It is currently Thu Nov 28, 2024 8:16 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 746 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 11:20 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
Would you guys prefer to go back to no replay?


With all it's bad parts, Ill still take it


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 11:22 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 3:55 pm
Posts: 33070
Location: Wrigley
pizza_Place: Warren Buffet of Cock
When half time came, I went away and did other things for about 45 minutes. Then I came back and just fast forwarded through all the commercials and such. Amazing how much filler there is in an NFL game. The flags are out of control. Someday teams are going to realize you should just launch bombs down field on every play because you have a great chance of getting a pass interference call at least one out of three times. Sometimes your team will catch it, and the rest of the time you'll get a roughing the passer call.

_________________
Hawaii (fuck) You


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 11:22 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 7:56 am
Posts: 32234
Location: A sterile, homogeneous suburb
pizza_Place: Pizza Cucina
rogers park bryan wrote:
Would you guys prefer to go back to no replay?


With all it's bad parts, Ill still take it


I think at this point, I would. I've become a replay Libertarian. It has some good stuff, but once implemented, it just grows and grows to the point where we have a nanny state for the officials.

_________________
Curious Hair wrote:
I'm a big dumb shitlib baby


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 11:22 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 3:55 pm
Posts: 33070
Location: Wrigley
pizza_Place: Warren Buffet of Cock
rogers park bryan wrote:
Would you guys prefer to go back to no replay?


With all it's bad parts, Ill still take it


I agree. I was tired of obviously wrong calls being made.

_________________
Hawaii (fuck) You


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 11:24 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2006 3:29 pm
Posts: 34795
pizza_Place: Al's Pizza
leashyourkids wrote:
Hank Scorpio wrote:
IMU wrote:
It was the wrong call. This is an insane 15 page argument.


I don't get how they can add new info to the challenge. Fox challenged whether he got out of bounds or not. Then they add the fumble/touchback to the equation. No one was challenging if he kept possession. What if they saw a facemask penalty that they missed during the play, they can't add that penalty on after the fact. It all just made no sense to me.


They shouldn't be able to change anything except what is being challenged. That's crap.

Why do they even announce what they are challenging if anything can be looked at?

When the ref announces the challenge, he should just say "The Bears are challenging the ruling on the field of everything that happened on the play."


Why not? The point of replay is to make the correct calls. Those rules in previous years where you couldn't challenge if the call was made one way, but you could if was called the other way, were stupid. You literally couldn't challenge calls even when they were clearly wrong, simply because the wrong call was made. That's insane. Personally, I wouldn't mind going back to no replay at all. But you can't un-ring that bell. If there is a replay system, then everything should be subject to review.

A perfect example that Parkins said this morning was the Lions/Ravens on Thanksgiving a while back. Justin Forsett was clearly down, but since that idiot Jim Schwartz challenged a play that could only be challenged by the booth, the TD stood, over a ridiculous semantic argument. They should do it the right way or scrap it altogether.

_________________
Good people drink good beer - Hunter S. Thompson

<º)))><

Waiting for the time when I can finally say
That this has all been wonderful, but now I'm on my way


Last edited by Chus on Mon Nov 13, 2017 11:47 am, edited 3 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 11:25 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2006 3:29 pm
Posts: 34795
pizza_Place: Al's Pizza
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
leashyourkids wrote:
Hank Scorpio wrote:
IMU wrote:
It was the wrong call. This is an insane 15 page argument.


I don't get how they can add new info to the challenge. Fox challenged whether he got out of bounds or not. Then they add the fumble/touchback to the equation. No one was challenging if he kept possession. What if they saw a facemask penalty that they missed during the play, they can't add that penalty on after the fact. It all just made no sense to me.


They shouldn't be able to change anything except what is being challenged. That's crap.

Why do they even announce what they are challenging if anything can be looked at?

When the ref announces the challenge, he should just say "The Bears are challenging the ruling on the field of everything that happened on the play."

The whole concept of a coaches challenge is stupid, and before Chus plays the "Stop crying liberals!" card, I've thought that for years.


I still don't understand what this bit is.

_________________
Good people drink good beer - Hunter S. Thompson

<º)))><

Waiting for the time when I can finally say
That this has all been wonderful, but now I'm on my way


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 11:26 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 7:56 am
Posts: 32234
Location: A sterile, homogeneous suburb
pizza_Place: Pizza Cucina
denisdman wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Would you guys prefer to go back to no replay?


