T1B

BSmack wrote:

Jim Haslett wrote:Haslett estimated half the league's players, and all its linemen, took steroids in the 1980s before they were banned by the league.

So half the players in the league played for Pittsburgh?

Oh.


Remind me... how many of those Super Bowls did Pittsburgh win in the 80's? I guess those aren't as tainted as the ones they won in the 70's?


But keep dropping shit that doesn't support your argument. If you drone on and on and put everyone here to sleep, it gives you BODE.



UCan't: The Steelers Super Bowls were tainted by steroid use.

BSmack: Bullshit. Everyone else was doing roids in the 80's, too.



Just stay down, dude. There may have been a very slight debate whether you were getting your ass handed to you before, but once you joined in and started booting yourself up and down the thread, it was all over but the "uhm...uhm... I MEANT" 's.



Fucking tard.

Dins,

Is it asking too much for you to READ the thread before you comment on it. I'll break it down for you.

1. UCant said that the NFL banned steroids "because of the unfair advantage Pittburgh had over the rest of the league."

2. I posted the obvious rebuttal to that bit of idiocy.

3. You come piling in like you always do with dicksmokers flapping and nary a clue.

Now kindly fuck off while people who know football resume this debate.

BSmack wrote:I posted the obvious rebuttal to that bit of idiocy.

BSmack wrote:

Jim Haslett wrote:Haslett estimated half the league's players, and all its linemen, took steroids in the 1980s

BSmack wrote:Well there we go. 30+ year old anecdotal evidence.

But 20+ year old anecdotal evidence gives you BODE.


Outfuckingstanding.


Oh, and btw- you've said plenty more stupid shit in the course of plungering yourself... wanna continue?


Stay down, tard.

Dinsdale wrote:But 20+ year old anecdotal evidence gives you BODE.

When it's the very same evidence that UCant posted defending HIS argument being shoved back in his face?

Damn right it does.

Seriously Dins, I dropped more football knowledge during my morning shit that you have in your whole fucking life. Stick to what you know.

BSmack wrote:I dropped more football knowledge during my morning shit.

Good to see we're finally on the same page here... I've always equated your football takes to turds circling a drain as well.

Holy fucking morons, Batman.


Yeah, you get mad BODE for quoting Jim Haslett. Yeah, he really supports your view of things...

Jim Haslett wrote:"It started, really, in Pittsburgh. They got an advantage on a lot of football teams. They were so much stronger [in the] '70s, late '70s, early '80s

Cherry-picking quotes out of context gives you BODE.

If Pittsburgh Steelers were early adopters of the juice, then you can bet that the rest of the league followed about 5 minutes later. That's really all there is to that "debate".

As for fans in AZ...simple demographics. For 50 years, young folks have been leaving the rust belt for places like AZ. A lot of them are far more eager to change their zip code than they are their rooting interest.

When I moved to SoCal from Pittsburgh, I remained a PSU and Steeler fan...if anything, those allegiances became even stronger. I merely had a lot more Bill Plaschke articles to avoid reading...and I was all over that.

BSmack wrote:

ucantdoitdoggieSTyle2 wrote:Whether it's a crime or not is immaterial. The Stealers were ahead of their time in the area of chemical enhancements and stole 4 Super Bowls based largely upon the advantages they had over less equipped teams. The NFL adopted a steroid policy before they were even deemed illegal in the US because of the unfair advantage Pittburgh had over the rest of the league.

From the same article you cited earlier.

Jim Haslett wrote:Haslett estimated half the league's players, and all its linemen, took steroids in the 1980s before they were banned by the league.

So half the players in the league played for Pittsburgh?

BSmack earlier in this same thread wrote:Hasslet is completely full of shit and admitted as much when he immediately backed off his bullshit accusations the second people asked him to back them up.

Just trying to help.

Goober McTuber wrote: Just trying to help.

Dude, don't you understand that you got runned for posting "anecdotal evidence"?

Goober McTuber wrote:

BSmack earlier in this same thread wrote:Hasslet is completely full of shit and admitted as much when he immediately backed off his bullshit accusations the second people asked him to back them up.

Just trying to help.

And that has what to do with me hanging UCant by his own petard?

BSmack wrote:

Goober McTuber wrote:

BSmack earlier in this same thread wrote:Hasslet is completely full of shit and admitted as much when he immediately backed off his bullshit accusations the second people asked him to back them up.

Just trying to help.

And that has what to do with me hanging UCant by his own petard?

You seemed to be citing Haslett as a source of info when it benefits you, and discrediting him when he damages your argument. Not that that's flailing or anything.

