Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization

A collection of NET's best and most memorable threads. Predictions, debates, laughs, and X's & O's. Rating: PG to NC-17
  • Trrrroy wrote:
    Man, we hosed those stupid San Diego nit-wits. That hair is worth a late first rounder at least.


    Exactly. I mean, look who our new coach is now. Hollywood Pete Carroll took one look at Hass and decided we needed an upgrade!
    User avatar
    TripHawk
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 466
    Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 8:31 am


  • OMG this guy has hair he must be a good Qb jk. but he is a big guy and prob can take some shots so for a punching bag till they get it right ok but way to much to give up
    God Bless America and God Bless the SEATTLE SEAHAWKS - TEZ

    Mike Bullene ‏@12thManM1ke 45m
    @TDESPN Though, you did say the other night you cannot win the SB riding a defense. Even though you are literally the poster child for that. --twittered back at dilfer after he tried to slam hawks fans.
    User avatar
    hawkcrazzed
    *GOLD SUPPORTER*
    *GOLD SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 931
    Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 8:55 am
    Location: Toronto Canada


  • woofu wrote:Mass hysteria, dogs and cats living together, real old testament stuff,,,,,, :roll:


    Hahaha, when I read that I heard Bill Murray's voice. Too funny

    I guess I'll take a wait and see approach. If he plays well, good trade, if not... well it wasn't.

    It's all up to Whitehurst to live up to it. We have no idea if it was a good value or not at this point because we are paying for his potential.

    Let's see what happens.
    As a musician and audio quality champion, Neil Young said in 2012, “Steve Jobs was a pioneer of digital music. But when he went home, he listened to vinyl.”
    User avatar
    twisted_steel2
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5293
    Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 9:41 am
    Location: Ballard


  • Hey, twice a year your girlfriends will want to watch the AZ game with you.

    I can hear the girl talk now,,, "who's cuter,, Matt L. or Charlie?"
    I like the player and I want to bring him in,,
    ,,just show me the Starfax.
    User avatar
    woofu
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 574
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 3:11 am


  • jerseyhawk wrote:Well i hate saying i told you so......but now all you people who said getting whitehurst wouldn;t be a big deal well i hope your happy......that 40th pick could of got us Marshall maybe and now we get a third stringer who never played in one game as a pro yet and we give up next year's third ..........so i believe my post was perfect .... worse not better....god i hope he pans out or we dropped the ball on this one ..........well welcome aboard Whitehurst you better do good really fast or i'll be showing you ur exit just as quick........ :34853_doh:

    Sorry, but this post is dumb. How do you know we would have gotten Marshall for our #40? I'd tell you to go pleasure yourself, but you already are.
    User avatar
    MysterMatt
    *TOP 5 SUPPORTER*
    *TOP 5 SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 6835
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 10:12 am


  • AbsolutNET wrote:This is less than we gave up for Hass, no?


    We moved from 10 to 17 in the first round and got a 7th for Hasselbeck. So, it's probably comparable on the point chart.

    However: our coach and GM at the time watched Hasselbeck practice for at least a year and had pretty huge intel on him. What can our staff really know about Whitehurst? I guess we can't know.
    “We need to be challenged, ... and we need to be under the gun to respond.” --Pete Carroll
    User avatar
    nanomoz
    *GOLD SUPPORTER*
    *GOLD SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 4577
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 1:20 pm
    Location: UT


  • Shadowhawk wrote:One thing about Whitehurst: he's a tough SOB. I remember the first preseason game in San Diego last year when the Chargers had one last chance to drive down and win the game. The Hawks were blitzing on every play and Whitehurst kept getting the crap beat out of him every single time he dropped back to pass. But he'd get back up and call another play like nothing had happened. Looked pretty good on that drive, though of course it was against our 3rd stringers.

    I don't mind that we traded for him but despise the fact that we dropped 20 spots in the second round and traded next year's 3rd. I've never been a fan of Carroll and Schneider and so far they are doin nothing to change my opinion.


    That's the only part of your post that I saw. :34853_doh:
    GO HAWKS!!!