With all it's bad parts, Ill still take it


I agree. I was tired of obviously wrong calls being made.


The problem is (and I realize this is just a couple calls out of MANY) they still sometimes get the call wrong even when they do replay it. Before increasing the amount of replay, they should address the vague nature of rules such as the catch rule and make sure their officials are full-time and not 80 years old. Putting in or expanding replay should be the last resort.

It's like purposely serving shitty food at a restaurant but assuring everyone that they can return it if they don't like it.

_________________
Curious Hair wrote:
I'm a big dumb shitlib baby


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 11:27 am 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2006 6:17 pm
Posts: 102657
pizza_Place: Vito & Nick's
Chus wrote:
Why not? The point of replay is to make the correct calls.
The correct call was not made yesterday. So you must be advocating to get rid of replay.


I would prefer to go back to challenge only. Forget the automatic reviews. Let the coach's have their one or two challenges per game and thats it.

_________________
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
It's more fun to be a victim
Caller Bob wrote:
There will never be an effective vaccine. I'll never get one anyway.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 11:38 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2006 3:29 pm
Posts: 34795
pizza_Place: Al's Pizza
Chus wrote:
Why not? The point of replay is to make the correct calls.


Frank Coztansa wrote:
The correct call was not made yesterday.


You should keep repeating that. They will probably change it any minute now. The officials know more about the rules than you and I do, and I would assume that they had better video, and more of it, than you and I saw. Like an ostrich burger. It has less fat, but you eat more of it.

Frank Coztansa wrote:
So you must be advocating to get rid of replay.


You gotta stop making this about me, Frank. The rules officials, MANY in this thread, and your FB agree with me that it was a fumble. I had nothing to do with the call on the field, nor do I have a dog in this fight. I hate the Packers too. Send an email to Roger Goodell.

Roger.Goodell2@NFL.net

Frank Coztansa wrote:
I would prefer to go back to challenge only. Forget the automatic reviews. Let the coach's have their one or two challenges per game and thats it.


I don't care how they set it up, as long as they get the calls correct. The first thing that needs to be done, is to clear up what is a catch and what isn't.

Bad calls are a part of sports. Always have been, and always will be. Like I said yesterday, the game had 122 offensive snaps. There were 121 other plays to score points or prevent the Packers from scoring points. One play isn't the deciding factor in any game. Even if they spotted the ball at the one yard line, there was no guarantee that they score any points anyway. It was raining. The next snap could have been fumbled and taken back 95 yards.

_________________
Good people drink good beer - Hunter S. Thompson

<º)))><

Waiting for the time when I can finally say
That this has all been wonderful, but now I'm on my way


Last edited by Chus on Mon Nov 13, 2017 12:16 pm, edited 3 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 11:39 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2010 5:02 pm
Posts: 11735
pizza_Place: Angelo's Pizza in Downers Grove
Turnovers and touchdowns should be automatically reviewed. No other reviews should be allowed.

The game was better without reviews. Ironically, there was less complaining about officiating before challenges were allowed.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 11:41 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2006 3:29 pm
Posts: 34795
pizza_Place: Al's Pizza
Big Chicagoan wrote:
Turnovers and touchdowns should be automatically reviewed. No other reviews should be allowed.

The game was better without reviews. Ironically, there was less complaining about officiating before challenges were allowed.


The zebras are going to make mistakes. They are 65 year old men trying to keep up with the best athletes on the planet. It's not an easy job. For the most part, they get things right.

_________________
Good people drink good beer - Hunter S. Thompson

<º)))><

Waiting for the time when I can finally say
That this has all been wonderful, but now I'm on my way


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 11:44 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2012 7:43 pm
Posts: 20537
pizza_Place: Joes Pizza
Big Chicagoan wrote:
Ironically, there was less complaining about officiating before challenges were allowed.

No.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 11:54 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2010 5:02 pm
Posts: 11735
pizza_Place: Angelo's Pizza in Downers Grove
Kirkwood wrote:
Big Chicagoan wrote:
Ironically, there was less complaining about officiating before challenges were allowed.

No.


