Gunvald's Husse
-
Posts
122 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Gunvald's Husse
-
-
But it is okay because Saturday prayed on it before saying yes. Did god (or whichever other finctional character he was speaking to) answer? If he did, that means that the new Colts Interim HC hears voices and if he didn't, why did Saturday take the job?
I have no doubt that he can give a motivational speech (I have more doubts about whether those listening to him are going to be any better at their jobs becuase of it) but I can't help feeling that being a HC might just take a little mroe than that.
-
A game at one? Yes!
No more middle of the night
Squish the fish then bed
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Process said:
You clearly didn't watch either game.
He could have easily had 5 INTs yesterday. Instead all these clowns in the media who just look at stats are talking about great he is and how he is the MVP favorite, when he played like crap.
Played like crap? Hyperbole much? It wasn't a great performance and absolutely he didn't look like an MVP but let's not get caried away here. 🙄
-
7 hours ago, Talley56 said:
Been saying all off season that I don't believe the Bengals were a fluke last year. Give them a respectable oline that can give Burrow time (not get him sacked 9 times in a game) and I think they are one of the best teams in the league.
And how do you propose that they do that this year. They have the oline that they have and it ain't going to change much.
People rave avout the decision to draft Chase over Sewell last year and there is no doubt that Chase is the real deal but if you can't protect your QB, it doesn't matter how good your receivers are!
-
55 minutes ago, WMDman said:
Is it 8:20 yet?
Been and gone, been and gone ... is it 02:20 yet? 😫
-
19 minutes ago, machine gun kelly said:
You beat me to it. Why all the concern about a player who will never be used this year? 🙀🦬🏋️♂️🙏All kidding aside, some guys will shake loose once cuts happen Tuesday. We only need a serviceable
punterholder. It was a nice bonus to have a guy who canknock it out of the parkpunt, but it’s not a necessity.Fixed it for ya 😀
-
20 minutes ago, UKBillFan said:
no franchise is classier than any others
But some franchises are definitely less classy that others!
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, JerseyBills said:
If social media didn't exist he'd be 100% playing
I think tou mean "If he hadn't been accused of rape of a minor he'd be 100% playing". Let's not blame social media here, let's blame what it is alleged that he has done
1 hour ago, JerseyBills said:Everybody wants to act like they were never 20 years old at a college party and haven't made mistakes
Mistakes? Yes. Been accused of rape? No.
-
1
-
-
14 minutes ago, The Jokeman said:
Or sign Beckham....
Which one?
-
1
-
2
-
-
6 hours ago, Last Guy on the Bench said:
Chelsea scum here. Good lord your boys waxed us. That was painful. Tip of the hat to you. Premium win. (And I was glad to see Aaronson looking feisty anyway. Took a bit of the sting out.)
You know I mean "scum" in an affectionate (?) way - there is only one real Scum (and how nice it is to see them down in the depths of the league table!)
TBH, I would have been very happy with grabbing a point yesterday but we were on fire. That may well have been our best performance since we were promoted back to the big boys' table. And yes, Aaronson definitely looks like the real deal.
-
3
-
1
-
-
39 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:
Apologies that this is so late guys and I'm sure a lot of good discussion about the game has already taken place. After missing one pre-season game in 10 years I have missed two in a row live so had to catch up this morning. The Bills clashed with Arsenal yesterday and pre-season vs actual soccer game that mattered I passed on watching the pre-season game live.
That is why Leeds > Arsenal ... I got to watch the Bills on Saturday and the Mighty Whites today (and what a game it was against the Chelsea scum) MOT
39 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:Anyway, a hard one to write because I'm not sure how much we actually learned yesterday. The Bills 1s are better than Denver's 2s and the Bills 2s are better than Denver's 3s. But anyway, here goes....
Hard to disagree with any of that. I would add that it was a good game for Taiwan Jones - in his absence the STs looked a bit vulnerable to run backs. I don't think his place on the roster was in much doubt anyway but, for me, that showed the value of a "proper" ST player.
-
4
-
-
14 minutes ago, IronMaidenBills said:
I’m not allowed to talk about it anymore so I cannot elaborate further from my experiences nor do people have a willingness to hear about it. So this conversation isn’t going to go any further.
Ah, the old "I get to make up sh*t but when called on it I hide behind the 'they' won't let me tell the truth" defence. Gotcha 🙄
-
1 hour ago, IronMaidenBills said:
Americans vs Europeans or the rest of the worlds view on sex is a lot different. Sex dungeons, live club sex, legal prostitution, and other non violent sexual acts are a lot more culturally acceptable there.
Not saying what Watson did was a good thing, but it’s amazing to travel the world and see how much people would just generally shrug at this.As a European/Rest of the World person who has travelled extensively I am calling complete and utter BS on the suggestion that "we" would just generally shrug at what he did. "Other non violent sexual acts" are more culturally acceptable over here. Seriously?
-
2
-
2
-
-
11 hours ago, Chaos said:
I will be surprised if the original decision is not upheld. This new system allows the NFL to strut around all righteous, while at the same time ending up with another revenue drawing star QB playing. Best of both worlds. I expect the appeal is simpy a marketing charade.
Not a chance in hell that it will still be 6 games and no fine
My guess is at least 12 games and a big fine. The NFL (a) sends out a message that they will be tough on this sort of behaviour (which they should be) and gets to look like the good guys for once; (b) sets a precedent that supersedes the ones that Robinson used when setting the number at 6 and (c) sends the message to people that contract shenanigans of the sort that the Turds engaged in are a no-go
-
20 minutes ago, Beck Water said:
If I look up "Credulous" in the dictionary, seems likely I'd find your picture in the definition.
