|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160
Hall of Famer
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160 |
Peen's thinking Rac.. I'm thinking 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,205
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,205 |
Quote:
.I got wind of it myself
Oh, well then that settles it.
I don't doubt Seattle could have made a offer weeks earlier....why wasn't the trade made then rather than a day after Chuck stunk up the joint??
If you can arrive at that answer, then you will finally understand. 
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong ![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/small-gator-chomp.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659
Poser
|
|
Poser
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659 |
It has already been explained. It's because Seattle began negotiating with Dorsey. Now do you understand?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,393
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,393 |
Quote:
There was one good reason....Romeo..he would have kept screwing around and our franchise qb(we hope) Quinn would have been stuck in the third role while Romeo wavered between Frye and Anderson
That is 150,000% guess work on your part.. but if that's what you want to believe, be my guest,,, I have a feeling that nothing is as simple as that.
Last edited by Damanshot; 10/03/07 11:11 AM.
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160 |
why wasn't the trade made then rather than a day after Chuck stunk up the joint??
How hard is it to answer? Not hard ..Phil ANSWERED IT...
At the time, two things were happening..Anderson didn't beat Frye out for the starting spot..so thats one..
Two, Phil didn't want to do it at that point.
He's business partners with the Seattle GM so he knew the offer would still be there.
They let the first game play and Frye bombed out..Rac yanked him..Phil went into his Monday meeting , made his decision and made the deal.
See with U and the some of media and other fans, you're bellyaching about the timeline of the trade ..thats what matters to U..not the end result..I didn't have any problem with the timing..it was not a norm thing to do but they did it..and it's worked so far.
So U want to blame it on Rac..thats your fallguy..he let the QB comp play out and as I told Pit thousands of times, it did not hurt the team..or has the output shown otherwise?
The team is 2-2 , almost 3-1..so why complain?
We know whats going to eventually happen anyway with the QB's..
U guys just want to nickpick..if U ever decide to investigate things , you'll find out there are a lot of deals on the table that never materialize..
Just as I knew there was a deal on the table with NE involving Chaun Thompson for Nick Kazur OT..if they never gotten the linemen they were after that deal would have went down.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,205
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,205 |
Quote:
It has already been explained. It's because Seattle began negotiating with Dorsey. Now do you understand?
B....I understand all of that......that even lends more to what I am saying.
Romeo is the guy who wanted to keep Frye.....not Savage.
I maintain Savage would have been happy to start the season with what we have now, but Romeo was insisting on Chuck, and finally getting his way, we had to release Dorsey.
Savage would have traded Frye 2-3 weeks earlier except for Romeo insisting on keeping him..
The day after Chucks total flop in game one, Savage said screw this...I am getting Dorsey back and getting rid of Chuck, and shipped him to the Hawks like he probably wanted to do a few weeks earlier.
If Savage had really made the decision to keep Charlie, and was convinced he was worth it, he would have kept him over Ken Dorsey and let Seattle sign Dorsey. Savage wouldn't let a half of football sway his mind unless his mind was already made up.
That is what adds up.
You guys can think what you want.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,393
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,393 |
Quote:
Romeo is the guy who wanted to keep Frye.....not Savage.
I maintain Savage would have been happy to start the season with what we have now, but Romeo was insisting on Chuck, and finally getting his way, we had to release Dorsey.
Peen, I think you are tayloring the evidence to meet the theory you you've chosen to embrace..
You don't know for sure if Romeo wanted Frye or if Savage wanted Frye or if it was just as described,, a competition that Frye won and ultimatly lost.
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,205
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,205 |
I just try to look at the matter and see where the logic leads.
Any other way requires a GM making panic decisions and a coach starting a guy he didn't want to start.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659
Poser
|
|
Poser
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659 |
What adds up is what has been stated in the media and what Frye was told. The simple fact is that Savage was willing to draw it out to get more out of Frye, but when Seattle started talking with Dorsey, he felt getting Dorsey back was more valuable than getting a higher draft pick. You are SPECULATING as to what happened. I am going on the word of Savage and Frye.
It has nothing to do with "thinking what I want". It has to do with the facts. You can translate them as you want, though.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,393
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,393 |
Quote:
Any other way requires a GM making panic decisions and a coach starting a guy he didn't want to start.
