(09-10-2017, 09:58 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Also can we approach this thread with the necessary context that the Bengals lead the league in giving roster spots to guys caught on video slugging women in the face. I think that's fair given this is just a bunch of Bengals fans passing judgement on other franchises and questioning the character of players who haven't committed crimes.

They weren't even the first team I thought of.  Colts maybe? 49ers?....lol.

(09-10-2017, 09:58 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Also can we approach this thread with the necessary context that the Bengals lead the league in giving roster spots to guys caught on video slugging women in the face. I think that's fair given this is just a bunch of Bengals fans passing judgement on other franchises and questioning the character of players who haven't committed crimes.

The hypocrisy from you still cracks me up all day.

I'm pretty sure she's doing a lot better than the two guys that the face of your franchise murdered.  

(09-14-2017, 05:48 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: The hypocrisy from you still cracks me up all day.

I'm pretty sure she's doing a lot better than the two guys that the face of your franchise murdered.  

Did you legit just justify Mixon slugging a woman in the face by saying that at least she lived?

That's disgusting. 

(09-14-2017, 05:57 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Did you legit just justify Mixon slugging a woman in the face by saying that at least she lived?

That's disgusting. 

That's a fallacy, try again, kiddo.

(09-14-2017, 06:03 PM)Older Than You Wrote: That's a fallacy, try again, kiddo.

"I'm pretty sure she's doing a lot better than the two guys that the face of your franchise murdered.  


"


Yea, no. 

(09-14-2017, 06:08 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: "I'm pretty sure she's doing a lot better than the two guys that the face of your franchise murdered.  


"


Yea, no. 

Your post was a Straw man fallacy. 

So for the slow kids: Try again.

(09-14-2017, 06:11 PM)Older Than You Wrote: Your post was a Straw man fallacy. 

So for the slow kids: Try again.

False claims of strawman compounded with ad hominem.

Kind of ironic.

(09-14-2017, 05:57 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Did you legit just justify Mixon slugging a woman in the face by saying that at least she lived?

That's disgusting. 

Nope........  just pointing out your hypocrisy and how hilarious it is.

Like I always say, people that live in glass houses shouldn't throw knives that were used to kill two people.

(09-14-2017, 07:44 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: Nope........  just pointing out your hypocrisy and how hilarious it is.

Like I always say, people that live in glass houses shouldn't throw knives that were used to kill two people.

I don't know how I have been hypocritical, but I imagine me asking will result in you repeating lies about me defending Ray Rice, something everyone else on here knows is a lie. 

You'll call me names and then explain how Joe Mixon and Pacman were victims and Ray Rice wasn't, as if I somehow was going to defend him. There'll be an ass ton of laughing emojis as you go in and out of using caps. There'll be a statement about how all of your points were ignored by me (even though you won't make any points) and that no one takes me seriously. 

All because I had the audacity to approach a discussion between you and SSF as a neutral party. 

We can save ourselves the song and dance. I'm sure you have another person to stalk. 

Again...some of you missed this - Flacco is NOT better!!!!!

The Bengals could use Kaep.

(09-14-2017, 08:12 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: I don't know how I have been hypocritical, but I imagine me asking will result in you repeating lies about me defending Ray Rice, something everyone else on here knows is a lie. 

You'll call me names and then explain how Joe Mixon and Pacman were victims and Ray Rice wasn't, as if I somehow was going to defend him. There'll be an ass ton of laughing emojis as you go in and out of using caps. There'll be a statement about how all of your points were ignored by me (even though you won't make any points) and that no one takes me seriously. 

All because I had the audacity to approach a discussion between you and SSF as a neutral party. 

To be fair, it wasn't really a conversation, it was me winding him up because it's both childishly simple and immensely entertaining.

(09-14-2017, 07:44 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: Nope........  just pointing out your hypocrisy and how hilarious it is.

Like I always say, people that live in glass houses shouldn't throw knives that were used to kill two people.

Brad, you care too much.  This is supposed to be fun, and if it's not, then walk away.  We are unfortunate enough to be the fans of a team with a ridiculous owner, and we will be made fun of because of it, but how much does it really matter?  I like Pat and SSF, but in the end their opinion on the Bengals is meaningless.  If opinions of the Bengals meant something, we wouldn't have this shitstorm of a team. We wouldn't have an owner who thought the best OC available just happened to be on his staff. We wouldn't have an owner lose the best two lineman off an already bad line, and do absolutely nothing about it.  It's ridiculous, Brad, and you should spend more time laughing at the absurdity of it.  

