daquixers_is_back

I never said it was ...

I guess the question is ... are stores/people using X-mas as an abbreviation for Christ, or as an abbreviation to take Christ out, not knowing that X could very well represent him? I would guess the latter.

I have used another website similar (uses Sopcast) and I watched a few minutes of the Ravens game I believe it was a few weeks back ... it is OK but it is a bit slow.

Yeah and Champ Bailey has been owned in 1 out of his past 20 games too. So I dont quite see your point. Clements has been "owned" literally only ONCE in his past 20-25 games.

Thousands of Children, or thousands of babies?

You would have to figure that the amount in question is about the same as one of their employees annual salaries. $40,000 is a lot of money, no matter how you put it.

Come on now man, I gave you your props. I will try to find your lot next game ... but the reason we got stuck is because of the rain/snow/sleet for 4 hours.

Uhm ... Nate wasnt covering Roy Williams all day. That was McGee who got owned by Williams.

That was pretty funny. I like when he said (paraphrasing) "Let me give you guys some stats ... 48" vertical ... etc" HAHA! I just got to the whiffle ball tournament ... "could you imagine being that good?" he said ...

He had the best rushing year of his career that year (nearly 500 yards rushing that year) Flutie really had a rough stretch during THREE games that year. Take away those THREE games and the other 14 he had 2,500 yards, 15 TD's and 9 INT's. Not great, but NOT horrible either.

Im not sure what people mean by the drop-off in play in 2005 and early 2006. He did have a few missed tackles but that is all you can really bag him for. He only really had ONE bad game last season, which was against Chambers. The other games he shutdown a lot of coners, including STEVE SMITH. The only thing I can think of is that he was not getting INT's. Other than that I thought he played good. Heck even Champ Bailey didnt have more than 3 INT's for FOUR straight years.

Im partial to Denzel Washington in Remember The Titans.

Two bad QB's? I dont consider myself a Flutie homer or anything, but he did have 5,800 yards, 39 TD's and 27 INT's up to that point in his Bills career. Not sure how that is bad. Lets face it ... he was getting up there in age, and he wasnt going to be the QB of the future, but he had about a 68% winning percentage with the Bills (AKA about 11 wins a season).

I thought RJ played well that game, but overall as a team I think we would have played better and wouldnt have been in that situation if Flutie was playing. No real facts to back it up ... just a feeling.

Music City Miracle still kills me to this day ...

I have never been there, but Hammers lot has a very good reputation so that is something I would probably recommend. Other than that, I usually park at someones house across from the 7/11 on the corner of abbot road. Its only $10, usually has free space, and is pretty easy access to the thruway after the game. Not to mention its very close to the stadium.

Do you REALLY not get what I am saying? Its all proportionate. If someone has 97 receptions at the end of the year it would be somewhat equal to a RB having about 350 carries, yet Bush will end up having around 92+ catches and less than 140 rushes. That is what I meant by the comment you are referring to. At this point I believe most of you understand what I was saying (as if you didnt understand it from the beginning) and are simply trying to be annoying. So have fun. Next topic.

Gotta love the pre-programmed insults that everyone comes up with too.

I would think it would be smarter to make Vick a receiver.

Actually that makes total sense to me. Especially if you said "i think we should make Royal a WR ... more of a Antonio Gates type of player"

He is just being ridiculous. Both of them knew EXACTLY what I meant from the first post and are just being retarded about it.

Which is EXACTLY what I meant. I figured by saying a Reggie Bush TYPE of player, people would have understood what I meant. Obviously not. Note, I NEVER said a Reggie Bush POSITION, I said a Reggie Bush TYPE.

Possibly ... but he could be at RB and catch out on the flats ... etc. Thats something I was just about to post actually ...

Actually if you really want to debate this, one could say that Bush "plays" WR and is "listed" at RB ... look at the carries to receiving ratio. He is basically half RB/half WR Ok. Let me edit my post so that people who don't want to engage their brain can understand what my post originally meant. "I would not put Vick at RB. I would put Vick at Wide Receiver if ANYTHING. Like Reggie Bush is at WR 75% of the game (yes even though he is LISTED at RB)." Is that better?

Really? No way! I said a Reggie Bush TYPE ... not a Reggie Bush position. Over half of the plays Bush lines up as a WR. Not a RB.