible ramblings.


Cerebral_DownTime wrote:I have a big arm and can throw the ball pretty damn far...... maybe even over those moutains. The Browns should sign me, i'll let you all in locker room to drink beer. Then we can all go out the parking lot to watch me do motorcycle stunts.
User avatar
Triple-S
All-time leader in moral victories
 
Posts: 6379
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2008 6:26 pm
Location: Kent-Green, Ohio
Favorite Player: Yuengling
Least Favorite Player: Nati Light.

Re: Walrus Has No Balls - RG3 a Redskin

Unread postby Cerebral_DownTime » Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:12 pm

Hikohadon wrote:
peeker643 wrote:You need a job or anything?

I could do a 'consultant' thing too if you'd rather do nothing and get cash.


Do you have anything where I can come in the office once a week, watch a little film, flirt with the secretary, then fall asleep on the couch? I can give you player insight that you probably haven't heard. Stuff like "You have to watch out for Tom Brady." Then break out the midget jokes.



Nothing beats a good midget joke.
"Our name is Legion, for we are many."
User avatar
Cerebral_DownTime
Go f#%k yourself
 
Posts: 14422
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2007 3:31 am
Location: Galloway Ohio
Favorite Player: Fenrir
Least Favorite Player: Walt Flannigan's dog

Re: Walrus Has No Balls - RG3 a Redskin

Unread postby peeker643 » Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:26 pm

Hikohadon wrote:
peeker643 wrote:You need a job or anything?

I could do a 'consultant' thing too if you'd rather do nothing and get cash.


Do you have anything where I can come in the office once a week, watch a little film, flirt with the secretary, then fall asleep on the couch? I can give you player insight that you probably haven't heard. Stuff like "You have to watch out for Tom Brady." Then break out the midget jokes.


Hell yes I do. Around here we call it the GillieHaskell Treatment. Only when "we're" around though. If Pup asks it just doesn't exist.
"Great minds think alike. The opposite is also true."

"None of us is as dumb as all of us."


I'm on Twitter at http://twitter.com/peeker643
User avatar
peeker643
Duly Noted
 
Posts: 22741
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: Walrus Has No Balls - RG3 a Redskin

Unread postby CleSportsTruth » Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:29 pm

Triple-S wrote:
CleSportsTruth wrote:Think I'll take Peter's word on this vs. Holmgren's CYA job to lapdog fans.


really?

http://kissingsuzykolber.uproxx.com/200 ... story.html

http://kissingsuzykolber.uproxx.com/200 ... story.html


Being a self-important douche, as he is, doesn't mean I don't believe his football reporting (when it's not pure opinion). Reminds me of, to take an example from a sport the two of us, but few others, enjoy (IndyCar), Robin Miller. Miller's a notorious asshole, whose opinion columns pissed off everyone, esp. 16th & Georgetown. But like it or not, he's always broken big IndyCar news stories. When he writes news, he's usually right.

That's how I see King.
CleSportsTruth
 
Posts: 222
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 8:07 pm

Re: Walrus Has No Balls - RG3 a Redskin

Unread postby Hikohadon » Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:54 pm

CleSportsTruth wrote:Four Peter King tweets:


Peter King‏@SI_PeterKingReply
Retweet

Favorite
· Open

-----Les Snead told each team, 'Make your best offer. This is it.' Both teams made an offer, and Wash's was better. Cle has no beef, IMO.

1h Peter King‏@SI_PeterKing

RT @A_Gabriele729: Makes no sense. If browns called back with better offer, you take it. How can rams tell fans otherwise? ... Because-----

1h Peter King‏@SI_PeterKing

------Cle wanted to make another offer. StL said it was taking Wash's offer. Totally fair to me.

1h Peter King‏@SI_PeterKing

RT @espn_nfcwest: Holmgren: Redskins had an in with Rams ... Rams said, 'Make best offer.' Wash did. Cle did. Wash's was better. Then------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Think I'll take Peter's word on this vs. Holmgren's CYA job to lapdog fans.


This isn't a case of King's word being different from Holmgren's. It's a case of perception. What likely happened:

STL says make your best offer. This is it.

CLE offers 3 1's. WAS offers 3 1's and a 2 (convenient, isn't it? Wonder if they had any inside knowledge about Cleveland's offer...).