(09-15-2017, 08:43 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: The Bengals could use Kaep.

But he's no good.  

(09-15-2017, 11:14 AM)michaelsean Wrote: Brad, you care too much.  This is supposed to be fun, and if it's not, then walk away.  We are unfortunate enough to be the fans of a team with a ridiculous owner, and we will be made fun of because of it, but how much does it really matter?  I like Pat and SSF, but in the end their opinion on the Bengals is meaningless.  If opinions of the Bengals meant something, we wouldn't have this shitstorm of a team. We wouldn't have an owner who thought the best OC available just happened to be on his staff. We wouldn't have an owner lose the best two lineman off an already bad line, and do absolutely nothing about it.  It's ridiculous, Brad, and you should spend more time laughing at the absurdity of it.  

You, Rfaulk, Phil, and a few others get this.  Even back in the day when the rivalry was competitive many of us understood this.  

(09-15-2017, 11:19 AM)GMDino Wrote: But he's no good.  

He's better than either of our back ups.  I still wouldn't want him on the Steelers for reasons that have been discussed ad naseum, assuming he'd take a back up contract.

Let me relate one story Brad, that may help you understand what is going on here.

I have a friend/acquaintance who is a Steeler fan. Great guy, except when it comes to football, he's the Steeler fan we like to laugh about. He is Steel City South's signature. When I talk football with him, I will never admit to anything and I mean anything good about the Steelers. I'll tell him I don't consider any Super Bowls before 1980 irrelevant so in my opinion they only have two rings, and one of them was gifted by the refs, and the other by being given a TD when it was clearly an incomplete pass. He'll say something like, "Man I bet you'd like to have Bell on your team." I'll say, "No way he's a product of their scheme, and the Bengals don't run the same scheme." I don't even know what that means. It goes on and on, and instead of laughing at me, he argues.

(09-15-2017, 11:29 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: He's better than either of our back ups.  I still wouldn't want him on the Steelers for reasons that have been discussed ad naseum, assuming he'd take a back up contract.

As a backup, he's not worth the sideshow that would accompany him.  They just don't need the headache.

(09-15-2017, 12:04 PM)michaelsean Wrote: As a backup, he's not worth the sideshow that would accompany him.  They just don't need the headache.

That's my point.  Even as a starter, he's going to be on a bad team.  A bad team doesn't need even more reason to be bad, and anyone who doubts that such distractions disrupt a team doesn't know shit about team sports.  The ultimate irony is that the Ravens were supposedly going to sign him, and then his militant girlfriend posted a pic of Ray Lewis as Biscotti's "house n-word" and blew that.  You reap what you sow I guess.

(09-14-2017, 08:12 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: I don't know how I have been hypocritical, but I imagine me asking will result in you repeating lies about me defending Ray Rice, something everyone else on here knows is a lie. 

You'll call me names and then explain how Joe Mixon and Pacman were victims and Ray Rice wasn't, as if I somehow was going to defend him. There'll be an ass ton of laughing emojis as you go in and out of using caps. There'll be a statement about how all of your points were ignored by me (even though you won't make any points) and that no one takes me seriously. 

All because I had the audacity to approach a discussion between you and SSF as a neutral party. 

We can save ourselves the song and dance. I'm sure you have another person to stalk. 

Hypocritical means saying one thing and then doing or saying the complete opposite, which you do by condemning the Bengals for drafting Mixon for hitting a woman in college but you were fine with, and even defended, your organization keeping a man that hit a woman while on the roster.  You'll come out and say "I was the first one to condemn him," which is completely false because you defended them keeping him until the video came out, which then you called him a d bag, and one question that you've avoided is, if it was just about them being able to suspend him without evidence, why wouldn't you have called him a d bag all along?  You'll avoid that question again, though.

You're also a hypocrite for condemning the Bengals for keeping players with character issues by being completely fine with your organization keeping a murderer, which how many Bengals have committed a crime that bad?

You won't have answers for either of those points but will just continue the personal attacks or denial or you'll just ignore it all together, which has become all too typical with you.