|
|
View Poll Results: ??? | |||
Blind Homer Time ... Under 50 yrds |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
6 | 5.83% |
keeping it Positive 50-100 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
39 | 37.86% |
Same ol, Same ol 100-150 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
35 | 33.98% |
not pretty 150-200 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
9 | 8.74% |
Another Hall of famer is born 200-250 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
6 | 5.83% |
holy #$%^!!!! 250+ |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
8 | 7.77% |
Voters: 103. You may not vote on this poll |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
![]() |
#10 | |
Don't Tease Me
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: KS
Casino cash: $11047037
|
Quote:
i ASSume your talking about a larry johnson/Foster comparison? i think you have me confuse with someone else again (apparently like the McCardell deal) my complaint about Johnson is AND ALWAYS HAS BEEN primarily a complaint about picking a RB, when we didn't need a running back. we should of pick a defensive player i didn't say Larry johnson was a bust ... i have said that we may have the best group of running backs in the league. I told you that before. i dont see a double standard here... i see you getting me confused with someone else's comments about larry johnson. i think lots of people do that same around here lazarus = negative ... so revisionists history sooner or later everybody remembers that it was me that said whatever negative comment was made. i've made no decision about larry johnson's talent ... but i have made a decision that the chiefs picking larry johnson was a bad fuggin pick. being redundant here to try and get my point across... and see if someone can actually remember it. larry johnson = possible good RB chiefs using 1st RD pick on a RB in the 2003 draft = crappy any questions??
__________________
Last edited by Mr. Laz; 09-17-2004 at 08:07 PM.. |
|
Posts: 95,626
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|