The Goat Pen

" When I made that prediction, I did that with the firm belief that Alabama had zero chance of beating Texas-A&M."

Why should anyone pay any mind to your predictions after reading that statement? You calculated Alabama's chances to be zero against ANY team in CFB? Seriously? I wouldn't even put Bama's chances at zero against the Jacksonville Jaguars. Granted, it would be a very low number, but not zero. But against another CFB team? Zero? You're an idiot...

I feel he proved that awhile ago.

hedge wrote:Why should anyone pay any mind to your predictions after reading that statement?

I don't care if you (or anyone) pays any mind to any prediction (or anything) I have said on this forum regardless of any statements. I don't have to prove anything to you hedge. Last year's Heisman Trophy winner proved to me that he knew how to thwart Alabama.

I'm saying Clemson plays Louisville for everything. I did not say those are the two best teams in the country. I am saying that somehow (someway) they will eventually (by mid December) be ranked in the BCS as #1 and #2. If you disagree, fine. You are not going to hear remarks from me in a condescending, asshole way, the way you just did to me. Life is too short for that kind of angst.

Just takes those bricks and set them down hedge.

" Life is too short for that kind of angst."

Any life with you in it is too long...

usually its my running backs that I have to keep switching out due to injury in fantasy but this year its my receivers. I can't keep those guys right now.

I lost my only game 2 Sundays ago because of a last minute scratch of Calvin Johnson. I tracked him up till 11 or so Sunday & then had to get the kids off to where they needed to be after we hit Findlay Market. Had I replaced him with anyone on my bench I would have still been undefeated.

that Randall Cobb hit was hard to watch.

Yeah. That was nasty. I have Jones on my bench as #1 backup to Johnson & Green. I thought he was lost as well.

Randall "Tex" Cobb, what?

You may weave and you may bob
But you shan't elude... Randall "Tex" Cobb

From Yardbarker........suggested replacement names for the Washington Redskins

1. Warriors - Very little will need to be adjusted here. Probably similar Native American uniforms, same fight song, same colors, just not Golden State's mascot- "Thunder".

2. Crabbers - Because Landover, MD, formerly Raljon, MD, is about a 30 minute drive from the Chesapeake Bay, what better team name than the Crabbers? Most Skins fans love crabs, Old Bay seasoning, and a Natty Boh to go along with it... Why not name the DC Football team the "Crabbers" after the popular Mid Atlantic crustacean?

3. Red Tails - This nickname derives from the famous Tuskeegee Airmen fighter pilots from WWII. Although it is always a good thing to honor the Tuskeegee Airmen, the Redskins may want to shy away from anything with racial origins - good or bad.

4. Federals - This is the old USFL team name. Why not turn the key on an already established brand and DC Football team name? One thing they'd have to change would be the ugly team colors of red and green. Even big dumb football players should know not to combine red and green, aka Christmas colors, for any outfit. Yikes.

5. Soldiers - With Washington, DC, as the central hotbed for Military intelligence, operations, and politics, naming the team the "Soliders" would be fun and fitting way to honor our fallen troops from previous wars. Besides, it could finally justify camoflauge NFL clothing.

Why not The Rapers? Most teams have mascot names that plainly connote a figure that would like to kill or maul their opponent, so what's wrong with rape? It would also be a nice nod at how most people feel about the entire governmental apparatus of Washington...

It has to be "Rapers and Pillagers." Rapers by itself is too offensive. Raping and Pillaging is just creating a nation.

The Redskins are not changing their name nor should they.

Fuckin media

Why shouldn't they?

Right after the Fighting Irish change theirs...

Bklyn wrote:Why shouldn't they?

Because it's a stupid media drivin cause. Find me a majority of Indians who think it's offensive & then get back to me. The Washington Redskins name has been around for years. Suddenly now it's an issue?

"Rapers by itself is too offensive."

But not, say, the Bombers? Not if your damn village has been bombed!

Fair or foul, it's not just the media and it's not new.

Personally, I thought the name Fighting Irish was fine, I have thought the logo was a little suspect. If the Irish are fine with it, so be it. The Southies have a hard time arguing against it.

Fair is foul, and foul is fair:
Hover through the fog and filthy air...

They should rename them Notre Dame Drunken Papists.