STL takes the WAS package.

CLE calls back and says "We can beat that." STL says "No, we already sold the pick." (stupid tactics, but whatever). They don't go back on their word b/c Fisher & Shanny are buds.

CLE stomps feet and feels bitter. They feel their 3 1's are just as good as the Skins' package b/c the 4 is worth more than the 6 (it would take at least a 2nd rounder to move from 6 to 4), which is debatable but doesn't matter b/c STL didn't think so. Holmgren says as much in his call today, since Holmy is nothing if not easy to anger (and certainly seems like a grudge-holder). He probably believes what he says, the way Wade Phillips still feels that the Music City Miracle was a forward pass and the way that Browns fans feel that Karliss missed the kick.

Any future calls from STL to CLE will be met with a "Go Fuck Yourself."

Like I've said before, it's hard to fault the FO if this is the case (and it sounds more and more like it was). Regardless, they didn't get it done, so it's also hard to find them faultless.
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4340
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: Walrus Has No Balls - RG3 a Redskin

Unread postby CleSportsTruth » Thu Mar 15, 2012 8:03 pm

Hikohadon wrote:
CleSportsTruth wrote:Four Peter King tweets:


Peter King‏@SI_PeterKingReply
Retweet

Favorite
· Open

-----Les Snead told each team, 'Make your best offer. This is it.' Both teams made an offer, and Wash's was better. Cle has no beef, IMO.

1h Peter King‏@SI_PeterKing

RT @A_Gabriele729: Makes no sense. If browns called back with better offer, you take it. How can rams tell fans otherwise? ... Because-----

1h Peter King‏@SI_PeterKing

------Cle wanted to make another offer. StL said it was taking Wash's offer. Totally fair to me.

1h Peter King‏@SI_PeterKing

RT @espn_nfcwest: Holmgren: Redskins had an in with Rams ... Rams said, 'Make best offer.' Wash did. Cle did. Wash's was better. Then------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Think I'll take Peter's word on this vs. Holmgren's CYA job to lapdog fans.


This isn't a case of King's word being different from Holmgren's. It's a case of perception. What likely happened:

STL says make your best offer. This is it.

CLE offers 3 1's. WAS offers 3 1's and a 2 (convenient, isn't it? Wonder if they had any inside knowledge about Cleveland's offer...).

STL takes the WAS package.

CLE calls back and says "We can beat that." STL says "No, we already sold the pick." (stupid tactics, but whatever). They don't go back on their word b/c Fisher & Shanny are buds.

CLE stomps feet and feels bitter. They feel their 3 1's are just as good as the Skins' package b/c the 4 is worth more than the 6 (it would take at least a 2nd rounder to move from 6 to 4), which is debatable but doesn't matter b/c STL didn't think so. Holmgren says as much in his call today, since Holmy is nothing if not easy to anger (and certainly seems like a grudge-holder). He probably believes what he says, the way Wade Phillips still feels that the Music City Miracle was a forward pass and the way that Browns fans feel that Karliss missed the kick.

Any future calls from STL to CLE will be met with a "Go Fuck Yourself."

Like I've said before, it's hard to fault the FO if this is the case (and it sounds more and more like it was). Regardless, they didn't get it done, so it's also hard to find them faultless.


But IFFFF King is right, the Browns KNEW, in advance, it was a one-time "blind bid." Thinking they could still match after the offers, irregardless of the rules the Rams had put in place, is either disingenuous BS or stupidity. Either way, they either f'ed up on this or, if you opposed doing it altogether, were lucky to get outbid. But it IS on them.
CleSportsTruth
 
Posts: 222
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 8:07 pm

Re: Walrus Has No Balls - RG3 a Redskin

Unread postby Hikohadon » Thu Mar 15, 2012 8:08 pm

CleSportsTruth wrote:But IFFFF King is right, the Browns KNEW, in advance, it was a one-time "blind bid." Thinking they could still match after the offers, irregardless of the rules the Rams had put in place, is either disingenuous BS or stupidity. Either way, they either f'ed up on this or, if you opposed doing it altogether, were lucky to get outbid. But it IS on them.


What, you think that a team taking an offer after they said "No more offers" has never happened before?

Of course you call them and try to trump the winning bid. The worst that can happen is they say No. NOT CALLING is stupidity.