Not really... it could have just been what they said it was,, competition won by Frye and then Lost by Frye.
let's be honest, Frye SUCKED with a capital S in that Pittsburgh game. But I think we all know Chuck as a proud kid,,,, it could be that he didn't take being pulled too well. Maybe he said something that caused Savage to pull the trigger on a trade that was in the works anyway.. Who knows..
You know what else we don't know,, we don't know if that trade wasn't being discussed with Anderson in mind instead of Frye, but then the blow up of the first game caused some quick shuffling and Savage was able to trade CF rather than DA.
We really don't know.
Probably the thing that makes me laugh loudest is when someone says:
This is the way it happened: Then they go out and explain it. But to them it's not a theory, it's fact. And if you look, most of the time, the resolution they come up with is good,,, IF the theory were FACT!
I don't argue with many for the resolution to problems they come up with... I question the thinking when Identifying the problem. Such is the case here...
Putting all that aside,, you could be wrong,, but you could be right! None of us know for sure.
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160 |
I maintain Savage would have been happy to start the season with what we have now, but Romeo was insisting on Chuck, and finally getting his way, we had to release Dorsey.
U continue to bypass the facts...Rac didn't insist on anyone..Phil was backing Frye before the Pitt game.
They released Dorsey because of his skillset..as Phil said.
They weren't expecting Seattle to start talking contract and Phil reacted quickly..for the development of Quinn they needed Dorsey..not Frye.
MORE more time Peen this ain't about Rac..The Seahawks forced the play..if it was RAC holding up things he would have vetoed the move..he didn't.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,205
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,205 |
Quote:
The Seahawks forced the play..if it was RAC holding up things he would have vetoed the move..he didn't.
At that point I don't think RAC had much say in the matter.
In the end, it doesn't matter. As you said...we have won a few games so there can't be too much complaining no matter how that deal played out,.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,800
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,800 |
Quote:
We are now 2-2 and except for a blocked field goal,, we should be 3-1..
I wanna know, do those of you that wanted RAC fired after the Pittsburgh game still want him fired now?
I've questioned RAC's decisions but never wanted him fired after the Pittsburgh game. I still question him but am giving him the season, and still think him and Phil don't see eye to eye, so I still stand behind my opinions.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,800
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,800 |
Quote:
Romeo is the guy who wanted to keep Frye.....not Savage.
I maintain Savage would have been happy to start the season with what we have now, but Romeo was insisting on Chuck, and finally getting his way, we had to release Dorsey.
Savage would have traded Frye 2-3 weeks earlier except for Romeo insisting on keeping him..
The day after Chucks total flop in game one, Savage said screw this...I am getting Dorsey back and getting rid of Chuck, and shipped him to the Hawks like he probably wanted to do a few weeks earlier.
If Savage had really made the decision to keep Charlie, and was convinced he was worth it, he would have kept him over Ken Dorsey and let Seattle sign Dorsey. Savage wouldn't let a half of football sway his mind unless his mind was already made up.
That is what adds up.
You guys can think what you want.
I agree with that 100% and even think that this could even go back to Carthon as well. The Frye trade didn't just happen there was a serious reason and when a GM makes a bold move that is a reflection on the coach, I don't see it any other way.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160 |
Thats because you and Peen don't want to see it for what it is.
They just didn't decide they wanted to get Dorsey back, they wanted him even after they had released him but didn't see a viable way to keep him.
If YOU WANT to ignore the Seahawks initiating contract talks with KD , then go ahead..
The bottom line has been spoken again and again..Phil deemed Dorsey more valuable to Quinn than Frye.
Thats why they iced the deal that quickly.
Dorsey is Quinns mentor..thats what this is about..not Rac..has little to do with Rac ..more to do with Quinn..and the other factor..they got no offers for Anderson..
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,800
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,800 |
Quote:
If YOU WANT to ignore the Seahawks initiating contract talks with KD , then go ahead..
And why were the in negotiations, because they were having WR issues and were thinking of moving the number 2 QB Senaca Wallace to the WR position, so they wanted a QB just in case, they also had an interest in Frye since he ws drafted, not sure if you knew these facts but I felt I would point them out.
As for the Quinn and Dorsey connection, thats a no brainer I read the article too during training camp.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160 |
You posting that (which I knew ) means what in defense of your stance?
