supremecoltsfan300
-
Posts
1,362 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by supremecoltsfan300
-
-
Go Seattle! Shock the world
-
Here comes the boom! the 4th boom
-
Wilson should roll out to the opposite side of Matthews. Could probably run for a first down if nobody is open and Matthews isnt chasing him
-
...thanks 
Irvin is working that RT so far....and Bryant is just a massive human being. Good game to watch so far if you like defense.
I hate defense. But I hate qbs who aren't named Manning and Luck even more. So go D!
-
darn I'm alone in here
Seattle's front line is putting work in. Lots of different looks - putting pressure on Rogers.
I'm still here
-
Wow their D is looking Impressive so far
-
I want to see the Seahawks smack around some Packers, good start so far
-
I wish I knew u before the Bears/Packers game. I would've loved to bet u some $$$.
Packers were lucky to win that game though. Bears lost it more than anything. Missed blocks, catches, catchable ints, penalties, bad special teams. Bears have potential to be SB contenders, but if they dont learn how to clean up those mistakes they'll never get there.
-
I expect to see atlanta run the ball more to use some clock. less time manning is on the field the less of a chance the broncos win. but i do gotta say one thing. when tracey porter picked off rothlisberger for a TD i bet that brought back bad memories to peyton during the superbowl. pretty much almost the same play lol.
Imo it was a very different play. In the SB, Manning threw it quick to the left on the inside where wayne is supposed to cut in for the crossing pattern. In The SNF game, Big Ben stared down his reciever and threw it out to the left where the defender had the better position the whole time.
Agree Atlanta will run it a lot. Probably a lot of playaction down the field to Julio and White too
-
bears at packers
chiefs at bills
panthers at saints
browns at bengals
vikings at colts
texans at jaguars
raiders at dolphins
cardinals at patriots
bucs at giants
ravens at eagles
cowboys at seahawks
redskins at rams
jets at steelers
titans at chargers
lions at 49ers
broncos at falcons
-
broncos 1st. 14-2 record
-
Peyton said it right before/after the ref threw a personal flag against the lineman I think. A great teaching moment imo
-
Peyton
Calvin
Fitz
Gronk
Foster
I'll take 5 SB wins in a row, tyvm
-
I don't really like Skip either or particularly think his views are even somewhat intelligent, but he was well within his right to speak his mind if that is what he truly believes. Race is such a touchy subject and yes, im gonna say it.... especially for whites to say something racially controversial. I have heard many black analysts say something similar and get no backlash what so ever. So why was it wrong for Skip to say it? Whether you believe him or not, there is some truth in what he said. It's just like leading up to the draft, virtually every single black analyst they asked....RG3 or Luck, said RG3.(At least I can't think of a single one that said Luck) It is what it is, Most black people will pull for the black QB and many white's will pull for the white QB. Part of the problem we have with race issue's is because nobody is willing to discuss the issue's no holds barred. Somebody always gets upset or offended. People need to stop with all the PC crap and say what they feel without fear of repercussion.
perfectly said
-
It's bullying. You could tell from Prince's comments afterwards that he didnt find it funny nor did he enjoy it. If both sides arent laughing about it, it's bullying.
-
I think Skip indirectly generalizing it to the whole population was off base. However, it's not like what he said isn't true for some people. The % of people it's true for is a lot smaller than what skip is making it seem. The remark was done in poor taste, but dont really think you can call skip racist when comment had some truth to it.
-
You misspelled chiefs and 49ers, but its cool. I fixed it for you
Actually even with a healthy Vick, there are more than 3 teams in the NFC standing between them and a SB appearance. Out of all the Philly teams this is the one least likely to win a championship within the next five years
PS My phone keeps trying to fix my spelling of "Vick" with "Vicki"
Chiefs are not anywhere close to being contenders. they may win games against inferior teams this year, but they won't do any damage against the good teams. What happened to to the chiefs in 2010 in the playoffs against the ravens would happen again if they somehow got in.
Eagles vs 49ers definitely favors the eagles. Eagles were blowing out the 49ers last year, till they had the 4th quarter collapsed. Eagles have gotten actual linebackers now and their d-line is the best in the league. Smitih wont have time to throw at all.
And out of all the philly teams this is the most likely one to win a SB. They are loaded and as long as they don't suffer major injuries will do well. Foles is actually making me think they'll win games even without Vick. I don't have them winning the SB, but they definitely can get there.
-
tell us how you really feel
well since you asked
Vick needs to be able to make it through the preseason healthy for the Eagles to go anywhere......Vick stop getting hurt every game!
-
No love for the Giants? Come on man!!
I think the Giants have a shot to go to the SB. Just think that if they run into the Eagles in the playoffs, I'd strongly favor the Eagles. When Nnamdi Asomugha actually plays like a real CB, I think eagles are just too much of a match-up nightmare for the giants.
-
I just hope the Eagles do well....
Live in Philly and all the radio-heads are freaking out about last week's game......like cm'on it was week one preseason.
Personally I think both teams are real contenders.