And I agree it is on them, even if they got somewhat fucked in this b/c STL does things in a fucked up way. If you're willing to get it done, then you have to make sure it happens, otherwise you blew it.
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4340
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: Walrus Has No Balls - RG3 a Redskin

Unread postby CleSportsTruth » Thu Mar 15, 2012 8:12 pm

^Not saying "don't call," but expecting a different result is a bit foolish. Bitching about it afterwards is whiny pettiness, IMO.
CleSportsTruth
 
Posts: 222
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 8:07 pm

Re: Walrus Has No Balls - RG3 a Redskin

Unread postby peeker643 » Thu Mar 15, 2012 8:22 pm

As the guy standing under the southern upright of the western goal post when Karlis attempted his kick, let me conclusively and once and for all say that, yes, Karlis's kick was good.

I can still see it clearly when I close my my eyes.

Uprights extended, that football is inside the two uprights. I care not one flipping bit where you or your dad was sitting or what camera angle you saw.

The kick was good. Then and forever more.
"Great minds think alike. The opposite is also true."

"None of us is as dumb as all of us."


I'm on Twitter at http://twitter.com/peeker643
User avatar
peeker643
Duly Noted
 
Posts: 22741
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: Walrus Has No Balls - RG3 a Redskin

Unread postby peeker643 » Thu Mar 15, 2012 8:23 pm

CleSportsTruth wrote:
Hikohadon wrote:
CleSportsTruth wrote:Four Peter King tweets:


Peter King‏@SI_PeterKingReply
Retweet

Favorite
· Open

-----Les Snead told each team, 'Make your best offer. This is it.' Both teams made an offer, and Wash's was better. Cle has no beef, IMO.

1h Peter King‏@SI_PeterKing

RT @A_Gabriele729: Makes no sense. If browns called back with better offer, you take it. How can rams tell fans otherwise? ... Because-----

1h Peter King‏@SI_PeterKing

------Cle wanted to make another offer. StL said it was taking Wash's offer. Totally fair to me.

1h Peter King‏@SI_PeterKing

RT @espn_nfcwest: Holmgren: Redskins had an in with Rams ... Rams said, 'Make best offer.' Wash did. Cle did. Wash's was better. Then------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Think I'll take Peter's word on this vs. Holmgren's CYA job to lapdog fans.


This isn't a case of King's word being different from Holmgren's. It's a case of perception. What likely happened:

STL says make your best offer. This is it.

CLE offers 3 1's. WAS offers 3 1's and a 2 (convenient, isn't it? Wonder if they had any inside knowledge about Cleveland's offer...).

STL takes the WAS package.

CLE calls back and says "We can beat that." STL says "No, we already sold the pick." (stupid tactics, but whatever). They don't go back on their word b/c Fisher & Shanny are buds.

CLE stomps feet and feels bitter. They feel their 3 1's are just as good as the Skins' package b/c the 4 is worth more than the 6 (it would take at least a 2nd rounder to move from 6 to 4), which is debatable but doesn't matter b/c STL didn't think so. Holmgren says as much in his call today, since Holmy is nothing if not easy to anger (and certainly seems like a grudge-holder). He probably believes what he says, the way Wade Phillips still feels that the Music City Miracle was a forward pass and the way that Browns fans feel that Karliss missed the kick.

Any future calls from STL to CLE will be met with a "Go Fuck Yourself."

Like I've said before, it's hard to fault the FO if this is the case (and it sounds more and more like it was). Regardless, they didn't get it done, so it's also hard to find them faultless.


But IFFFF King is right, the Browns KNEW, in advance, it was a one-time "blind bid." Thinking they could still match after the offers, irregardless of the rules the Rams had put in place, is either disingenuous BS or stupidity. Either way, they either f'ed up on this or, if you opposed doing it altogether, were lucky to get outbid. But it IS on them.



What, you think that a team taking an offer after they said "No more offers" has never happened before?

Of course you call them and try to trump the winning bid. The worst that can happen is they say No. NOT CALLING is stupidity.

And I agree it is on them, even if they got somewhat fucked in this b/c STL does things in a fucked up way. If you're willing to get it done, then you have to make sure it happens, otherwise you blew it.
"Great minds think alike. The opposite is also true."