If you knew that you then should understand that the move doesn't MAKE RAC look incompetent which is what a few of you are implying..
See U can't straddle Peens rusted fence and agree that the move had to do with Rac's incompetence , then point out to me that Seattle needed a QB as if I didn't know why...
U just got your pants caught on that rusted part..AND it makes U look like you just want to follow a controversal view of the situation without putting the pieces of the pie together yourself..
The move was made to secure Dorsey back and give the Hawks a QB at the same time..just not the one they went after at that time.
Last edited by Attack Dawg; 10/03/07 01:56 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,205
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,205 |
Quote:
The bottom line has been spoken again and again..Phil deemed Dorsey more valuable to Quinn than Frye.
I agree.
And that leads back to what I was saying. Romeo is the guy who insisted on keeping Frye. Savage never wanted to release Dorsey in the first place but really had no choice once it was clear Romeo had to have Chuck.
Once Seattle began to explore Dorsey after the Frye debacle in game 1, Savage decided he didn't care what Romeo wanted, traded Chuck like he wanted all along and got Dorsey back on board.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659
Poser
|
|
Poser
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659 |
No one is disagreeing with the facts. It's when you imply things that you have nothing but your own predetermined bias against RAC to back you is where the problem is. There isn't ONE SHRED of evidence to the last two paragraphs you posted.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,250
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,250 |
Quote:
Romeo is the guy who insisted on keeping Frye. Savage never wanted to release Dorsey in the first place but really had no choice once it was clear Romeo had to have Chuck.
This doesn't even qualify as supposition.
There isn't even enough circumstantial evidence around to support this without taking major leaps of faith and ignoring other glaring items.... yet you continue to state such drivel as fact.
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160 |
Romeo is the guy who insisted on keeping Frye. Savage never wanted to release Dorsey in the first place but really had no choice once it was clear Romeo had to have Chuck.
]  Peen...try this..slowly..Phil said when Dorsey was released and it's somwhere in this board..that they couldn't see keeping Dorsey with the other three QB's because of his arm..they didn't envision him having to take any snaps at all..they knew he has the mind to run the offense but not the arm.. So they released him but still with the intent of bringing him back somehow..that somehow got into action when Seattle turned to sign him.. So they talked and it went probably like this.. Dorsey: 'Hey Phil? Seattle offered me a contract".. Phil.."GMAB"!..O.K..hits speed dial.."Hey Ruskell..U trying to sign KD?" Ruskell: YEAH.. Phil: " Well we want him..tell ya what ..it looks like Frye just overflowed the deep fryer and you want a QB ..so you can have him.." Ruskell: "Whatcha want for him?" A GRILLED angus burger?" Phi: "ha ha ha..." Ruskell: ''O.k , how bout a 6th rounder for 'em?" Phil:" Sounds good NOW GET Dorsey on a plane NOW!!!!!" MAYBE Peen U can see now? 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,877
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,877 |
I tend to agree with what you are saying regarding Peen's assertions. But actually what really matters to me is that no matter who you think wanted who one thing is true. The Browns looked foolish when they did this after the first game. Trade Charlie. Trade Derek. Hell, trade Romeo. But don't do it after just 4 quarters of football (actually in CF's case 1 quarter) after you've just gone through a full training camp.
We just looked dumb. Spin it any way you want it was still dumb. People will forget it if we end up 8-8 or better. But if we slide down into the 4-12, 5-11 range again you can bet that will be the lead paragraph in every article at the end of the season.
"People who drink light 'beer' don't like the taste of beer; they just like to pee a lot."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160 |
Dumb? To whom? Oh.. the so called experts who were astonished by the move?  So it wasn't conventional ..big freaking deal.. They don't look dumb to those same experts ...I haven't heard a peep outta their pir holes..looks like the potholes got filled with the early success the team has had.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,877
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,877 |
Yeah, I'm sure you called the trade at halftime of the first game. GMAFB  Unconventional is benching your starting QB after one quarter. Dumb is then trading him before his jersey is washed the next day. Sorry, I'm entitled to my opinion. And I still think it was dumb. Or at the very least dumb looking.
"People who drink light 'beer' don't like the taste of beer; they just like to pee a lot."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160 |
Didn't say U couldn't have a opinion dude..
No..and I said nothing about I knew the trade was happening that Tuesday..I said I knew the Browns had been shopping both before and during TC...