Disagree. Before people bitched about the refs, but bad calls were part of the game.

Now people bitch about every call the refs make. The refs make worse calls because they think they can be saved by the review. The reviews take forever and are wrong too much. Everyone complains about how long it takes. Everyone complains about how dumb the review rules are. Everyone complains about how dumb the NFL rules are. Everyone over-analyzes everything.

NFL needs to go back to the "Tough Shit" days of bad refereeing. This used to be a man's sport. Now its a whiny bitch sport.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 11:58 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2007 11:52 pm
Posts: 12559
Location: Ex-Naperville, Ex-Homewood, Now Tinley Park
pizza_Place: Oh I'm sorry but, there's no one on the line
Kirkwood wrote:
Big Chicagoan wrote:
Ironically, there was less complaining about officiating before challenges were allowed.

No.

Testaverde wrote:
I wasn't complaining.

_________________
"All crowds boycotting football games shouldn't care who sings or takes a knee because they aren't watching." - Nas


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 12:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2008 8:22 am
Posts: 15141
pizza_Place: Wha Happen?
this is the major issue to me, and it's one that the NBA hasn't had to step into yet...when you review a play for out of bounds, if a guy gets hit in the hand and the ball bounces off his hand, it's out on him...but he got fouled, causing the ball to go off him.

_________________
Ба́бушка гада́ла, да на́двое сказа́ла—то ли до́ждик, то ли снег, то ли бу́дет, то ли нет.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 12:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
leashyourkids wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Would you guys prefer to go back to no replay?


With all it's bad parts, Ill still take it


I think at this point, I would. I've become a replay Libertarian. It has some good stuff, but once implemented, it just grows and grows to the point where we have a nanny state for the officials.

I get it. But you could have this...


Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 12:04 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 7:56 am
Posts: 32234
Location: A sterile, homogeneous suburb
pizza_Place: Pizza Cucina
Chus wrote:
Chus wrote:
Why not? The point of replay is to make the correct calls.


Frank Coztansa wrote:
The correct call was not made yesterday.


You should keep repeating that. They will probably change it any minute now. The officials know more about the rules than you and I do, and I would assume that they had better video, and more of it, than you and I saw. Like an ostrich burger. It has less fat, but you eat more of it.

Frank Coztansa wrote:
So you must be advocating to get rid of replay.


You gotta stop making this about me, Frank. The rules officials, MANY in this thread, and your FB agree with me that it was a fumble. I had nothing to do with the call on the field. Send an email to Roger Goodell.

Roger.Goodell2@NFL.net

Frank Coztansa wrote:
I would prefer to go back to challenge only. Forget the automatic reviews. Let the coach's have their one or two challenges per game and thats it.


I don't care how they set it up, as long as they get the calls correct. The first thing that needs to be done, is to clear up what is a catch and what isn't.

Bad calls are a part of sports. Always have been, and always will be. Like I said yesterday, the game had 122 offensive snaps. There were 121 other plays to score points or prevent the Packers from scoring points. One play isn't the deciding factor in any game. Even if they spotted the ball at the one yard line, there was no guarantee that they score any points anyway. It was raining. The next snap could have been fumbled and taken back 95 yards.


If he thinks it was correct, he can absolutely keep repeating it. He has said multiple times that he's not blaming the outcome of the game on it, and he's discussing it here in the context of how poor the officiating is. You can say the refs know more about the rules than we do, but you're also welcome to go address the actual rule JLN posted. It's easy. It doesn't take an attorney or a referee to interpret. If you disagree with it, by all means state your case. But to fall back on the fact that the officials agree isn't really making an argument. The entire crux of the disagreement is whether the refs were correct, and many of us don't think they were. Your assumption that they had better video seems to be just speculation also. If they actually do have better video than what is given to the public, that's stupid and would clearly just be the NFL not wanting to open themselves up to criticism of wrong calls.

Also, your point about of 121 of 122 snaps or whatever isn't really addressing any of what Frank is saying. I'm pretty sure he hasn't once said that it cost the Bears the game.

