- Joined
- Oct 10, 2006
- Messages
- 76,883
- Reaction score
- 66,866
not at all
Yes, at all. Your argument is a lousy one, and I'm putting that politely. Your analogy simply doesn't work.
And the word is moot, not mute.
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.not at all
Analogy is fine unless your trying to tell me short of murder cutting bait with a player for bad off field behavior is always a bad move.Yes, at all. Your argument is a lousy one, and I'm putting that politely. Your analogy simply doesn't work.
And the word is moot, not mute.
Analogy is fine unless your trying to tell me short of murder cutting bait with a player for bad off field behavior is always a bad move.
I am sorry I am not sure where pre-anything changes what he did. In fact if we were still pre you could argue due process.For the last damned time, the analogy sucks. Now, if this were PRE-arrest, PRE-trial and PRE-NFL punishment, it would at least be a case of a 'right church, wrong pew' analogy. However, it's not even that.
Move on, already.
No one is trading for that salary.
Might as well cut him. Turn over a new leaf. Clean break.
Please post the names if teams willing to trade for a 13M dollar rb.
Please supply us a list of all the great players that are currently available to be signed. While you're at it, perhaps you could also explain why a team that already has about $13m in cap room would need that additional $13m for those signings.
I don't get it. They have a 30 year old running back with a $13 million salary and no dead money hit. Shouldn't they cut him so fast it would make your head spin? What brain dead team pays a running back $13 million a year and then listens to him whine day after day after day about not wanting to be there? Sheesh.....