2/14/2017 9:34 AM
This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
BTW, page 3. That's when it started getting off topic. I said a few weeks ago that no one should ever read past page 3. The insultfest always begins in earnest on page 4.
2/14/2017 10:18 AM
Who is reporting all these posts?
2/14/2017 10:26 AM
The owner of the thread.
2/14/2017 11:07 AM
Me. I'm trying to steer this back on topic. There are hundreds of threads to toss around insults. I don't really care what tw47 or cjmully think of me. If they want to criticize my ideas, so be it. But I'm not in the mood for "U R stewpid" today.
2/14/2017 11:17 AM
On topic, please.
2/14/2017 11:36 AM
cubcub, I'm not debating the quality of coaching or intelligence of any user in this thread any longer. I'd appreciate if you'd just delete your post. Thanks in advance.

Oh well, I asked.
2/14/2017 12:04 PM (edited)
mike's proposal was interesting and promising

confused by what happened to a perfectly nice thread
2/14/2017 12:08 PM
What always happens. Goes OK for maybe 3 pages then becomes an insult-laden, off-topic mess. It could have gone 3 ways:

1. Debate the three ideas I had.
2. Individuals propose their own ideas that could be debated also.
3. Grab the biggest piece of poo you can find and sling it at someone you disagree with.

As usual, it quickly turned to #3.
2/14/2017 12:11 PM
How is defending my position on my analogy against you're flawed logic not on topic? My analogy was a direct rebuttal to the first post in this thread?
As far personal attacks. If someone is being illogical or idiotic I have no problem saying so. Just because I'm abrasive doesn't mean my statements are wrong or unjustified. That said you've directly called me names. If I have problems with someone's rhetoric I don't mirror or exceed that rhetoric. Yet you've chosen that path.
2/14/2017 12:14 PM
This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
Posted by npb7768 on 2/12/2017 5:24:00 PM (view original):
I recently got into two battles with the same nearby team over 2 local and probable EE players. For the most part, i led on one of the guys, and he led on the other. He won the first guy at 54% to 48%, both Very High. He continued to go hard after the 2nd guy and won that battle too. He did a great job outmaneuvering me, and i have no problem with my two losses. And he's a great guy too and a legendary owner.

Having said all that, the fact is that he went balls-out for 2 EE guys... and we all know that EE's can put owners at a disadvantage... so if he gets hosed on EE's in a couple of seasons, i will have little sympathy for him with his situation. I've come around to thinking that the EE set-up should stay as-is. Big Six high-prestige schools who deliberately stuff their fat faces at the pig feeding trough, while aware that they could get hosed with EE problems, should adjust, or accept their probable fate of getting hosed. Also want to note that this owner has never complained and is a nice, honest and straight-up guy.
I think this is high quality post.
2/14/2017 12:37 PM
◂ Prev 1...5|6|7|8 Next ▸

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2024 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.