"None of us is as dumb as all of us."


I'm on Twitter at http://twitter.com/peeker643
User avatar
peeker643
Duly Noted
 
Posts: 22741
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: Walrus Has No Balls - RG3 a Redskin

Unread postby CleSportsTruth » Thu Mar 15, 2012 8:27 pm

peeker643 wrote:
CleSportsTruth wrote:
Hikohadon wrote:
CleSportsTruth wrote:Four Peter King tweets:


Peter King‏@SI_PeterKingReply
Retweet

Favorite
· Open

-----Les Snead told each team, 'Make your best offer. This is it.' Both teams made an offer, and Wash's was better. Cle has no beef, IMO.

1h Peter King‏@SI_PeterKing

RT @A_Gabriele729: Makes no sense. If browns called back with better offer, you take it. How can rams tell fans otherwise? ... Because-----

1h Peter King‏@SI_PeterKing

------Cle wanted to make another offer. StL said it was taking Wash's offer. Totally fair to me.

1h Peter King‏@SI_PeterKing

RT @espn_nfcwest: Holmgren: Redskins had an in with Rams ... Rams said, 'Make best offer.' Wash did. Cle did. Wash's was better. Then------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Think I'll take Peter's word on this vs. Holmgren's CYA job to lapdog fans.


This isn't a case of King's word being different from Holmgren's. It's a case of perception. What likely happened:

STL says make your best offer. This is it.

CLE offers 3 1's. WAS offers 3 1's and a 2 (convenient, isn't it? Wonder if they had any inside knowledge about Cleveland's offer...).

STL takes the WAS package.

CLE calls back and says "We can beat that." STL says "No, we already sold the pick." (stupid tactics, but whatever). They don't go back on their word b/c Fisher & Shanny are buds.

CLE stomps feet and feels bitter. They feel their 3 1's are just as good as the Skins' package b/c the 4 is worth more than the 6 (it would take at least a 2nd rounder to move from 6 to 4), which is debatable but doesn't matter b/c STL didn't think so. Holmgren says as much in his call today, since Holmy is nothing if not easy to anger (and certainly seems like a grudge-holder). He probably believes what he says, the way Wade Phillips still feels that the Music City Miracle was a forward pass and the way that Browns fans feel that Karliss missed the kick.

Any future calls from STL to CLE will be met with a "Go Fuck Yourself."

Like I've said before, it's hard to fault the FO if this is the case (and it sounds more and more like it was). Regardless, they didn't get it done, so it's also hard to find them faultless.


But IFFFF King is right, the Browns KNEW, in advance, it was a one-time "blind bid." Thinking they could still match after the offers, irregardless of the rules the Rams had put in place, is either disingenuous BS or stupidity. Either way, they either f'ed up on this or, if you opposed doing it altogether, were lucky to get outbid. But it IS on them.



What, you think that a team taking an offer after they said "No more offers" has never happened before?

Of course you call them and try to trump the winning bid. The worst that can happen is they say No. NOT CALLING is stupidity.

And I agree it is on them, even if they got somewhat fucked in this b/c STL does things in a fucked up way. If you're willing to get it done, then you have to make sure it happens, otherwise you blew it.


Huh, I'm getting Deja Vu here! :hic:
CleSportsTruth
 
Posts: 222
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 8:07 pm

Re: Walrus Has No Balls - RG3 a Redskin

Unread postby bac5665 » Thu Mar 15, 2012 8:27 pm

CleSportsTruth wrote:^Not saying "don't call," but expecting a different result is a bit foolish. Bitching about it afterwards is whiny pettiness, IMO.


Expecting an NFL team to take a worse offer is quite a bit more foolish. I don't see how Heckgrin can really be blamed for STL making a horrible business decision and WSH just happening to barely beat our blind offer. That's stacking the deck against us pretty hard.
User avatar
bac5665
 
Posts: 946
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 5:15 pm
Location: Columbus Ohio
Favorite Player: Jason Kipnis
Least Favorite Player: Bug Selig

Re: Walrus Has No Balls - RG3 a Redskin

Unread postby Hikohadon » Thu Mar 15, 2012 8:29 pm

CleSportsTruth wrote:^Not saying "don't call," but expecting a different result is a bit foolish. Bitching about it afterwards is whiny pettiness, IMO.