    Visit my Seahawks blog at 17power.blogspot.com!

    Follow me on Twitter at @17power
    User avatar
    MontanaHawk05
    * 17Power Blogger *
     
    Posts: 11245
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:46 am


  • nanomoz wrote:Whitehurst looks like the offspring of Billy Ray Cyrus and a Baldwin brother.


    With a dash of Viggo Mortenson for good measure.
    80% of Planet Earth is covered by water.....The rest is covered by EARL THOMAS!
    Image
    User avatar
    SundayNiteBlackout
    National Guard 09-Present
     
    Posts: 1069
    Joined: Mon Jul 20, 2009 12:43 pm
    Location: Seattle, WA


  • SundayNiteBlackout wrote:
    nanomoz wrote:Whitehurst looks like the offspring of Billy Ray Cyrus and a Baldwin brother.


    With a dash of Viggo Mortenson for good measure.


    Touche'.
    “We need to be challenged, ... and we need to be under the gun to respond.” --Pete Carroll
    User avatar
    nanomoz
    *GOLD SUPPORTER*
    *GOLD SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 4577
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 1:20 pm
    Location: UT


  • The only thing that was going to make a first round pick for Marshall even somewhat palatable was that we still had that number 40 pick so close to the first round, now that is gone. Who is Whitehurst going to throw too? Housh will be doubled, Branch will be broken and Deon needs more game experience. If we keep this same horrendous line even Carlson is going to be gone as a target as well because he'll be sitting back trying to help keep the QB upright.
    User avatar
    DrinkinTheLimerade
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 105
    Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2010 7:52 am
    Location: Seattle


  • nanomoz wrote:
    AbsolutNET wrote:This is less than we gave up for Hass, no?


    We moved from 10 to 17 in the first round and got a 7th for Hasselbeck. So, it's probably comparable on the point chart.

    However: our coach and GM at the time watched Hasselbeck practice for at least a year and had pretty huge intel on him. What can our staff really know about Whitehurst? I guess we can't know.


    I thought we gave up a 3rd?
    Image
    User avatar
    AbsolutNET
    * NET X's & O's Guru *
     
    Posts: 8691
    Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 11:24 am
    Location: PNW


  • Now San Diego can move to pick up Jahvid Best like they wanted. I almost feel like this is a big "FU" from Pete Carroll for WA State taking Sark and ruining his year this past year and now he's out to stick it to the state's most beloved team.
    User avatar
    Fox0r
    * NET News Scoop *
    * NET News Scoop *
     
    Posts: 1874
    Joined: Mon Jun 08, 2009 6:30 pm
    Location: Lynnwood, WA


  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UdlemnigJ-s

    Granted, it's from his college days, but he seems to have good mobility for his size and a pretty quick release. I'm not a fan of the move, but i'll remain hopeful that he turns out to be really good.

    Can any of our resident scouts provide better analysis of his game?
    Yoonhawk
    * NET Attorney *
     
    Posts: 699
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:58 am
    Location: Seattle, WA


  • Marshall for #60??
    I like the player and I want to bring him in,,
    ,,just show me the Starfax.
    User avatar
    woofu
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 574
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 3:11 am


  • AbsolutNET wrote:
    nanomoz wrote:
    AbsolutNET wrote:This is less than we gave up for Hass, no?


    We moved from 10 to 17 in the first round and got a 7th for Hasselbeck. So, it's probably comparable on the point chart.

    However: our coach and GM at the time watched Hasselbeck practice for at least a year and had pretty huge intel on him. What can our staff really know about Whitehurst? I guess we can't know.


    I thought we gave up a 3rd?


    Oh, ya, you're right. My bad. Hass was probably more expensive then.