Also Cretinous
-
31 minutes ago, JerseyBills said:
Cmon man. Dude played with broken ribs , bones. He was a great team player and respected in the locker room.
He's not a me first guy for not putting an experimental vaccine in his body.
It was absolutely his right not to be vaccinated but that is the very definition of "me first" - he chose a path that suited him but harmed the team. Also, enough of the "experimental" vaccine bollox.
I think, as others have said, the changes were not in the organisation but in him: 2 years ago he was a god out there, if we needed a first down then everytone knew where to look. Last year that just was not the case. Had his play not diminished then perhaps the distraction that he became would have been acceptable but the combintion of lesser play and greater disctraction was what meant his time here was over
-
1
-
1
-
-
40 minutes ago, StHustle said:
Smh….how is Karen misogynistic at all?? Cause it specifically references a female who acts in a certain manner? In no way does the word absolve men who act similar, it’s just female and race specific. So are all terms that are female gender specific misogynistic or only ones that call out ignorant behavior? I’ve seen white men call a white woman a Karen. Only Karens or those who empathize with them get offended by the term.Karen is that you?
Lol…couldn't resist 😂
Not a Karen (wrong bits!) but someone who considers that broad, sweeping and derogatory generalisations based on race (racism), gender (misogyny/misandry) or religion (religious discrimination) to always be inappropriate. Slag of a person by all means, don't slag of a group.
Since we are way off the subject of football here (and probably were with the OP), I will quit whilst I am behind
-
22 minutes ago, BIGFOOTspaceman said:
Ok, we will have to agree to disagree. I have just have a different opinion. But judging by the fact the he received a 230 million dollar contract....fully guaranteed, lends weight that people are already dismissing this as an issue. Certainly in the Browns Org. The Browns are working off of past similar instances with other sports stars and making an educated guess on how this will play out. I'm just agreeing that the Browns are guessing correctly.
You may be right (I really hope - no offence - that you are wrong) but I would say that the contract says nothing about how "people" are viewing the issue.
Plus, I think you are crediting the Browns onwership with far more intelligence than they actually have when you suggest they thought this through 😀
-
1
-
-
28 minutes ago, BIGFOOTspaceman said:
Does this comment still apply?
Exactly how many women was he alleged to have assaulted? I am in no way dismissing what he did but you are comparing apples and oranges here
In addition, the exposure of a case in 2033 and one now is completely different - people who would have never heard of the Bryant case (and I am one of them as I am neither in the US nor at all interested in trhe NBA) will most definitely have heard of the Watsaon case. For example, the fact that his 6-game suspension is being appealed was covered in the Guardian in the UK (on the US news page, not the sports page), not exactly a regular coverer of US sports
-
20 minutes ago, JoPoy88 said:
Internet’s got a much longer memory these days bud…this will follow him the rest of his career.
I agree. Even after his career is finished (today would be nice) when people think of Watson I suspect the first thing they will think of will be the whole "sexual predator" thing ... and personally I am all in favour of that.
-
2 hours ago, Doc Brown said:
My guess is the judge believes there's a distinction between “violent” sexual assault (cases where there is physical force or a direct threat of violence) and “non-violent” sexual assault (cases involving manipulation or coercion). Most state laws don't make that distinction (it's all just "sexual assault") so it puzzles me too. Assault is still in the ruling so Goodell can simply say any kind of sexual assault is reprehensible and damages the shield to justify extending Watson's suspension. Honestly, Robinson left Goodell with enough meat in her decision where he could easily justify a full year ban. I don't think he will but he could.
That would be my guess but I am still wondering how (and why, although the way mhy be that she had to find a reason for the - frankly ridiculous IMO - 6-game ban after she hammered him in her findings fo fact) she came up with it. As you say, legally "sexual assault" doesn't actually need violence (no assault does, if there is actual violence then in is "battery"). Investigating sexual assaults (these days in a non-criminal context) is part of my day job and I have never come across such a distinction, even from review panels without the legal background that, presumably, this judge has.
-
1
-
-
I think that there really is only one appropriate punishment in such a case, and that is to cut off his goolies
On a serious note though, my real concern with the Judge's decision is this mythical "non-violent sexual assault" concept she has come up with. I mean, WTF does that even mean?
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, BritBill said:
Now, what I've been doing is activating the free trial on the Sunday before the Bills kick off. Then as soon as they finish I cancel the free trial
Spoken like a true Yorkshireman
-
2
-
-
On 7/15/2022 at 10:18 PM, vtnatefootball11 said:
C'mon now I'm far from a Watson defender, but calling him a "sexual predator" is too far. There was not one single instance where physical force was alleged to be involved. Have you ever bought a girl dinner/drinks in hopes she might have sex with you?? You're a sexual predator.
Obviously that's some hyperbole, but I think you see where I'm going, stop with the virtue signaling.
Seriously, that is the line you want to take? That there has to be "physical force" used for someone to be a sexual predator? The man, by all accounts, used women for his own sexual gratification. If that is not a sexual predator then what is?
Antonio Brown shares text from Brady blasting him
in The Stadium Wall
Posted
Two thoughts:
1) Brady actually comes across as caring (and AB as a d*ck); and
2) Brady's written work definitely needs improving. Gramatically that is a mess (and don't get me started on the punctuation)*
* Yes, it is miles better than some of the stuff I see players post and yes, I am a language pendant but even so ... C-