You just described every single person in the history of internet message boards and article comment sections. Pouting and interpreting history to fit their agenda is what humans do.

He lost a trophy that he thought he had. Felt he was dealt with unfairly. There's probably shit broken all over his house from the tirade he threw.
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4340
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: Walrus Has No Balls - RG3 a Redskin

Unread postby CleSportsTruth » Thu Mar 15, 2012 8:31 pm

bac5665 wrote:
CleSportsTruth wrote:^Not saying "don't call," but expecting a different result is a bit foolish. Bitching about it afterwards is whiny pettiness, IMO.


Expecting an NFL team to take a worse offer is quite a bit more foolish. I don't see how Heckgrin can really be blamed for STL making a horrible business decision and WSH just happening to barely beat our blind offer. That's stacking the deck against us pretty hard.


Stop the excuse-mongering! The rules, even if they were dumb for StL, applied to BOTH TEAMS! We throw in the 37 pick in the bid, and we'd have our QB today.

Stacked against us? How? It's a "blind bid."
CleSportsTruth
 
Posts: 222
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 8:07 pm

Re: Walrus Has No Balls - RG3 a Redskin

Unread postby peeker643 » Thu Mar 15, 2012 8:31 pm

Hikohadon wrote:
CleSportsTruth wrote:^Not saying "don't call," but expecting a different result is a bit foolish. Bitching about it afterwards is whiny pettiness, IMO.


You just described every single person in the history of internet message boards and article comment sections. Pouting and interpreting history to fit their agenda is what humans do.

He lost a trophy that he thought he had. Felt he was dealt with unfairly. There's probably shit broken all over his house from the tirade he threw.


Well said, pal.
"Great minds think alike. The opposite is also true."

"None of us is as dumb as all of us."


I'm on Twitter at http://twitter.com/peeker643
User avatar
peeker643
Duly Noted
 
Posts: 22741
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: Walrus Has No Balls - RG3 a Redskin

Unread postby Hikohadon » Thu Mar 15, 2012 8:33 pm

As the guy not standing under the southern upright of the western goal post when Karlis attempted his kick, let me conclusively and once and for all say that, yes, Karlis's kick was good.

I can still see it clearly when I close my my eyes.

Uprights extended, that football is inside the two uprights. I care not one flipping bit where you or your dad was sitting or what camera angle you saw.

The kick was good. Then and forever more.
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4340
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: Walrus Has No Balls - RG3 a Redskin

Unread postby CleSportsTruth » Thu Mar 15, 2012 8:35 pm

So, uh, peek and Hiko are posting as the same guy, right? Am I the only one wondering why?
CleSportsTruth
 
Posts: 222
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 8:07 pm

Re: Walrus Has No Balls - RG3 a Redskin

Unread postby peeker643 » Thu Mar 15, 2012 9:03 pm

CleSportsTruth wrote:So, uh, peek and Hiko are posting as the same guy, right? Am I the only one wondering why?



What!?!?!

Ridiculous.
"Great minds think alike. The opposite is also true."

"None of us is as dumb as all of us."


I'm on Twitter at http://twitter.com/peeker643
User avatar
peeker643
Duly Noted
 
Posts: 22741
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: Walrus Has No Balls - RG3 a Redskin

Unread postby Cerebral_DownTime » Thu Mar 15, 2012 9:05 pm

Because they're a couple of dingleberries.

And they might work for Al Qaeda.
"Our name is Legion, for we are many."
User avatar
Cerebral_DownTime
Go f#%k yourself
 
Posts: 14422
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2007 3:31 am
Location: Galloway Ohio
Favorite Player: Fenrir
Least Favorite Player: Walt Flannigan's dog

Re: Walrus Has No Balls - RG3 a Redskin

Unread postby Hikohadon » Thu Mar 15, 2012 9:08 pm

CleSportsTruth wrote:So, uh, peek and Hiko are posting as the same guy, right? Am I the only one wondering why?


We have the same agent.

Being called dingleberry is even better than dickweed.
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4340
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: Walrus Has No Balls - RG3 a Redskin

Unread postby Cerebral_DownTime » Thu Mar 15, 2012 9:23 pm

Hikohadon wrote:Being called dingleberry is even better than dickweed.