    However, if we had the option of moving back from 6 to 17, I'd like that better than 40-60.
    “We need to be challenged, ... and we need to be under the gun to respond.” --Pete Carroll
    User avatar
    nanomoz
    *GOLD SUPPORTER*
    *GOLD SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 4577
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 1:20 pm
    Location: UT


  • MysterMatt wrote:

    4) If Locker or some other true elite QB is available to us in the 2011 draft, we can still take him because we aren't totally married to Whitehurst.



    and we might even be in position to take Locker, because we'll probably suck it up mightily again this year.
    User avatar
    OneLofaTatupu
    * NET Shrink *
     
    Posts: 1558
    Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 10:04 pm
    Location: Seattle, WA


  • nanomoz wrote:
    SundayNiteBlackout wrote:
    nanomoz wrote:Whitehurst looks like the offspring of Billy Ray Cyrus and a Baldwin brother.


    With a dash of Viggo Mortenson for good measure.


    Touche'.


    Don't know if ya'll watch survivor, but he kinda has that younger brother of Coach the Dragon Slayer vibe going.
    Image
    User avatar
    DynoHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 721
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:58 pm


  • Not getting Marshall isn't really the end of the world, and who knows? Maybe on draft day Denver will realize the #60 is the best offer they can get. Anyways, having the 6 and the 14 gives us a ton of flexibility, so I'm just not going to panic for now.
    User avatar
    MysterMatt
    *TOP 5 SUPPORTER*
    *TOP 5 SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 6835
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 10:12 am


  • nanomoz wrote:However: our coach and GM at the time watched Hasselbeck practice for at least a year and had pretty huge intel on him. What can our staff really know about Whitehurst? I guess we can't know.

    You know, 'SC to San Diego is really not that far. Maybe Pete Carroll saw more of Whitehurst than we can ever know.

    All I know for sure is, Whitehurst is apparently now a Seahawk. That means he's got my 100% support. And really, all we gave up was next year's 3rd? I don't have that much of a problem with it.
    Image
    User avatar
    Jazzhawk
    * NET News Scoop *
    * NET News Scoop *
     
    Posts: 8959
    Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 6:16 pm


  • AbsolutNET wrote:
    nanomoz wrote:
    AbsolutNET wrote:This is less than we gave up for Hass, no?


    We moved from 10 to 17 in the first round and got a 7th for Hasselbeck. So, it's probably comparable on the point chart.

    However: our coach and GM at the time watched Hasselbeck practice for at least a year and had pretty huge intel on him. What can our staff really know about Whitehurst? I guess we can't know.


    I thought we gave up a 3rd?


    We did. We moved down from 10 to 17 and gave up a 3rd. Based on the value chart, we gave up the #33 pick for Hass.
    Image

    Super Bowl XLVIII Champions
    User avatar
    volsunghawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7950
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 11:20 am
    Location: Right outside Richard Sherman's house


  • SundayNiteBlackout wrote:
    Blitzer88 wrote:My buddy just called me and said that Brock Huard is just going off about this deal.....


    He thinks it's good or bad?


    I believe he sees it as bad...
    Image
    User avatar
    Blitzer88
    * NET Eeyore *
     
    Posts: 10902
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:47 am
    Location: Pasco, WA


  • SmokinHawk wrote:Well.. He certainly looks the part. 27 isn't that old for a QB. I have a feeling we might be pleasantly surprised here, folks. He's big AND mobile. Great combination.

    Image

    (from Seahawks Draft Blog)



    at least if he does do well, Jake Gyllenhal can star as him in the movie
    User avatar
    OneLofaTatupu
    * NET Shrink *
     
    Posts: 1558
    Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 10:04 pm
    Location: Seattle, WA


  • I'll be all for this if he goes full mullet!


    Image
    GET YOUR EAR PLUGS READY!!!
    DROPPIN' THE NOISE HAMMER AT THE SOUTH ALASKA INSANE ASYLUM
    User avatar
    TheHawkster
    * NET Bad Ass *
     
    Posts: 1967
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 12:00 am
    Location: Puyallup


  • Or even the douchey blonde guy from LOST
    80% of Planet Earth is covered by water.....The rest is covered by EARL THOMAS!
    Image
    User avatar
    SundayNiteBlackout
    National Guard 09-Present
     
    Posts: 1069
    Joined: Mon Jul 20, 2009 12:43 pm
    Location: Seattle, WA


  • Let's Draft CJ Spiller and Jacoby Ford and then we can rename the team Clemson U when Whitehurst and Spiller take us to the promised land. :sarcasm_off:
    User avatar
    Fox0r
    * NET News Scoop *
    * NET News Scoop *
     
    Posts: 1874
    Joined: Mon Jun 08, 2009 6:30 pm
    Location: Lynnwood, WA


  • volsunghawk wrote:We did. We moved down from 10 to 17 and gave up a 3rd. Based on the value chart, we gave up the #33 pick for Hass.


