MW wrote:Booney wrote:Who's the dude?
dogwatcher
Dogwatcher*
MW wrote:Booney wrote:Who's the dude?
dogwatcher
Dogwatchers a dude?Lightning McQueen wrote:MW wrote:Booney wrote:Who's the dude?
dogwatcher
Dogwatcher*
stan wrote:Dogwatchers a dude?Lightning McQueen wrote:MW wrote:Booney wrote:Who's the dude?
dogwatcher
Dogwatcher*
MW wrote:
my god this forum is acting funny today!
Dogwatcher wrote:Dude, you led your original post with a "dare" regarding your injury list.
I responded to your dare with a very lengthy list of quality players who were unavailable on Friday night for the team that very few expected to win and that beat you by 48 points in highly convincing fashion.
Heck, I'm as shocked as you were, dude, that we won, and by so much, but when the first line in your post talks about your injury list what do you think is going to be the response?
MW wrote:Maybe you're not a dude with this logic...
read it again.
I was not saying we lost because of injuries, I was responding to booney saying our depth will be exposed and I was saying most sided depth will be exposed with those outs. I then said we played shit.
It's like talking to my wife...
Booney wrote:MW wrote:Maybe you're not a dude with this logic...
read it again.
I was not saying we lost because of injuries, I was responding to booney saying our depth will be exposed and I was saying most sided depth will be exposed with those outs. I then said we played shit.
It's like talking to my wife...
And I said other than M.Crouch and Smith who is missing from your best 22?
B.Crouch is a bonus when he's fit, unfortunately he can't get his body right so you can't really count him, but for this exercise I'll allow it.
Who else?
Booney wrote:MW wrote:Maybe you're not a dude with this logic...
read it again.
I was not saying we lost because of injuries, I was responding to booney saying our depth will be exposed and I was saying most sided depth will be exposed with those outs. I then said we played shit.
It's like talking to my wife...
And I said other than M.Crouch and Smith who is missing from your best 22?
B.Crouch is a bonus when he's fit, unfortunately he can't get his body right so you can't really count him, but for this exercise I'll allow it.
Who else?
MW wrote:Maybe you're not a dude with this logic...
read it again.
I was not saying we lost because of injuries, I was responding to booney saying our depth will be exposed and I was saying most sided depth will be exposed with those outs. I then said we played shit.
It's like talking to my wife...
Dogwatcher wrote:MW wrote:Maybe you're not a dude with this logic...
read it again.
I was not saying we lost because of injuries, I was responding to booney saying our depth will be exposed and I was saying most sided depth will be exposed with those outs. I then said we played shit.
It's like talking to my wife...
"I challenge any side to be the same with that calibre either out or playing injured"
Challenge met.
And, don't call me Dude or I'll become unglued.
MW wrote:Walker, Lynch, Sloane and to a lessen extent Talia and Betts all playing underdone but that's the risk you take going in if you go down that path.
Knight and Hampton can come in
Brodlach wrote:Rory Laird might end up the best IMO, he is an absolute jet. He has been in great form at the Bloods
MW wrote:CEY, Milera and possibly Fog, depending on matchups. Not sure on the fourth...
Booney wrote:MW wrote:Walker, Lynch, Sloane and to a lessen extent Talia and Betts all playing underdone but that's the risk you take going in if you go down that path.
Knight and Hampton can come in
M.Crouch, Smith*, Knight and Hampton would come in.
( I'd be worried about Hampton too, he can't seem to get out on the park with any continuity )
Who goes out?
Booney wrote:There's no doubt the coaching group at the AFC is an astute group, yet they keep picking Milera to contradict that assumption.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 176 guests