_________________
Curious Hair wrote:
I'm a big dumb shitlib baby


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 12:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2006 3:29 pm
Posts: 34795
pizza_Place: Al's Pizza
And JLN posting a rule from the rule book isn't the knockout punch that some of you think it is. Somebody post the rules as to what constitutes a catch. Then let's watch 100 different plays, and determine whether they are catches or not. Dez Bryant? Calvin Johnson? Zach Miller? Gronk last night?The Bucs WR from the Rams/Bucs NFC Championship many years ago? Fuck if I know.

There is a lot of interpretation and judgment that goes into MANY calls, hence why the zebras often huddle up before they make a call. Unnecessary roughness is a judgment call. So are intentional grounding and pass interference. And on and on.

After obviously blown calls on a Sunday, the league will issue some sort of statement on Monday. AFAIK, there has been nothing from the NFL this morning.

_________________
Good people drink good beer - Hunter S. Thompson

<º)))><

Waiting for the time when I can finally say
That this has all been wonderful, but now I'm on my way


Last edited by Chus on Mon Nov 13, 2017 12:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 12:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2006 3:29 pm
Posts: 34795
pizza_Place: Al's Pizza
Big Chicagoan wrote:
Kirkwood wrote:
Big Chicagoan wrote:
Ironically, there was less complaining about officiating before challenges were allowed.

No.


Disagree. Before people bitched about the refs, but bad calls were part of the game.

Now people bitch about every call the refs make. The refs make worse calls because they think they can be saved by the review. The reviews take forever and are wrong too much. Everyone complains about how long it takes. Everyone complains about how dumb the review rules are. Everyone complains about how dumb the NFL rules are. Everyone over-analyzes everything.

NFL needs to go back to the "Tough Shit" days of bad refereeing. This used to be a man's sport. Now its a whiny bitch sport.


Like I said, they call things a certain way just so they can take another look at it, if need me. They admit this. Bad calls even out over time. For every Don Majkowski, there is a Calvin Johnson. To blame the referees for losses week after week is ridiculous. There I go getting all emotional.

_________________
Good people drink good beer - Hunter S. Thompson

<º)))><

Waiting for the time when I can finally say
That this has all been wonderful, but now I'm on my way


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 12:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 92106
Location: To the left of my post
rogers park bryan wrote:
Would you guys prefer to go back to no replay?


With all it's bad parts, Ill still take it

College replay rules.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 12:13 pm 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2006 6:17 pm
Posts: 102657
pizza_Place: Vito & Nick's
This isn't about winning or losing a football game, Chus. It is about the refs getting a call wrong, and you not admitting your error. At least the NFL admits when they were wrong. On here, you never do.

_________________
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
It's more fun to be a victim
Caller Bob wrote:
There will never be an effective vaccine. I'll never get one anyway.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 12:15 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 92106
Location: To the left of my post
Chus wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
leashyourkids wrote:
Hank Scorpio wrote:
IMU wrote:
It was the wrong call. This is an insane 15 page argument.


I don't get how they can add new info to the challenge. Fox challenged whether he got out of bounds or not. Then they add the fumble/touchback to the equation. No one was challenging if he kept possession. What if they saw a facemask penalty that they missed during the play, they can't add that penalty on after the fact. It all just made no sense to me.


They shouldn't be able to change anything except what is being challenged. That's crap.

Why do they even announce what they are challenging if anything can be looked at?

When the ref announces the challenge, he should just say "The Bears are challenging the ruling on the field of everything that happened on the play."

The whole concept of a coaches challenge is stupid, and before Chus plays the "Stop crying liberals!" card, I've thought that for years.


I still don't understand what this bit is.

Sure you do. You were constantly talking about Bears fans crying because of a perceived unfair situation.

Sound familiar?

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 12:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 92106
Location: To the left of my post
Chus wrote:
And JLN posting a rule from the rule book isn't the knockout punch that some of you think it is. Somebody post the rules as to what constitutes a catch. Then let's watch 100 different plays, and determine whether they are catches or not. Dez Bryant? Calvin Johnson? Zach Miller? Gronk last night?The Bucs WR from the Rams/Bucs NFC Championship many years ago? Fuck if I know.

There is a lot of interpretation and judgment that goes into MANY calls, hence why the zebras often huddle up before they make a call. Unnecessary roughness is a judgment call. So are intentional grounding and pass interference. And on and on.