    Indeed. I corrected, ^above^, but this thread's like wild fire.

    Moving from 40 to 60 in this draft seems huge to me. Really huge. I loved that high 2nd round pick--at 60, guys like Lamarr Houston, Branond Ghee and Chad Jones are likely gone.
    “We need to be challenged, ... and we need to be under the gun to respond.” --Pete Carroll
    User avatar
    nanomoz
    *GOLD SUPPORTER*
    *GOLD SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 4577
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 1:20 pm
    Location: UT


  • Still sitting here a bit shell shocked that we may be looking at the successor starting QB in Seattle with Charlie Whitehurst. Of course there are tons of question marks - but when you really think about it - this is a strong and sound move for the Seahawks.

    First - take a look at the other three teams in our division:
    - Alex Smith - HUGE contract, nothing to show for it
    - Matt Leinart - HUGE contract, nothing to show for it
    - Sam Bradford - will be a HUGE contract, and has NO experience

    At least with this move, you are taking a very well calculated risk that Charlie Whitehurst could be your heir apparent without screwing up your salary structure and you can use those picks you have left to fill some gaping holes. I think it's obvious that Matt Hasselbeck is not in competition for the #1, but one injury and/or ripe opportunity for a substitution to CW is forthcoming. Hence the VERY logical reasoning to dump Seneca Wallace in favor of finding a more future-proof backup.

    Anyway, just thoughts...
    Image
    User avatar
    nsport
    * NET Sports Handicapper *
     
    Posts: 1416
    Joined: Sat Apr 25, 2009 9:13 am


  • nanomoz wrote:Oh, ya, you're right. My bad. Hass was probably more expensive then.

    However, if we had the option of moving back from 6 to 17, I'd like that better than 40-60.


    I know what you mean, but the 2 first rounders softens the blow quite a bit for me. Thats still 3 picks in the top 60. We will find 3 good prospects in 2 rounds
    Image
    User avatar
    AbsolutNET
    * NET X's & O's Guru *
     
    Posts: 8691
    Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 11:24 am
    Location: PNW


  • nanomoz wrote:
    volsunghawk wrote:We did. We moved down from 10 to 17 and gave up a 3rd. Based on the value chart, we gave up the #33 pick for Hass.


    Indeed. I corrected, ^above^, but this thread's like wild fire.

    Moving from 40 to 60 in this draft seems huge to me. Really huge. I loved that high 2nd round pick--at 60, guys like Lamarr Houston, Branond Ghee and Chad Jones are likely gone.


    ...Damien Williams, Arrelious Benn, Jermaine Gresham, Brandon Lafell, Jahvid Best, Ryan Matthews...
    GO HAWKS!!!

    Visit my Seahawks blog at 17power.blogspot.com!

    Follow me on Twitter at @17power
    User avatar
    MontanaHawk05
    * 17Power Blogger *
     
    Posts: 11245
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:46 am


  • The Scroll bar on ESPNNEWS says that we get san diegos 2011 3rd rounder
    Image
    User avatar
    CurryNation
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 163
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:49 am


  • I can't wait to hear the press conference
    User avatar
    iigakusei
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 858
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 6:14 am


  • Good stuff, but Matt Leinart had a Super Bowl QB to sit behind, and Alex Smith has Rocky Bernard to thank for his career struggles. ;)
    GO HAWKS!!!

    Visit my Seahawks blog at 17power.blogspot.com!

