3 hours ago, Bwestbrook36 said:

Well he also thinks the chiefs are gonna get killed

I think so too

1 hour ago, Boogyman said:

MVP's not winning Superbowls since whenever is obviously coincidence lol. In what universe would having the best player, especially the best QB, in any given year be detrimental to winning?

Fans and players are very superstitious. Never really got into it. Hurts getting MVP and then winning the SB would have been awesome

10 minutes ago, Mike030270 said:

I think so too

Fans and players are very superstitious. Never really got into it. Hurts getting MVP and then winning the SB would have been awesome

Yeah, I dismiss this nonsense as I'm reading it lol

1 hour ago, HaroldJackson29 said:

My narrative wasn't destroyed because you only found one example and the other was two single guys vs each other.

Fact/proof..So in other words you can't think for yourself and need a perceived authority to tell you what to think.

Proof= When 2 black QBs ar playing on Lincoln's bday. It's obviously predetermined and staged. 

When  Doug Williams won SB 22 on January 31. That was the anniversary of the 13th Amendment being passed. 

So ,you wanna believe the league just got lucky twice?

How long does it take you to tie your shoes?

1 hour ago, HaroldJackson29 said:

My narrative wasn't destroyed because you only found one example and the other was two single guys vs each other.

Almost forgot to point out, since you love using the word contradiction, even though you can’t give me an example of one, I thought I’d give you a pre Super Bowl gift and point out a contradiction for you so you can recognize one going forward. 
 

You see how you mentioned that "only one” example was given, immediately followed by another example? That sir, is a contradiction. A contradiction is when you say one thing, then say something opposite afterwards. 
 

I’m glad I was able to help you become a little smarter. Maybe you can carry this lesson going forward. 
 

Enjoy the game. 

HJ29 was moved to Ranter. You have to yell at him there now. (Rant and Rave)

I think he's a new to the boards Chiefs fan.

I put him on ignore after about 1 day of his routine.

1 minute ago, SkippyX said:

HJ29 was moved to Ranter. You have to yell at him there now. (Rant and Rave)

I think he's a new to the boards Chiefs fan.

I put him on ignore after about 1 day of his routine.

How do you know that if you have him on ignore ??

Just now, downundermike said:

How do you know that if you have him on ignore ??

He has been quoted 24/7

If I hover over his name in the quoted post it says RANTER.

How can you not figure these things out for yourself?

2 minutes ago, SkippyX said:

He has been quoted 24/7

If I hover over his name in the quoted post it says RANTER.

How can you not figure these things out for yourself?

You are spending a lot of time investigating the whereabouts of someone you have on ignore.

34 minutes ago, Boogyman said:

How long does it take you to tie your shoes?

Jokes on you, he uses Velcro 

5 minutes ago, TorontoEagle said:

Jokes on you, he uses Velcro 

So 45 minutes then? Still seems like a long time.

4 minutes ago, Boogyman said:

So 45 minutes then? Still seems like a long time.

He never actually gets them done up

7 hours ago, TorontoEagle said:

A sack results in you losing yards and a down. That is detrimental. What happens on the next play doesn’t make the sack non-detrimental. 

 

7 hours ago, Swoop said:

Nah, that's not true. It's only kinda that way.

Like you can totally throw a pick and then the defense can have a pick-6 on the next play. So you know, not all plays are bad.

How is a play detrimental if you overcome it?

A sack is a negative play, but it isn't (always) detrimental. Maybe find a better English word. 

2 minutes ago, brkmsn said:

 

How is a play detrimental if you overcome it?

A sack is a negative play, but it isn't (always) detrimental. Maybe find a better English word. 

Sack are usually bad, but there are also "good sacks". The defense gets paid too. Sometimes, no matter how good you are, on a single play the other team can be better. 

 

17 minutes ago, Boogyman said:

Sack are usually bad, but there are also "good sacks". The defense gets paid too. Sometimes, no matter how good you are, on a single play the other team can be better. 

 

Like if you are trying to pick up one more first down and run out the clock, and you call a pass play, if no one is open, take a sack, keep the clock going and/or make the other team burn a timeout. 

