NoDak
Hotlinking' sonofabitch
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2013
- Messages
- 23,324
Absolutely.Harvey Martin was better than Haley.
Absolutely.Harvey Martin was better than Haley.
Who do you think you are to judge and label people? You are the perfect example of a Troll and Hall Monitor . And you think you are important enough to feel justified in taking this position. You need help.If that's what you'd like to call your blatant double standards, have at it. I will call them out for what they are.
I have no patience for hypocrites.
Then take whatever steps you need to take. Put me on Ignore if the site allows. Then you can post your double standards in peace without seeing me call them out, which I will continue to do.
I'm the Hypocrite Police.Who do you think you are to judge and label people? You are the perfect example of a Troll and Hall Monitor . And you think you are important enough to feel justified in taking this position. You need help.
I will put your DE evaluation skills in the same box as Smittys RB skills then.
Meow listen here.I'm the Hypocrite Police.
I will put your DE evaluation skills in the same box as Smittys RB skills then.
What you said originally had jack shit to do with the original stat.Are you simple? I made a statement about a general team accomplishment and you pull in Roma as some kind of response. What I said has nothing to do with Romo or my opinion about him. It’s a lame approach to make It about something you can make a disparaging remark about. If and when I want to make a comment about Romo I will put him in the mix.
And finished his career playing for the 49ers in the playoffspeople forget that Haley quit the team during the '95 season and later had a change of mind
What original stat are you talking about. I made a comment about the statement it’s not the starts that are important. It’s about how you finish that the most important. What are you getting at. It is a saying and I just added the last line.What you said originally had jack shit to do with the original stat.
What you said originally had jack shit to do with the original stat.
The consecutive starts stat. That stat has nothing to do with how the QB finishes. It has to do with durability. But, you just couldn't help yourself to somehow take a jab. And, now, you want to move the goalposts (as you always do) to try to act all innocent. It gets really old, to be honest.What original stat are you talking about. I made a comment about the statement it’s not the starts that are important. It’s about how you finish that the most important. What are you getting at. It is a saying and I just added the last line.
Again I was addressing an old saying and not about anything specific. I just went by P1 ‘s comment because at the time it didn’t connect with what I was commenting on. The rest was a dogpile of pulling up past opinions I had and labeling. But take it any way you want. I really don’t care.The consecutive starts stat. That stat has nothing to do with how the QB finishes. It has to do with durability. But, you just couldn't help yourself to somehow take a jab. And, now, you want to move the goalposts (as you always do) to try to act all innocent. It gets really old, to be honest.
Now you read minds as well. If I had something to say about the stat or anyone else I would have said it. I can verbalize.
Yes, we get it. When it comes to Romo wins and losses are a team stat. When it comes to Dak it's a reason not to pay himNow you read minds as well. If I had something to say about the stat or anyone else I would have said it. I can verbalize.
Have that fantasy if you like but Iamtdg had it right when he said that stat had nothing to do with how the QB finishes. And the reason it doesn’t is because it wasn’t intended to have anything to do about a Quarterback at all. I’ve given my reason for the saying so take it or leave it but I know what I meant. Every other comment is all over the board about what they thought it meant. No two people said the same thing because they want to make a comment that they think I meant and it is easily explained they think by their response. It had nothing to do with any individual or any stat by an individual. It’s an old team saying.Yes, we get it. When it comes to Romo wins and losses are a team stat. When it comes to Dak it's a reason not to pay him
Have that fantasy if you like but Iamtdg had it right when he said that stat had nothing to do with how the QB finishes. And the reason it doesn’t is because it wasn’t intended to have anything to do about a Quarterback at all. I’ve given my reason for the saying so take it or leave it but I know what I meant. Every other comment is all over the board about what they thought it meant. No two people said the same thing because they want to make a comment that they think I meant and it is easily explained they think by their response. It had nothing to do with any individual or any stat by an individual. It’s an old team saying.