    Follow me on Twitter at @17power
    User avatar
    MontanaHawk05
    * 17Power Blogger *
     
    Posts: 11245
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:46 am


  • jerseyhawk wrote: and second i don;t need to pleasure myself your girlfriend took care of me earlier today , could you plese tell her i want my money back...........


    hahahaha, 1970's, '80's and '90's called......They want their "comeback" back.
    80% of Planet Earth is covered by water.....The rest is covered by EARL THOMAS!
    Image
    User avatar
    SundayNiteBlackout
    National Guard 09-Present
     
    Posts: 1069
    Joined: Mon Jul 20, 2009 12:43 pm
    Location: Seattle, WA


  • MontanaHawk05 wrote:
    nanomoz wrote:
    volsunghawk wrote:We did. We moved down from 10 to 17 and gave up a 3rd. Based on the value chart, we gave up the #33 pick for Hass.


    Indeed. I corrected, ^above^, but this thread's like wild fire.

    Moving from 40 to 60 in this draft seems huge to me. Really huge. I loved that high 2nd round pick--at 60, guys like Lamarr Houston, Branond Ghee and Chad Jones are likely gone.


    ...Damien Williams, Arrelious Benn, Jermaine Gresham, Brandon Lafell, Jahvid Best, Ryan Matthews...


    Were you adding to my list, or naming guys that will be there at 60? I can't tell. :D
    “We need to be challenged, ... and we need to be under the gun to respond.” --Pete Carroll
    User avatar
    nanomoz
    *GOLD SUPPORTER*
    *GOLD SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 4577
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 1:20 pm
    Location: UT


  • I guess it seems to be a fair deal. Just appears we got completely pilfered at first look. I don't think I understand the, next year a 3 round.... equals a 4th round today deal, but that seems to hinge on us getting better or worse. Not so matter of fact.
    He better breakout like Schaub did. He isn't 23, he will be 28 when the season starts.
    User avatar
    Wizofwest
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 174
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 10:06 pm


  • I don't think you can count either Smith or Leinart out yet. Smith is only 25 and made some strides last season. Leinart has been playing behind Warner his entire career. Both could still pan out.
    Image
    User avatar
    Mckinja
    * NET Staff Alumni *
    * NET Staff Alumni *
     
    Posts: 2797
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 10:31 am
    Location: Auburn, WA


  • nanomoz wrote:
    MontanaHawk05 wrote:
    nanomoz wrote:
    Indeed. I corrected, ^above^, but this thread's like wild fire.

    Moving from 40 to 60 in this draft seems huge to me. Really huge. I loved that high 2nd round pick--at 60, guys like Lamarr Houston, Branond Ghee and Chad Jones are likely gone.


    ...Damien Williams, Arrelious Benn, Jermaine Gresham, Brandon Lafell, Jahvid Best, Ryan Matthews...


    Were you adding to my list, or naming guys that will be there at 60? I can't tell. :D


    Adding. :(

    Two months of stimulating "Second-round RB" draft forum arguments wasted...
    GO HAWKS!!!

    Visit my Seahawks blog at 17power.blogspot.com!

    Follow me on Twitter at @17power
    User avatar
    MontanaHawk05
    * 17Power Blogger *
     
    Posts: 11245
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:46 am


  • I think Hass is in very real competition for #1.

    I'm aslo glad we probably won't be drafting Jimmy Clausen. This move, if for no other reason, has me stoked.
    seattlesetters
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 564
    Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 3:45 pm


  • Guys like Hardesty are looking a lot better for the hawks now that we are at 60.
    Image
    User avatar
    HawkFan72
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 11333
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 10:50 am
    Location: Antioch, CA


  • This deal is an act out of desperation, IMO. SD came away the winners and the Seahawks lost. The Seahawks gave up too much. They should have parted with 4th rd this year and 2nd rounder next year. Instead they move down 20 spots which doesn't make the choice attractive for Denver re: Marshall. There's a big difference between #40 pick and 60. Also it takes them out of many options - Ryan Matthews, Jahvid Best, Damian Williams, etc may not be there at #60 (as mentioned previously by others). I guess they got the QB they wanted hopefully he pans out.
    Last edited by hawkfan68 on Wed Mar 17, 2010 2:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
    User avatar
    hawkfan68
    *GOLD SUPPORTER*
    *GOLD SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 3468
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 11:10 am
    Location: Sammamish, WA


  • seattlesetters wrote:I'm aslo glad we probably won't be drafting Jimmy Clausen.


