SDS

[This is an automated response] As a courtesy to the other board members, please use more descriptive subject lines. The topic starter can edit the subject line to make it more appropriate. Thank you.

[This is an automated response] This subject matter is being currently being discussed or has already been discussed in a previous thread. Please consider using the "search" function before starting new topics. Thank you.

Cool! BB v2.0 will be waaaay more talented than v1.0!

[This is an automated response] This subject matter is being currently being discussed or has already been discussed in a previous thread. Please consider using the "search" function before starting new topics. Thank you.

Looking forward to having you back BB.

this has been brought up ad nauseum for 12 years. Do a search.

How many punches to the face are those worth?

there is a lesson to be learned here.

The problem is your uninformative subject line. No one knows what the topic is about, so scanning the board in search of that topic yields no results.

What is asinine about the whole situation is that Wade wouldn't go to the mat for Bruce, but laid down in front of the bus for Ronnie Jones- or whoever that clown was he wouldn't fire at Wilson's insistence.

Please don't encourage this. We get many complaints about over the line avatars. Thank you.

I find these arguments to be more hyperbole than truth. Our QB's are NOT on their backside every play or every other play or every third play. To say so is just a strawman argument. QB's with talent will make quicker throws, more accurately and thus will eliminate the brain cramps that have plagued us for years. We couldn't get it done with Mike Gandy at LT, but Arizona can? Why? Because of Kurt Warner - that's why.

Maybe you missed my line when I said: "you get your QB whenever you think you have the chance to get a good one." The post wasn't that long, nor difficult to understand. I argued that building an oline and then praying you find a QB when you think you are already to go makes ZERO sense. In fact, think about this way, what if we had that oline built and were ready to go? Now we would be faced with finding that franchise QB this season - one in which you say may not contain and good QB's. See the problem with that game plan?

The problem is that your timeline doesn't fit. How many years does it take to get a great oline? Minimum two if you make all the right moves. If year 3 you are satisfied then you suggest trying to fill the QB slot, even though you have no idea if anyone is available that year TO fill it out. Even if you did find someone that year - you are looking at year four until they are productive. So now you are 6-7 years into the process... IF you nail that QB 1st try AND if you nail down 5 oline spots in 2 years. you get your QB whenever you think you have the chance to get a good one. Anything less is foolish and wishful thinking about the future.

[This is an automated response] As a courtesy to the other board members, please use more descriptive subject lines. The topic starter can edit the subject line to make it more appropriate. Thank you.

play a 10 minute quarter. If you win at the end of that you win. If it is tied then play it like the end of the 1st Q (possession continuation) and the next score wins.

BS it didn't hit the ground. It bounced up. Sorry about your failing eyesight.

An absolute hose job on all three calls. How they could call that a catch is beyond me.

[This is an automated response] This subject matter is being currently being discussed or has already been discussed in a previous thread. Please consider using the "search" function before starting new topics. Thank you.

[This is an automated response] As a courtesy to the other board members, please use more descriptive subject lines. The topic starter can edit the subject line to make it more appropriate. Thank you.

This really applies to their day jobs and the work they do in support of that. Anyone who engages in politics/musical/misc... banter knows the deal when they enter that world.

I would like to state upfront what the policy is here, and I'm embarrassed that it has to be spelled out for some of you. We have some special guests here that provide their time, knowledge and insight to us and for that we are grateful. They do this for free. We welcome their participation and we will do what we need to do in order to facilitate that. Feel free to engage these individuals with your questions and your comments in a reasoned, tactful manner. You don't have to like what they report. You don't have to agree with what they report. But I can assure you that from this point forward your engagement with them on THIS forum will be respectful. If you can't phrase your comment or objection as if these individuals were sitting across the dinner table from you - then just keep it to yourself. Plain and simple. Just don't write it. If you lack restraint - we will quickly provide that for you. We wish you luck in your future endeavors. This goes for old-timers and newbies alike. For those of you wanting to argue this - don't bother. I will not side with your lack of civility, I will not side with ignorant ramblings over professionalism. Let me reiterate, tactful criticism and skepticism are welcomed. Being a rude jackass is not.

hey kenny - I'm going to need to see a full size pic of that avatar...

Yeah, that's how I want my HOF candidates chosen - 10 guys stuck in their mother's basement voting 100,000x each.

[This is an automated response] This subject matter is being currently being discussed or has already been discussed in a previous thread. Please consider using the "search" function before starting new topics. Thank you.