Patriots could lose to Denver, Baltimore, or Pitt
Eagles could lose to Bears, Saints, Packers
Those are the only teams standing in the way of the SB for each of them imo.
-
I completely forgot about that surgery. Was that the year with the slow start then we won 8 games in a row?
yup and peyton won mvp that year too
-
I was wondering if she had a medical condition and that or medication, prevented her from feeling the burn. If this is true, then JJ is liable. If what Ruksak said about the tempature of the bence is true, JJ is liable.
Ruksak makes a great point that the Cowboys made a poor choice in installing a black marble bench, something that's made to be sat on but also gets extremely hot in common conditions.
If she was under medication, how would JJ be liable? I don't understand how that works. Isn't that the same thing as say being drunk and slipping on stairs? You can't sue the owner there because you made yourself impaired. In both cases, the person is knowingly taking something that impairs their ability.
-
I want to respond to this threat regarding the overall rights on individuals being made whole due to being harm by others, and will get to that in a moment, but first want to respond the MacDonald's lawsuit by that little old lady that got serverly burn by a mere cup of coffee . . .
First off, thank God, we live in a country that allows us individuals to have an avenue to be made whole, (the courts) when another harms us . . . some my not like this avenue or thumb thier noses at it, but it is one of the greatest things we have in this country . . . the ability of the small not to have to pay for damages caused by another . . . a little guy who is damage by another should have an avenue to seek compensation, this is especially so when the big guy tells the little guy to go fry ice and I aint paying you a dime . . . well was is right is right and we have a system to correct this and allow another to have the other pay for damages caused by the former . . .
now lets look at the facts of the MacDonald . . . (you can skip to the summary below if you all wish for a shortly explanation)
MacDonalds, a fast food hamburger joint, decides it wants to make more money by getting into the breakfast industry, then into the drive though industry to make money faster . . . then they started to sell coffee to communters . . . and in effort to compete against their competitors, cranked up the thier coffee maker some 40 degrees F over the other coffee supliers (I think it was 40 or 50, I kind of forget as it has been about 20 years since the suit, but either way I remember numbers like 140 v 180 ro 140 v 190) . . . so MacDonalds was trying to get an edge on the competition by serving coffee at temps fo 180-190 in an effort to have their coffees be hotter once their customers get to work . . .
the problem was that, and common sense goes, their customers drank the coffee as they drove to work and MacDonalds should be aware of this situation. Indeed prior to the suit they recevied several hundred complaints that their customers were being burnt and many were settle out of court. So bottom line MacD was on notice that its coffee was causing is its customers to get burnt (beyond the common sense thinking that poeple will drink the coffee before getting to work) . .. but instead of taking notice of the complaints, MacD, through one of their spokesperson indicated that "we had more important things to deal with . . " or something along those lines , i forget now the exact language . . .
so bottom line instead of cranking down the coffee pots by 40 degrees to match is competitors, MacD decided to continue to leave the coffee overly hot even thought they were on full notice that the product was dangerous and caused injuries . . .
So for me, if someone finally decides to take MacDs all the way to court to put them in their place, i got no problem with it . . . The elderly lady recieved server burns and was in the hospital for many days . . . . and for all of you anti-court people, the end judgement was a portporional one, that is they found her partly responsible and reduced the judged accordingly . . .
A Quick Review on the MacD Case
1) MacD is a hamburger joint that wanted increase revenue by selling coffee
2) It further wanted to increase revenue by selling a liquid via a drive through
3) It further wanted to make money by beatting its competitors by cranking up the coffee by some 40-50 degrees
4) It recieved several hundred complaints that customers were burned because of item 3 above
5) It had "more importanting things to do" than to turn down the coffee maker temp
6) A elderly lady was serverly burned and sued MacDs and received a judgement which was adjusted in accordance to her liability in handling the coffee
you can say what you want about "frivilous" law suit, but when one puts out a product that one knows can be dangerous to its customers and does nothing about it, when one gets injuried down the road we should not complain if that individuals seeks reimbursement and damages for the injury
plain and simple as that
surely the national media will not go into this kind of detial but would rather just yell at the little old lady . . .
But in this McDonalds case, no one hurt the poor old lady. She did it to herself. She knowingly bought the coffee , aware that it was going to be hot. Anything can be dangerous if used improperly. If you spill it on yourself that's your fault. If you gulp it down, that's your fault. If you don't spill the coffee, and if you only take small sips while it's hot or wait to drink it until it's cooled, you'll never have an issue.
-
Really if you're arguing that Jerry Jones is at fault and not the lady, please get your head examined. Human stupidity was at its finest here. If something is hot, don't keep touching it! I learned that when I was little. She must have missed that lesson from her parents. The woman chose to sit there, JJ didnt tell her too. The woman chose to remain sitting there long enough for her to get burnt, JJ didnt restrain her so she couldnt move from the bench. Only this lady was dumb enough to get burnt on a bench. No one else was. People have to take responsibility for their own stupidity. Just because you get hurt, doesnt mean that someone was responsible for it.
...thanks 
MNF: Packers at Seahawks [Merge]
in NFL General
Posted
7 sacks so far.....