(Yesterday, 12:45 PM)TecmoBengals Wrote: [ -> ]Quick summary:
Random dude: Bengals ownership is the main reason why the team has a good winning record the last 4 years.
Me: Incorrect, Burrow is the reason why the team has won games the past 4 years.
Essex: You're incorrect is incorrect because it might be Chase.
Dude couldn't comprehend the conversation is about the value of ownership v the player and the retorts with the panties remark. My incorrect comment is addressing the Brown family as owners. It wasn't a conversation about individual players contributions to winning. 
My lesson learned is it is dumb as hell of me to engage posters who continuously put together poorly written posts.
Actually what you should avoid are the endless circular argument, which represent 90% of this and the Trey Update thread.....circular arguments which you are one of the ones, guilty of propagating endlessly.
(Yesterday, 05:39 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: [ -> ]![[Image: nobody-cares-nobody-gives-a-fck.gif]](https://media.tenor.com/Ar3v5pxeEzEAAAAM/nobody-cares-nobody-gives-a-fck.gif)
Eric1 is a highly educated man
(Yesterday, 03:31 PM)ochocincos Wrote: [ -> ]I 100% agree with you on certain scenarios like this.
Going that fast gives risk of something like Henry Ruggs happening.
Very dangerous not only to self but to others.
With that said, I do think a blanket clause can be easily misinterpreted and leave players overly vulnerable, so certain situations need to be called out in the contract.
If that's not done, I can see why a player may want to hold off until specific examples are clarified in the contract.
And now we find out that before getting the ticket for triple digit speed in a 60-mph zone, he failed to show up for court on a ticket he got prior to this one. This dude just does not get it.
(Yesterday, 01:29 PM)TecmoBengals Wrote: [ -> ]Now you're just making a fallacious argument. If you believed this lesson you wouldn't continue to make the same replies over and over to random posters who do not favor ownership.
Please stick to critiquing the bengals and specific topics.I think the Brown family has evolved from the past and are doing a reasonably good job..If others do not agree it is my right to respond and prsent facts that will support my position
With as much negative press the Brown family has received the last two offseasons, now just isn't the time to act like they have "evolved" and have had a great run.
(2 hours ago)ERIC1 Wrote: [ -> ]Please stick to critiquing the bengals and specific topics.I think the Brown family has evolved from the past and are doing a reasonably good job..If others do not agree it is my right to respond and prsent facts that will support my position
I agree with this stance in bold.
Every poster is permitted to have their own opinions, and providing any facts/evidence to support said opinion is appreciated.
With that said, there might still be disagreements on certain things because different people value different things and some things are purely subjective, even if one/both sides come with supporting arguments.
No one is required to engage in discussion with anyone on this board, and the block feature exists for those who just don't wanna see posts from certain individuals anymore
I actually will agree that the Bengals have evolved "some," as they have done things in the Taylor era they didn't do prior.
They just arguably are not still quite in line with most of the other orgs from a common processing perspective.
If an opinion is supported by facts is it an opinion? I believe people can say whatever they feel, based off of experience, history, knowledge, emotions or whatever. Most of the time it's to lead to discussion or discourse especially on a message board.
You don't have to have facts to back up an opinion or it wouldn't be an opinion it would be a fact. Indisputable, and nondebatable.