After obviously blown calls on a Sunday, the league will issue some sort of statement on Monday. AFAIK, there has been nothing from the NFL this morning.
Are you saying JLN's post is wrong? At a minimum, I'd say it clearly is proof that the call should have stood on the field.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 12:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2006 3:29 pm
Posts: 34795
pizza_Place: Al's Pizza
Frank Coztansa wrote:
This isn't about winning or losing a football game, Chus. It is about the refs getting a call wrong, and you not admitting your error. At least the NFL admits when they were wrong. On here, you never do.


I must have missed their apology this morning.

_________________
Good people drink good beer - Hunter S. Thompson

<º)))><

Waiting for the time when I can finally say
That this has all been wonderful, but now I'm on my way


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 12:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2006 3:29 pm
Posts: 34795
pizza_Place: Al's Pizza
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Chus wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
leashyourkids wrote:
Hank Scorpio wrote:
IMU wrote:
It was the wrong call. This is an insane 15 page argument.


I don't get how they can add new info to the challenge. Fox challenged whether he got out of bounds or not. Then they add the fumble/touchback to the equation. No one was challenging if he kept possession. What if they saw a facemask penalty that they missed during the play, they can't add that penalty on after the fact. It all just made no sense to me.


They shouldn't be able to change anything except what is being challenged. That's crap.

Why do they even announce what they are challenging if anything can be looked at?

When the ref announces the challenge, he should just say "The Bears are challenging the ruling on the field of everything that happened on the play."

The whole concept of a coaches challenge is stupid, and before Chus plays the "Stop crying liberals!" card, I've thought that for years.


I still don't understand what this bit is.

Sure you do. You were constantly talking about Bears fans crying because of a perceived unfair situation.

Sound familiar?


I have no idea what you are talking about, unless you are tying to equate a Bears game with mocking my autistic son. And then I still don't see the analogy.

_________________
Good people drink good beer - Hunter S. Thompson

<º)))><

Waiting for the time when I can finally say
That this has all been wonderful, but now I'm on my way


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 12:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2006 3:29 pm
Posts: 34795
pizza_Place: Al's Pizza
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Chus wrote:
And JLN posting a rule from the rule book isn't the knockout punch that some of you think it is. Somebody post the rules as to what constitutes a catch. Then let's watch 100 different plays, and determine whether they are catches or not. Dez Bryant? Calvin Johnson? Zach Miller? Gronk last night?The Bucs WR from the Rams/Bucs NFC Championship many years ago? Fuck if I know.

There is a lot of interpretation and judgment that goes into MANY calls, hence why the zebras often huddle up before they make a call. Unnecessary roughness is a judgment call. So are intentional grounding and pass interference. And on and on.

After obviously blown calls on a Sunday, the league will issue some sort of statement on Monday. AFAIK, there has been nothing from the NFL this morning.
Are you saying JLN's post is wrong? At a minimum, I'd say it clearly is proof that the call should have stood on the field.


You're a smart guy. You know exactly what I said there. It wasn't some complex idea that requires deep thought.

_________________
Good people drink good beer - Hunter S. Thompson

<º)))><

Waiting for the time when I can finally say
That this has all been wonderful, but now I'm on my way


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 12:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 2:35 pm
Posts: 82260
Loser’s lament

_________________
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 12:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2007 11:52 pm
Posts: 12559
Location: Ex-Naperville, Ex-Homewood, Now Tinley Park
pizza_Place: Oh I'm sorry but, there's no one on the line
Image

_________________
"All crowds boycotting football games shouldn't care who sings or takes a knee because they aren't watching." - Nas


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 12:24 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2006 3:29 pm
Posts: 34795
pizza_Place: Al's Pizza
newper wrote:
Image



:lol:

_________________
Good people drink good beer - Hunter S. Thompson

<º)))><

Waiting for the time when I can finally say
That this has all been wonderful, but now I'm on my way


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 12:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 92106
Location: To the left of my post
Chus wrote:
I have no idea what you are talking about, unless you are tying to equate a Bears game with mocking my autistic son. And then I still don't see the analogy.
:roll: Seriously?

I'm mocking you because you sound like the Republicans who say "Stop crying liberals!, Hillary lost!". You know, you're the guy who still thinks Trump should/will go down for the Russia stuff? Somehow, you think that was a shot at your son?

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 746 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Chet Coppock's Fur Coat and 9 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group