    Agreed. This team's luck with 1st Rd QB's has been abysmal over it's history... I even bought a Rick Mirer jersey. The shame.
    Image
    User avatar
    nsport
    * NET Sports Handicapper *
     
    Posts: 1416
    Joined: Sat Apr 25, 2009 9:13 am


  • Yeah, you don't sound like a "complete doucher" at all...
    Sarlacc, on comparing .NET to Soccer: And why not? It's a bunch of people running around in circles, feigning pain, and never scoring.
    Snohomie
    * NET Draft Guru *
     
    Posts: 3591
    Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 5:06 pm
    Location: Bellingham, WA


  • Okay. Now let's trade him to Denver for Marshall.
    "Some people here have been groomed to accept mediocrity and lame ducks, I'm on board with the vibrato!" -SouthSoundHawk
    "BFS is kicking ass in here." -kearly (8/9/2013)
    User avatar
    bestfightstory
    * Glitter over Knives *
     
    Posts: 8511
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:13 pm


  • Blitzer88 wrote:
    SundayNiteBlackout wrote:
    Blitzer88 wrote:My buddy just called me and said that Brock Huard is just going off about this deal.....


    He thinks it's good or bad?


    I believe he sees it as bad...


    He's also against drafting Clausen and Bradford with the #6 or #14 picks. In that sense, if picking up Whitehurst changes that philisophy, it's good. However, the Seahawks got mauled in this deal. They gave up too much for Whitehurst. Not a good start, Schneider, Carroll, and Co.
    User avatar
    hawkfan68
    *GOLD SUPPORTER*
    *GOLD SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 3468
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 11:10 am
    Location: Sammamish, WA


  • Okay. Now let's trade him to Denver for Marshall.
    "Some people here have been groomed to accept mediocrity and lame ducks, I'm on board with the vibrato!" -SouthSoundHawk
    "BFS is kicking ass in here." -kearly (8/9/2013)
    User avatar
    bestfightstory
    * Glitter over Knives *
     
    Posts: 8511
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:13 pm


  • HawkFan72 wrote:Guys like Hardesty are looking a lot better for the hawks now that we are at 60.



    Still loads of options at #60. Ben Tate, Major Wright, Reshad Jones, Corey Wootton... etc etc.

    Not the end of the world unless you really wanted Marshall without spending 6 or 14.
    User avatar
    theENGLISHseahawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7939
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:13 am


  • Okay. Now let's trade him to Denver for Marshall.
    "Some people here have been groomed to accept mediocrity and lame ducks, I'm on board with the vibrato!" -SouthSoundHawk
    "BFS is kicking ass in here." -kearly (8/9/2013)
    User avatar
    bestfightstory
    * Glitter over Knives *
     
    Posts: 8511
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:13 pm


  • bestfightstory wrote:Okay. Now let's trade him to Denver for Marshall.


    Just as riveting the second time!
    Sarlacc, on comparing .NET to Soccer: And why not? It's a bunch of people running around in circles, feigning pain, and never scoring.
    Snohomie
    * NET Draft Guru *
     
    Posts: 3591
    Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 5:06 pm
    Location: Bellingham, WA



  • If we trade Sims, I hope we net a third, doesn't Cleveland have a bunch of them?
    “We need to be challenged, ... and we need to be under the gun to respond.” --Pete Carroll
    User avatar
    nanomoz
    *GOLD SUPPORTER*
    *GOLD SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 4577
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 1:20 pm
    Location: UT


PreviousNext


It is currently Thu Aug 21, 2014 2:30 am

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE ARCHIVES ]




Information
  • Who is online
  • Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 3 guests