Ohh Bullshit. Dingleberry is much worse and you are very offended.
"Our name is Legion, for we are many."
User avatar
Cerebral_DownTime
Go f#%k yourself
 
Posts: 14422
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2007 3:31 am
Location: Galloway Ohio
Favorite Player: Fenrir
Least Favorite Player: Walt Flannigan's dog

Re: Walrus Has No Balls - RG3 a Redskin

Unread postby peeker643 » Thu Mar 15, 2012 9:27 pm

Cerebral_DownTime wrote:
Hikohadon wrote:Being called dingleberry is even better than dickweed.


Ohh Bullshit. Dingleberry is much worse and you are very offended.


No we aren't. At all. We're extremely professional about that. And you should come to that understanding because you're either with me and Hiko or you're against us.
"Great minds think alike. The opposite is also true."

"None of us is as dumb as all of us."


I'm on Twitter at http://twitter.com/peeker643
User avatar
peeker643
Duly Noted
 
Posts: 22741
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: Walrus Has No Balls - RG3 a Redskin

Unread postby Cerebral_DownTime » Thu Mar 15, 2012 9:40 pm

peeker643 wrote:
Cerebral_DownTime wrote:
Hikohadon wrote:Being called dingleberry is even better than dickweed.


Ohh Bullshit. Dingleberry is much worse and you are very offended.


No we aren't. At all. We're extremely professional about that. And you should come to that understanding because you're either with me and Hiko or you're against us.


Go fuck yourselves.
"Our name is Legion, for we are many."
User avatar
Cerebral_DownTime
Go f#%k yourself
 
Posts: 14422
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2007 3:31 am
Location: Galloway Ohio
Favorite Player: Fenrir
Least Favorite Player: Walt Flannigan's dog

Re: Walrus Has No Balls - RG3 a Redskin

Unread postby Hikohadon » Thu Mar 15, 2012 9:43 pm

Cerebral_DownTime wrote:
peeker643 wrote:
Cerebral_DownTime wrote:
Hikohadon wrote:Being called dingleberry is even better than dickweed.


Ohh Bullshit. Dingleberry is much worse and you are very offended.


No we aren't. At all. We're extremely professional about that. And you should come to that understanding because you're either with me and Hiko or you're against us.


Go fuck yourselves.


No tickets for you!

Image
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4340
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: Walrus Has No Balls - RG3 a Redskin

Unread postby motherscratcher » Thu Mar 15, 2012 9:52 pm

I'm reading a lot of "Holgren fucked up" takes. Yeah, he really blew it. Should have known better. Should have known that 3 first rounds picks, which is more than anyone has traded ever, wouldn't be enough. What a sap.

He should have known if he would have just added that second round pick he would have won. We all knew that right? He just blew it. Hes incompetent.

Because we all know that, had Holmgren offered 3 firsts and a second, and made that trade, every Cleveland GM with enough aptitude to work a Speak and Spell wouldn't have blowup the ether with their "WHY DID HOLMGREN GIVE THEM SO MUCH!?!? WHY IS HE SUCH AN IDIOT!!?? HES THE WORST EVER AT FOOTBALLIN'!!"

Never mind that a week ago the threads were overrun with takes whether it would really take both the #22 and #37 picks to move up or if just one of those would be enough.

Fast forward a couple days and everyone knew that 3 firsts would fall short.

Holmgren blew it. I guess.
According to my sources CDT farts in the tub and bites the bubbles.
User avatar
motherscratcher
Little Larry Sellers
 
Posts: 7748
Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2009 9:14 pm
Location: La La Land
Favorite Player: Ernie Camacho
Least Favorite Player: Jose Mesa

Re: Walrus Has No Balls - RG3 a Redskin

Unread postby peeker643 » Thu Mar 15, 2012 9:54 pm

Yeah!!! How's that taste?

No tickets for you, bitch!

Image
"Great minds think alike. The opposite is also true."

"None of us is as dumb as all of us."


I'm on Twitter at http://twitter.com/peeker643
User avatar
peeker643
Duly Noted
 
Posts: 22741
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: Walrus Has No Balls - RG3 a Redskin

Unread postby peeker643 » Thu Mar 15, 2012 9:55 pm

motherscratcher wrote:I'm reading a lot of "Holgren fucked up" takes. Yeah, he really blew it. Should have known better. Should have known that 3 first rounds picks, which is more than anyone has traded ever, wouldn't be enough. What a sap.

