Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Seriously, do y'all want a positive vibes only thread?


LinvilleGorge
 Share

Do y'all want a positive vibes only thread?  

69 members have voted

  1. 1. Do y'all want a positive vibes only thread?

    • Yes
      34
    • No
      35


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, WUnderhill said:

Weren’t people getting banned for reviving dead threads?

That was for bumping months old threads, usually folks bragging about how they wanted Stroud. The board was being overrun with Stroud threads.

I just wanted to remind y'all to be what you claimed to want. You wanted the poo posting to calm down. Hell, it largely has. But lke I said, at the first chance y'all had you'd become the new very loud poo posters.

And here we are. The prophecy hath been foretold.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

That was for bumping months old threads, usually folks bragging about how they wanted Stroud. The board was being overrun with Stroud threads.

I just wanted to remind y'all to be what you claimed to want. You wanted the poo posting to calm down. Hell, it largely has. But lke I said, at the first chance y'all had you'd become the new very loud poo posters.

And here we are. The prophecy hath been foretold.

Maybe there should be a negative vibes only thread or something like that. Just so people can poo on Bryce Young in peace after a win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, WUnderhill said:

Maybe there should be a negative vibes only thread or something like that. Just so people can poo on Bryce Young in peace after a win.

Anyone talking trash about Bryce's performance in this game is an idiot. He had no protection, several drops from his WRs, and next to no running game. We also had an empty red zone trip and he still managed a GW drive. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, PootieNunu said:

Anyone talking trash about Bryce's performance in this game is an idiot. He had no protection, several drops from his WRs, and next to no running game. We also had an empty red zone trip and he still managed a GW drive. 

It’s all very thinly veiled “We won today because of defense” From the same posters who blame Bryce for losses when the defense gives up 40. That, and “Well we won but I still have questions about arm strength/size/QB sneaks” the same tired bs. Or in Linville’s case “Wow it is so pathetic seeing people here happy after a win, how dare they call out people who trashed Bryce and said Stroud should have been the pick.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Good thought and I agree.  Nothing about this process compromises that premise. In fact, the process involves meeting more needs so you can do that.  If I can get an Edge on a rookie contract when my biggest need is LB, then I have enough $$ saved on the overall cap to get an elite rookie edge in the draft and sign a veteran LB in free agency. If I draft the LB first, my biggest need, then my savings against the cap (when looking at the 53-man roster) is minimal.  I have not saved enough $$ to sign the edge in free agency, so I have to try to draft the edge later, getting a lesser player.  Even if you draft an edge and the roster is full of them, you have trade capital because a lot of teams need a good edge.  This lends credence to the BPA theory if it is aligned with positions that are expensive on second contracts. In the cap era, you have to think it through-it is like a puzzle.   That is why I did not like it when Marty was drafting RBs (Willliams and Stewart) in the first round.  If you recall, that necessitated moving up for Otah, trading away next year's first rounder to do so.  That is the draft we really needed an edge, but since we did not have a first rounder, we took Everette Brown to fill that need.  Then it got worse.  We had 2 RBs on second contracts, Brown busted, that led to drafting Clausen, etc.  If you can get 2 starters for the price of one, that is what I would call smart--not overthinking, if I understand you.  I do agree, but that does not mean draft your trench players first.   It could mean draft an edge and use the cap savings to sign a trench player.
    • The DLine needs to do its job too - currently I only trust Brown to do that.
×
×
  • Create New...