Someone's team just got a whole lot better, through no effort of their own.  Seattle traded Christine Michael to Dallas.  Dallas will likely make Michael the starter, and he should be a beast behind that OL.

Nice drafting, whomever took him. 

(09-06-2015, 02:46 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Someone's team just got a whole lot better, through no effort of their own.  Seattle traded Christine Michael to Dallas.  Dallas will likely make Michael the starter, and he should be a beast behind that OL.

Nice drafting, whomever took him. 

Worth a pickup for sure but I'd hold off on the likely a starter thinking, Michael has been over hyped since he entered the draft. Fumbles and can't seem to consistently pass protect.

I grabbed him off the waiver wire in my league but I wouldn't get overly excited with him just yet, we might be in for an ugly fantasy season in Dallas, something similar to the Browns last year where you never knew which of the 3 would be the guy.

Also Montee Ball was just cut.

(09-06-2015, 02:46 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Someone's team just got a whole lot better, through no effort of their own.  Seattle traded Christine Michael to Dallas.  Dallas will likely make Michael the starter, and he should be a beast behind that OL.

Nice drafting, whomever took him. 

I added him as a free agent. Fortunately I checked PFT on my break and noticed the trade right after it was announced.

Snapped him up in this league and my other one. 

I agree with BobJones though, it's no lock he'll start. It's definitely worth a shot though.

Boy I wish I could've got Gronk. He layed the smackdown on me already.

So I let this go weeks ago, but after going back through this thread and upon further review I noticed that the same cast of vaginas are still taking shots and just begging for some dental work. This is only directed at those d-bags (you know who you are) not some of the others.
Let's not forget that I went 10-3 against basically the same cast of managers just last season. Posted in the afternoon to illustrate my sincerity.

(09-11-2015, 04:01 PM)coachmcneil71 Wrote: So I let this go weeks ago, but after going back through this thread and upon further review I noticed that the same cast of vaginas are still taking shots and just begging for some dental work.

Way to let it go.

(09-14-2015, 12:31 PM)Vas Deferens Wrote: Way to let it go.

I'm over that dude. He's beyond making himself look ridiculous.

Tiger Teeth loses to wolfkaosaun 106.64 to 106.44. Losses like that really sting.

(09-15-2015, 10:53 AM)Johnny Cupcakes Wrote: Tiger Teeth loses to wolfkaosaun 106.64 to 106.44.  Losses like that really sting.

I'm going to be pulling Harley's shoelaces out of my rectum for weeks to come after the beat down he placed on me.  Losses like that require medical attention.  

(09-15-2015, 10:53 AM)Johnny Cupcakes Wrote: Tiger Teeth loses to wolfkaosaun 106.64 to 106.44.  Losses like that really sting.

I'm still in shock.  He even started Blount who didn't play. 

I remember most saying Eifert was the "reach of the draft" going in Rd 6. So far so good.

(09-15-2015, 03:56 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I remember most saying Eifert was the "reach of the draft" going in Rd 6. So far so good.

I guess you don't know what a "reach" is.

Saying someone reached doesn't mean the player won't be that good.

A reach is when someone takes a player that they could have obtained with a later pick.

(09-15-2015, 04:22 PM)djs7685 Wrote: I guess you don't know what a "reach" is.

Saying someone reached doesn't mean the player won't be that good.

A reach is when someone takes a player that they could have obtained with a later pick.

Didn't mean to question anyone's acumen Coach, just pointing out that Eifert appears to be good value. 

(09-15-2015, 04:28 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Didn't mean to question anyone's acumen Coach, just pointing out that Eifert appears to be good value. 

I was just letting you know what people mean when they tell you that your pick was a "reach". I apologize, next time I'll let you be your usual snarky self without correcting you on any common terminology definitions.

And don't be intentionally dense, you weren't "just" trying to point out that Eifert appears to be good value. Your post was 99% directed to be your usual smartass self and jab at the people that said Eifert was a reach even though you don't even understand what that word means in this context. He's also not "good value", good value would have been getting him right around where he was projected to go. It's not good value to reach for a player, even if they turn out to have a good week/season. Apparently you don't understand what value means either. Great to see.

(09-16-2015, 09:05 AM)djs7685 Wrote: Your post was 99% directed to be your usual smartass self and jab at the people that said Eifert was a reach even though you don't even understand what that word means in this context.

..and your reply was 100% butt hurt.

(09-16-2015, 01:54 PM)bfine32 Wrote: ..and your reply was 100% butt hurt.

Why would I be butthurt that the Bengals' board smartass looked like a fool for trying to call people out while not understanding 2 simple to understand terms in a game he has been playing for quite some time?

I found it funny and sad more than anything. No butts were hurt in this exchange. If you'd like to know what any other obvious terminology means, feel free to PM me and I can fill you in.

(09-16-2015, 02:00 PM)djs7685 Wrote: Why would I be butthurt that the Bengals' board smartass looked like a fool for trying to call people out while not understanding 2 simple to understand terms in a game he has been playing for quite some time?

I found it funny and sad more than anything. No butts were hurt in this exchange. If you'd like to know what any other obvious terminology means, feel free to PM me and I can fill you in.

The Message Board Instigator strikes again!

Someone seems a little sensitive.

(09-17-2015, 02:10 PM)ExtraRadiohead Wrote: The Message Board Instigator strikes again!

Someone seems a little sensitive.

Nah, bfine's style is being a snarky ass to people.

When I see somebody like that posting something dumb, I like to take the avenue of poking some fun at them.

Calling people out for using common terms improperly is hardly "sensitive". You, like bfine, don't seem to be able to grasp the actual definitions of words. If you need a tutor as well, let me know.

(09-17-2015, 02:20 PM)djs7685 Wrote: Nah, bfine's style is being a snarky ass to people.

When I see somebody like that posting something dumb, I like to take the avenue of poking some fun at them.

Calling people out for using common terms improperly is hardly "sensitive". You, like bfine, don't seem to be able to grasp the actual definitions of words. If you need a tutor as well, let me know.

I was just laughing because you called me sensitive during the gameday chat after you took exception to one of my comments.

Hence why I called you the Message Board Instigator. It seems to be your thing like on the last boards. Peoples comments rub you the wrong way cause your a delicate flower.

(09-17-2015, 02:41 PM)ExtraRadiohead Wrote: I was just laughing because you called me sensitive during the gameday chat after you took exception to one of my comments.

Hence why I called you the Message Board Instigator. It seems to be your thing like on the last boards. Peoples comments rub you the wrong way cause your a delicate flower.

I'd rather some random dork on a message board think I'm "delicate" if it means knowing the difference between which your/you're to use in a sentence.

Sorry for being witty, I'll just sit around making stupid post after stupid post like you do in the future.