This cycle of ignoring whatever was originally said and then criticizing the responses (or lack there of) to his own question(s) are are what perpetuate him... It's like he (trys to) roast you for saying anything other than what he does regardless of the extent. My ORIGINAL thought was about him being risky, etc. and now to validate his point, this dude is bringing up how "everyone" roasted him for resigning Marcel when he was against it? And how because he was right about that then he will be right about the RECIPROCAL situation?
Are we in the Twilight Zone?
What is he talking about? Nobody ever brought that up but him and if someone hurt him about it, he is bitter and should move on (the Bills clearly did...)