He should have known if he would have just added that second round pick he would have won. We all knew that right? He just blew it. Hes incompetent.

Because we all know that, had Holmgren offered 3 firsts and a second, and made that trade, every Cleveland GM with enough aptitude to work a Speak and Spell wouldn't have blowup the ether with their "WHY DID HOLMGREN GIVE THEM SO MUCH!?!? WHY IS HE SUCH AN IDIOT!!?? HES THE WORST EVER AT FOOTBALLIN'!!"

Never mind that a week ago the threads were overrun with takes whether it would really take both the #22 and #37 picks to move up or if just one of those would be enough.

Fast forward a couple days and everyone knew that 3 firsts would fall short.

Holmgren blew it. I guess.


Hmmm... might be another office opening down the hall....
"Great minds think alike. The opposite is also true."

"None of us is as dumb as all of us."


I'm on Twitter at http://twitter.com/peeker643
User avatar
peeker643
Duly Noted
 
Posts: 22741
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: Walrus Has No Balls - RG3 a Redskin

Unread postby pup » Thu Mar 15, 2012 9:57 pm

I bet Ram fan is going to be pissed to find out they accepted a deal that was not as good as they could get because they had a buddy on the other line.

Yes, in a $50 side deal, I can see it coming down to friends. In the multi billion dollar world of the NFL, no freaking way. Mike is telling season ticket holders what he needs to for them to buy more tickets.
Home Run Leaders as RHB 5/7/13

Mark Reynolds (10)
User avatar
pup
Closet Shapiro Fan
 
Posts: 12020
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:15 pm
Location: Eastlake, Ohio
Favorite Player: Vince Shubrownicek
Least Favorite Player: Any other coach

Re: Walrus Has No Balls - RG3 a Redskin

Unread postby Xukuth » Thu Mar 15, 2012 9:57 pm

Hikohadon wrote:
CleSportsTruth wrote:^Not saying "don't call," but expecting a different result is a bit foolish. Bitching about it afterwards is whiny pettiness, IMO.


You just described every single person in the history of internet message boards and article comment sections. Pouting and interpreting history to fit their agenda is what humans do.


Image
"Well....I suppose if this were any other team, I might find the whole thing funny. In fact if this were any other team I might just fuckin'DIElaughin'!!!"
User avatar
Xukuth
 
Posts: 20
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2012 6:52 pm
Favorite Player: Ry Cooder
Least Favorite Player: Joe Pass

Re: Walrus Has No Balls - RG3 a Redskin

Unread postby Triple-S » Thu Mar 15, 2012 9:59 pm

Xukuth wrote:Image


I wrote the forward to that.

of course, CDT and the guys from the Red Flag Coalition were co-writers in it.
Swerb wrote:Go start a blog if you want to tell the world your incomprehendible ramblings.


Cerebral_DownTime wrote:I have a big arm and can throw the ball pretty damn far...... maybe even over those moutains. The Browns should sign me, i'll let you all in locker room to drink beer. Then we can all go out the parking lot to watch me do motorcycle stunts.
User avatar
Triple-S
All-time leader in moral victories
 
Posts: 6379
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2008 6:26 pm
Location: Kent-Green, Ohio
Favorite Player: Yuengling
Least Favorite Player: Nati Light.

Re: Walrus Has No Balls - RG3 a Redskin

Unread postby Cerebral_DownTime » Thu Mar 15, 2012 10:02 pm

motherscratcher wrote:I'm reading a lot of "Holgren fucked up" takes. Yeah, he really blew it. Should have known better. Should have known that 3 first rounds picks, which is more than anyone has traded ever, wouldn't be enough. What a sap.

He should have known if he would have just added that second round pick he would have won. We all knew that right? He just blew it. Hes incompetent.

Because we all know that, had Holmgren offered 3 firsts and a second, and made that trade, every Cleveland GM with enough aptitude to work a Speak and Spell wouldn't have blowup the ether with their "WHY DID HOLMGREN GIVE THEM SO MUCH!?!? WHY IS HE SUCH AN IDIOT!!?? HES THE WORST EVER AT FOOTBALLIN'!!"

