Jump to content

Sperm Edwards

Moderators
  • Content Count

    46,760
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    99

Sperm Edwards last won the day on February 25 2019

Sperm Edwards had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

348,604 JN Hall Of Fame

About Sperm Edwards

  • Rank
    Hall Of Famer
  • Birthday 10/21/1968

Contact Methods

  • Email
    spermedwards@yahoo.com
  • Facebook
    http://www.jetnation.com

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

29,404 profile views
  1. I did catch the two of you engaging in some familial bickering a page or two ago. Tepid as it was, it's the most entertaining part of the thread by far imo. The problem is you've got that underlying loyalty and respect for each other going on, which capped an otherwise potentially entertaining virtual death match with your tiresome civility towards one another.
  2. I stopped opening this thread days ago, and am not reading through 25+ more pages (half of it apparently DWC's musings, it would seem), so I skipped about 20 pages in the middle lol. Apologize in advance for not crediting any part here that others already brought up. Here's my take: Ordinarily on basic principle, offset language should be in every contract. If you're getting paid by a new team, you don't also need to get paid that same $ by the team who cut you, after they invested so much in you already, because you're so terrible that no one would trade anything for you, and given that
  3. I don’t care if any backup QBs are big brothers or father figures or mentors or mentos. But I also don’t subscribe to the idea that the team’s record in the starter’s absence is the only reason to sign an upgrade at QB2. I’d like the team to still be assessing the rest of the players it has, including young offensive weapons like a a couple rookie + 2nd yr WRs and a rookie RB and maybe a rookie TE, too. If the coaches feel that Wilson or White can credibly run the full offense - whether the team ultimately wins or loses their starts, though I prefer the former - that’d be great. The
  4. What’d be curious is, assuming he hadn’t and would have always refused (just for the sake of argument), post-infection and such a recent infection at that, is he now exempt from getting shots now, or if the league hadn’t considered & carved that out of their forfeit rule. We’re not getting into a deeper discussion about it than that here - we’ve seen how that’d go, and how quickly - and honestly I’m even reluctant to go this far. But I do wonder, purely in terms of the NFL game-forfeit rule and other mandates in place for those unvaccinated players.
  5. I was mulling over 3 replies to this post: 1. People are allowed to worship how they please whether you're a fan of them or not. 2. Do you like playing that game of stacking and re-stacking a little wooden block tower in hopes it doesn't fall? 3. Don't get me started. Soft-G people are the worst. And then realized I should've just up-repped your post & left it at that, like I just instructed DWC to do.
  6. I just had to edit this post after deleting your prior one. Thumbs-upping my post doesn't give you tacit permission to discuss which political aspects you like or dislike, right as you "agree" with denying the same for others. I'm glad you agree with the policy - in theory, I suppose - but stopping at a thumbs-up would've sufficed here.
  7. This is where you're mistaken. This is only a forum for discussing things I agree with. I disagree with the non-phonetic spelling of vakseenz, so we're very strict on the subject. But really the mistake is that this is not an open forum (or not a totally open one, anyway). An open forum would allow discussions about any/all things. That isn't this website, and it isn't without good reason, whether or not you find that to be ridiculous. The good news is there are at least 5 or 6 other sites on the www that report on and/or discuss these subjects. @slats put it as politely and as well
  8. Stats don't matter -- unless he wants to solely use stats as a rationalization right after saying that. How totally unsurprising. The Pats W/C game Tannehill was pressured on 2/3 of his dropbacks. That, and the success they had running Henry, is the reason for the low pass attempts and yards. That, plus the lack of a need to rack up points fast with Brady's offense only putting up 13 points. The next playoff game was more of the same, though Tannehill had 3 TDs which would be all he'd want to talk about if it was an actual scrub like Sanchez who threw them. Pinning the ne
  9. I didn't do a close examination of it but I might (yes, it's an exciting home life I lead). Crazy how New Orleans got under the cap. Weren't they over $100MM over with a crazy amount of it in past-paid bonus $ that can't go away by cutting/trading players? Presumably they cleared a huge chunk of it by putting it off for later (meaning they'd still have some cap issues next year, too); I mean there couldn't have been enough room to cut-cut-cut to have all that 'dead cap' space hit this year and still field a team.
  10. Damn. No regrets on hiding it. I think we all wanted the unverified source to be bs, as it often is. His poor family. What horrible news.
×
×
  • Create New...