I also said it didn't bother me..and it still doesn't..the trade was on the table ..they made the deal..doesn't matter who thinks it was dumb..they did it and it's cleared the path for Quinn..
Last edited by Attack Dawg; 10/03/07 03:36 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,800
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,800 |
I have lÕoked at it rationally and the conclusion I come to leans towards Ballpeen, would it be more relevent if I typed out basically what he said? No matter if Dorsey was available or not you still would have seen Frye traded.
Why do you feel the need to talk down to people who disagree with you? I don't really mind it it's sorta funny but chill man were all Browns Fans.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160 |
if U really looked at it rationally Peens conspiracy theories are not supported by any logic whatsoever..
U just can't disregard the facts then say it was because of Rac..
Tell me WHO PULLED Frye from the game?
Who allowed the QB competition from the start?
Answer that...
Why do you feel the need to talk down to people who disagree with you?
Who's feelings did I hurt?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,800
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,800 |
Quote:
I also said it didn't bother me..and it still doesn't..the trade was on the table ..they made the deal..doesn't matter who thinks it was dumb..they did it and it's cleared the path for Quinn..
I agree with that. If Quinn was way off I still think we would still have traded Frye and brought in someone off the street, who? I don't know, but it would be in the same capacity as Dorsey.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,800
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,800 |
So are you saying is just made the move out of a whim? We don't know all the facts and I am willing to bet there were issues behind the scenes, and to think that these issues are between Phil and Romeo are not far fetched, Looks to me like Phil had to fix an issue the HC couldn't do. I don't see why you think thats so off base.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 765
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 765 |
Quote:
It has already been explained. It's because Seattle began negotiating with Dorsey. Now do you understand?
That is the way you chose to see it. It hasnt really been explained until you consider all the facts. The biggest fact being that Charlie had started his last game for the browns. .
After the Pitt game it was clear Charlie was not going to be starting anymore to most everybody. They couldnt wait on Charlie to make miraculous strides forward because they have Quinn waiting in the wings and DA who was never given the opportunities that Charlie was. Even through training camp when neither guy was able to really demonstrate thier surperiority, DA showed different upside that was more suited to Chuds offense.
Seattle was looking for a 3rd string Qb, and Dorsey gave the browns more in the mental aspect of the game that was more valuable to them in Quinns tutelage.
Seattle had the luxury of seeing if Charlie can be more than a back-up. And Dorsey was just worthmore to us than Chuck at that point. I dont think seattle forced our hand at all. Charlie was going somewhere after the pittsburgh game, and if seattle really wanted to force our hand they would have waited until we released him. I believe we would have done exactly that........ but instead we got a 6th round for him.
Believing that Seattle got the better end of the deal is by forcing our hand is fine but it isnt the truth
In the end it was a win for both sides but it seems to be panning out for the browns in the short term
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,205
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,205 |
Quote:
There isn't ONE SHRED of evidence to the last two paragraphs you posted.
Lucky for me we don't need that around this place in a thread such as this.
The evidence you claim was in the papers, in the words of Savage, yet his actions did everything opposite of his words.
B....you know darn good and well there is a code of support...Savage isn't going to make his coach look like a fool by saying things in opposition.
At any rate, it doesn't really matter....how the heck did we get here anyhow??
What Romeo needs to do to improve is win a bunch of games and allow other people to make most of the big decisions.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,205
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,205 |
Quote:
Yeah, I'm sure you called the trade at halftime of the first game. GMAFB
Unconventional is benching your starting QB after one quarter. Dumb is then trading him before his jersey is washed the next day. Sorry, I'm entitled to my opinion. And I still think it was dumb. Or at the very least dumb looking.
It was.....and even though you don't agree with my position, it was a decision Savage wanted to make earlier, but he yielded to RAC's wishes and kept Chuck around.
Lerner left his box before the half according to reports and my viewing into his box and not seeing anyone.
I am sure all of this was discussed with Lerner over dinner a few nights before the opener....that RAC wanted to keep Chuck.
After the pleasant conversation that must have occurred in that box during Charlies play on the field, as the fans were leaving in droves, Savage at that point knew he blew it ever listening to RAC.