Goober McTuber wrote:You seemed to be citing Haslett as a source of info when it benefits you, and discrediting him when he damages your argument. Not that that's flailing or anything.

Just pointing out the inconsistencies in UCant's argument by using the very source HE cited. If you can't see that by now, I'd advise you to ask the folks at UW for a refund.

You know, if I could get the UW to refund my entire 4 years of tuition, it might be enough to pay for one class now.

BSmack wrote:

Goober McTuber wrote:You seemed to be citing Haslett as a source of info when it benefits you, and discrediting him when he damages your argument. Not that that's flailing or anything.

Just pointing out the inconsistencies in UCant's argument by using the very source HE cited. If you can't see that by now, I'd advise you to ask the folks at UW for a refund.

The source I cited was myself. I believe my exacts words were, "because I said so."

There reason I posted it wasn’t to back up any claim of my own. I did it to show you how ridiculous it is to post about tainted Super Bowls wins sans any proof. Here, I will post it again. Try reading it… this time.

ucantdoitdoggieSTyle2 wrote:The NFL adopted a steroid policy before they were even deemed illegal in the US because of the unfair advantage Pittburgh had over the rest of the league. They are tainted. Why? Because I said so. Just like your unconfirmed assertions that New England broke any rules during any of their Super Bowl seasons. Until you can offer up any hard evidence to support your claim, you can kindly go fuck yourself.

ucantdoitdoggieSTyle2 wrote:The source I cited was myself.

Oh, so you didn't post an excerpt from Haslett's interview?

UCantremebershityoupostedyesterday wrote:After his career rumors circulated about his probable steroid use while playing with the Steelers. Former coach and player Jim Haslett said to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette in 2005:

"It started, really, in Pittsburgh. They got an advantage on a lot of football teams. They were so much stronger [in the] '70s, late '70s, early '80s ... Steve [Courson], Jon [Kolb] and all those guys. They're the ones who kind of started it."

Talk about a tainted dynasty. A bunch of juice monkeys is all they were.

Sorry for going back, finding the WHOLE article, and kicking your ass with it.

What's the O/U on how many self-granted BODE proclamations BSmack will annoint himself with in this thread?

50.5?

Because if you claim it, it will come.

Dinsdale wrote:What's the O/U on how many self-granted BODE proclamations BSmack will annoint himself with in this thread?

50.5?

Because if you claim it, it will come.

At least you're smart enough to have stopped attempting to post football takes. Props for understanding your limitations I guess.

Wow, that's some cutting edge smack in that retort.

Give yourself another heaping dose of BODE for it.

BSmack wrote:After his career rumors circulated about his probable steroid use while playing with the Steelers. Former coach and player Jim Haslett said to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette in 2005:

"It started, really, in Pittsburgh. They got an advantage on a lot of football teams. They were so much stronger [in the] '70s, late '70s, early '80s ... Steve [Courson], Jon [Kolb] and all those guys. They're the ones who kind of started it."

To which, UCant said: "Talk about a tainted dynasty. A bunch of juice monkeys is all they were."

And what does that... have to do with this:::

BSmack wrote:UCant said: "that the NFL banned steroids because of the unfair advantage Pittburgh had over the rest of the league."

They're two separate posts about two different topics. Do you even know what you're arguing about anymore? You're attributing a source to a totally different post.




If/when you get a clue, get back to me....

ucantdoitdoggieSTyle2 wrote:

BSmack wrote:After his career rumors circulated about his probable steroid use while playing with the Steelers. Former coach and player Jim Haslett said to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette in 2005:

"It started, really, in Pittsburgh. They got an advantage on a lot of football teams. They were so much stronger [in the] '70s, late '70s, early '80s ... Steve [Courson], Jon [Kolb] and all those guys. They're the ones who kind of started it."

To which, UCant said: "Talk about a tainted dynasty. A bunch of juice monkeys is all they were."

And what does that... have to do with this:::

BSmack wrote:UCant said: "that the NFL banned steroids because of the unfair advantage Pittburgh had over the rest of the league."

They're two separate posts about two different topics. Do you even know what you're arguing about anymore? You're attributing a source to a totally different post.

Do you now NOT believe Haslett? Make up your fucking mind.

Sorry dude. I'm not about to take the time to sort through which one of your shit posts you really mean and which ones you don't. I take them all as a part of a greater pile of shit and apply the plunger without regard to whatever fantasy you might have regarding their meaning.

Another BODE declaration?

Wow, who woulda thunk it?

And yet another nip at the ankles from Spamsdale. Keep spewing out those football takes Claven.

Oh yea, you don't have any.