Perfect example in which I can speak from experience because in a game against the Raiders this year, the Broncos were in that very situation and Russ didn't take a sack, threw an incomplete pass, stopped the clock, allowed Vegas to have enough time to drive for a game tying FG and then the Broncos lost in OT. 

"Good sacks" do exist.

 

Sacks are bad. No team lines up and wants the play result to be a sack. Kneeling doesn’t count. 
 

Yes, sometimes the game situation makes it not as bad to take a sack. It’s still bad, it’s still negative, it’s still detrimental. What you do on the next play is irrelevant to the sack before it (in terms of the sack being good or bad). This is ridiculous.

38 minutes ago, brkmsn said:

 

How is a play detrimental if you overcome it?

A sack is a negative play, but it isn't (always) detrimental. Maybe find a better English word. 

I think you need to first understand what the word detrimental means

8 minutes ago, TorontoEagle said:

Sacks are bad. No team lines up and wants the play result to be a sack. Kneeling doesn’t count. 
 

Yes, sometimes the game situation makes it not as bad to take a sack. It’s still bad, it’s still negative, it’s still detrimental. What you do on the next play is irrelevant to the sack before it (in terms of the sack being good or bad). This is ridiculous.

Agreed. Just pointing out that not every sack is equal and there are worse plays than a sack.  Our opponents are also pretty good at football.

Would love for him to have a better game than Mahomes

6 hours ago, Bamabird said:

I have been away for a few days, came on today and started reading where I left off and was thinking, WTH happened here? People, we are going to the Super Bowl with a great QB, a great defense, great WRs and a great running game! Why all the bickering? Honestly, the only way to make trolls go away is what someone posted on here, IGNORE them and don't respond to their insane posts.

FLY EAGLES FLY!!

It's definitely gonna get worse than this if we win and Hurts plays well or get the MVP. Hurts may have 3 rushing TDs but the haters will complain because they weren't passes. @VaBeach_Eagle be prepared to dump this thread to R&R win or lose. 

Just to break down my current thoughts.

1) Mahomes deserves the MVP.

2) Hurts was ahead marginally before he got hurt, I don’t know if he would have kept it.

3) There are still people throwing shade at Hurts at every opportunity, even if they try and gaslight or claim they are objective.

4) Hurts is getting an extension in all likelihood regardless of what happens in the Super Bowl.

5) I’m nervous for Sunday. But come what may I believe Hurts is the franchise.

4 hours ago, HaroldJackson29 said:

My narrative wasn't destroyed because you only found one example and the other was two single guys vs each other.

Fact/proof..So in other words you can't think for yourself and need a perceived authority to tell you what to think.

Proof= When 2 black QBs ar playing on Lincoln's bday. It's obviously predetermined and staged. 

When  Doug Williams won SB 22 on January 31. That was the anniversary of the 13th Amendment being passed. 

So ,you wanna believe the league just got lucky twice?

So what you're saying is the Eagles will win because Hurts has more "blackness" than Mahomes?

@Heavywchamp New update to the boards. Extreme trolls get the Ranter label and they can only post in Rant and Rave. Hover over the name of the person you quoted.

A mod made a post in reply to someone saying something unsavory about canine anatomy and informed us of the new label.

2 minutes ago, SkippyX said:

@Heavywchamp New update to the boards. Extreme trolls get the Ranter label and they can only post in Rant and Rave. Hover over the name of the person you quoted.

A mod made a post in reply to someone saying something unsavory about canine anatomy and informed us of the new label.

Not sure if you're serious and the joke went over my head. Fact is, I honestly don't care about the trolls. I only chime in and laugh these days. I totally understand people who feel differently than most. After we win I'll have a blast reading though the butthurt 😂😂😂

If Eagles win and Hurts didn't get MVP they're really gonna come out full force 🤣🤣

15 minutes ago, Heavywchamp said:

Not sure if you're serious and the joke went over my head. Fact is, I honestly don't care about the trolls. I only chime in and laugh these days. I totally understand people who feel differently than most. After we win I'll have a blast reading though the butthurt 😂😂😂

just hover over his name

you can only read his butthurt in rant and rave