I doubt Savage ever seriously listens to RAC again on matters of players.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659
Poser
|
|
Poser
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659 |
Where in the world did you get that I said Seattle got the better end of the deal? I said that it worked out for BOTH teams. In fact, I said pretty much what you did. What I didn't say was that RAC objected and Savage forced the move as Peen was suggesting.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659
Poser
|
|
Poser
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659 |
No, Savage didn't yield to RAC's wishes, no matter how many times you say it, my old friend. Savage didn't pull the trigger because he wanted to get MORE VALUE out of Frye. When Seattle started talking to Dorsey, he sacrificed the chance at something more to be able to re-sign Dorsey and RAC agreed to it. This is straight from Charlie's mouth, not a bunch of people guessing as to what happened. I can't be any clearer on that.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,205
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,205 |
B....did Charlie lose the QB competition in the 2nd qtr of the first game??
If so...that is a very poor job by the coach.
Surely you have to agree with that premise.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 765
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 765 |
Quote:
Where in the world did you get that I said Seattle got the better end of the deal? I said that it worked out for BOTH teams. In fact, I said pretty much what you did. What I didn't say was that RAC objected and Savage forced the move as Peen was suggesting.
You didnt and i was incorrect to imply you did. 
I ASSUMED that by you saying Seattle forced Phils hand that they got the leg up. And we did say pretty much the same damn thing didnt we.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,393
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,393 |
Quote:
Savage isn't going to make his coach look like a fool by saying things in opposition.
how do you know that he had anything to say that would make his coach look like a fool..
Peen, you are certainly entitled to your opinion,, as are all of us, but geez man,, don't try to push your opinion at us and tell us it's Fact..
Truth be told, you may be right,, but again,, you don't realy know that,, you just believe that..
And frankly Peen,, I really think you would believe anything that casts a shadow on RAC... I hope I'm wrong about that,, but I don't think so.
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
...If there was more than the usual good feelings about RAC this week, maybe people finally felt he was turning the corner as the team looked very prepared and ready to play this past week.
Can you tell me another time when you've seen that in the last two years? That is something to be excited about and offer some praise for RAC for a job well done. Now let's see it continue.
It's always the same around here. We're on track when we win, we suck when we lose. If there's difference this time I think it can be attributed to the offense scoring points.
Hell, talk abounds right now about the possibility of us beating the Pats. And it's coming from a different angle than "any given Sunday". Let's see what the talk is after the game.
Don't try to lump me in with posters who come on here and make rash statements after one game. I'm only saying he deserves credit for a job well done for the Ravens game. I also said 'lets see it continue'.
Please tell me how that translates to 'we are on track'.
And you say, 'it's always the same around here' to my post...blah, blah, blah...I'm surprised you didn't write a whole 3 page essay about it.
Dude, all I was doing was answering the question you asked which was: "Can you tell me another time when you've seen that in the last two years?"
Nothing I said had anything to do with accusing you of making "rash statements" or to "lump you in" with anybody. I was speaking only about those in whom you felt I lumped you in with.
When I said, "It's always the same around here" I was refering to the fact that it's always the same around here, in response to your question. That was not in a direct disrespect to you or your post. It was an attempt to answer the question you asked. In fact, other than the fact that you asked that question, my response had absolutely nothing to do with you or the good things you mentioned.
However, as I re-read your initial post I realize the question was in regard to "the team looked very prepared and ready to play this past week." But I took initially as a question regarding the "more than the usual good feelings about RAC".
So this misunderstanding was totally on me with my lack of comprehension and misreading your post. I apologize for that. My bad.
I was going to write a 3-page essay explaining all this to you but hopefully this is enough to get the point across. 
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,036
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,036 |
There you go making me feel all bad.
Appreciate the feedback. No worries. No harm, no foul.
You're one of the good guys on here.
LOL - The Rish will be upset with this news as well. KS just doesn't prioritize winning...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,782
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,782 |
All this drivel about the week one fiasco is useless.
The Browns hung their hat on anderson, who was the better match for Chuds offense.
2 good games, 1 mediocre game, fans are happy, romeo can have a glass of iced tea in his not so hot seat.
No one expects a win against NE. Miami, that is a different story.
That leaves the Browns with a decision for the bye week.
What Romeo needs to do is let chud handle the O and do something about the D.
Welcome back, Joe, we missed you!…. That did not age well.
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Where Romeo Needs To Improve To
Stay In Cleveland
|
|