Never mind that a week ago the threads were overrun with takes whether it would really take both the #22 and #37 picks to move up or if just one of those would be enough.

Fast forward a couple days and everyone knew that 3 firsts would fall short.

Holmgren blew it. I guess.


Quit trying to get on the "Holmgren isn't perfect, but he's trying" bandwagon. He sucks and he's fat. The end.
"Our name is Legion, for we are many."
User avatar
Cerebral_DownTime
Go f#%k yourself
 
Posts: 14422
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2007 3:31 am
Location: Galloway Ohio
Favorite Player: Fenrir
Least Favorite Player: Walt Flannigan's dog

Re: Walrus Has No Balls - RG3 a Redskin

Unread postby Hikohadon » Thu Mar 15, 2012 10:05 pm

motherscratcher wrote:I'm reading a lot of "Holgren fucked up" takes. Yeah, he really blew it. Should have known better. Should have known that 3 first rounds picks, which is more than anyone has traded ever, wouldn't be enough. What a sap.

He should have known if he would have just added that second round pick he would have won. We all knew that right? He just blew it. Hes incompetent.

Because we all know that, had Holmgren offered 3 firsts and a second, and made that trade, every Cleveland GM with enough aptitude to work a Speak and Spell wouldn't have blowup the ether with their "WHY DID HOLMGREN GIVE THEM SO MUCH!?!? WHY IS HE SUCH AN IDIOT!!?? HES THE WORST EVER AT FOOTBALLIN'!!"

Never mind that a week ago the threads were overrun with takes whether it would really take both the #22 and #37 picks to move up or if just one of those would be enough.

Fast forward a couple days and everyone knew that 3 firsts would fall short.

Holmgren blew it. I guess.


The words that you say make much sense.

They will be small consolation if the Browns again suck and RG3 looks awesome. History won't remember how it happened, just that WASH has RG3 and the Browns have Colt McCoy. Holmgren is probably only about 10% to blame, but it's the size of the error that will determine how this is remembered. The Captain of the Titanic was probably on about 10% to blame too, but we know how that ended.
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4340
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: Walrus Has No Balls - RG3 a Redskin

Unread postby motherscratcher » Thu Mar 15, 2012 10:12 pm

Hikohadon wrote:The words that you say make much sense.


That's a first. Nobody's ever said that before.

Hikohadon wrote:
They will be small consolation if the Browns again suck and RG3 looks awesome. History won't remember how it happened, just that WASH has RG3 and the Browns have Colt McCoy. Holmgren is probably only about 10% to blame, but it's the size of the error that will determine how this is remembered. The Captain of the Titanic was probably on about 10% to blame too, but we know how that ended.


You're right. And we don't have to wait for how it turns out because already IS remembered that way.

I guess it comes down to how many people are interested in being honest about it and admitting that, given the information at hand, H&H made a good offer that most people would have thought was more than enough, and a lot of people would have been pissed about overpaying. People would have to admit that maybe in this case, even if it turned out shitty for us, we shouldn't be pissed at Holmgren because he played that hand pretty well and still lost.

Most people are just more interest in blaming people for stuff.
According to my sources CDT farts in the tub and bites the bubbles.
User avatar
motherscratcher
Little Larry Sellers
 
Posts: 7748
Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2009 9:14 pm
Location: La La Land
Favorite Player: Ernie Camacho
Least Favorite Player: Jose Mesa

Re: Walrus Has No Balls - RG3 a Redskin

Unread postby Cerebral_DownTime » Thu Mar 15, 2012 10:13 pm

So you're saying the Browns are like the Titanic?
"Our name is Legion, for we are many."
User avatar
Cerebral_DownTime
Go f#%k yourself
 
Posts: 14422
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2007 3:31 am
Location: Galloway Ohio
Favorite Player: Fenrir
Least Favorite Player: Walt Flannigan's dog

PreviousNext

Return to Cleveland Browns & The NFL

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ybot and 6 guests

Who is online

In total there are 7 users online :: 1 registered, 0 hidden and 6 guests (based on users active over the past 5 minutes)
Most users ever online was 181 on Sat Feb 16, 2013 4:50 pm

Users browsing this forum: ybot and 6 guests