That's right... BSuck has never recieved a pile-on... only legions of "ankle nippers."

Let's see -- we've got multiple BODE declarations, in a constant need to try and convince everyone he's getting over(because even he isn't so fucking stupid that he doesn't know the evidence points to the contrary).

We've got "ankle biting" accusations.

We've got "you have no take"... while delivering none of his own.

And of course "I'm not going to spend the time reading your post"... adressed to the guy he's been arguing with for two days in the same thread.


The unmatched stupidity this douche spouts makes me long for page-stretching pics of the Golden Gate and tards accusing me of mischaracterizing their posts.

Dinsdale wrote:...legions of "ankle nippers."

Nope, just one. You're the only one posting in this thread that is completely ignorant of the topics being discussed. Your only reason for being here is to get another taste of my ankles.

Sorry Dins, I guess you're not the only retard.

R-Jack wrote:If you are going to pimp yourself over your "football takes", at least have a history of knowing the game of fucking football,

You mean like winning not one, but two different FF leagues on this very board?

Amongst other things, I called Willie Parker's first big season and LJ's and there are 15 posters on this very fucking board who can back it up because they were sitting in the auction room when I did it.

WTF have YOU done?



That's what I tought. Now kindly STFU.

R-Jack wrote:fantasy asshole league

IN.

Sincerely,

R-Jack wrote:OK Here is a tip. If you are going to prop yourself on your knowledge of the game of football, your best evidence of such probably should not include the word "fantasy". Just sayin'

Then you tell me. If you're such a motherfucking EXPERT, then give me your curriculum vitae. Because so far, I've seen absolute jack shit from you in the line of football knowledge.

Oh, and if picking LJ to start getting more carries was such an easy task, how come I was able to snake him for 30 bucks in an auction league that year when Priest was going for close to 100?

BSmack wrote:Oh, and if picking LJ to start getting more carries was such an easy task, how come I was able to snake him for 30 bucks in an auction league that year when Priest was going for close to 100?

After your downright embarrassing performance at this year's draft, I think it's rather appropriate you're using FF skills as a barometer to measure your non-existent football knowledge. Seriously, how may waiver wire moves… 15+? How many trades? Granted, you have improved some since spending money on the likes of Leftwich and Crumpler. But really, when you're starting out in the basement, the only way out is up. I liked the Romo trade. Props for that... However, this only means you were able to find a couple of people who are actually worse at this FF thing than you are. How many players are left from that shit team put together in August? RACK you, and your epic fantasy skils, bro.

ucantdoitdoggieSTyle2 wrote:

BSmack wrote:Oh, and if picking LJ to start getting more carries was such an easy task, how come I was able to snake him for 30 bucks in an auction league that year when Priest was going for close to 100?

After your downright embarrassing performance at this year's draft, I think it's rather appropriate you're using FF skills as a barometer to measure your non-existent football knowledge. Seriously, how may waiver wire moves… 15+? How many trades? Granted, you have improved some since spending money on the likes of Leftwich and Crumpler. But really, when you're starting out in the basement, the only way out is up. I liked the Romo trade. Props for that... However, this only means you were able to find a couple of people who are actually worse at this FF thing than you are. How many players are left from that shit team put together in August? RACK you, and your epic fantasy skils, bro.

I traded Romo to the Beagles. So I am worse at this FF thing then him?

ucantdoitdoggieSTyle2 wrote:RACK you, and your epic fantasy skils, bro.

The Beagles have yet to miss the playoffs. And in case you missed it, sometimes you have to shuffle when your #1 back bites the dust 8 minutes into the first fucking game. Jacobs is coming back this week, so let's just wait and see. Lineup shuffles are a part of the game. Tell me you knew?

Neely8 wrote:I traded Romo to the Beagles. So I am worse at this FF thing then him?

Don't go trying to introduce logic to UCant.

BSmack wrote:The Beagles have yet to miss the playoffs. And in case you missed it, sometimes you have to shuffle when your #1 back bites the dust 8 minutes into the first fucking game. Jacobs is coming back this week, so let's just wait and see. Lineup shuffles are a part of the game. Tell me you knew?

I lost my highest scoring player in week two and just plugged someone else in. Granted, I finally lost this week, but when you're averaging about 50 pts/week from your QB/D/K and get only 10, these things happen. I think I would have lost anyways even had my guys attained their weekly averages, so props to Neely on the win.

However....

Only someone who drafted a shit fucking team would require 15 waiver moves and 3 trades 4 weeks into the season to improve it. If you make the playoffs, you can thank the people who improved your shit team for you. Line-up shuffles are part of the game if you have a shit draft, loser.