Menudo Posted February 8, 2006 Author Share Posted February 8, 2006 Fixed. 1313880[/snapback] True Bushwacked, but just because you aren't a fan of the Seahawks doesn't mean you weren't rooting against the Steelers.......two of the heaviest non-Seahawk hitters that I've seen are a Bronco & Colt fan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted February 8, 2006 Share Posted February 8, 2006 True Bushwacked, but just because you aren't a fan of the Seahawks doesn't mean you weren't rooting against the Steelers....... 1313886[/snapback] That doesn't exemplify nonbias. For the umpteenth time congrats for your team's victory and I apologize that the overwhelming majority of football fans will forever remember this as a horribly officiated game in favor of one team more than anything else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pope Flick Posted February 8, 2006 Share Posted February 8, 2006 Fixed. 1313880[/snapback] That gets this: Nothing on the video showed Rothlisberger didn't score the TD. The PI call can be slowed down ad infinitum, but if you watch it real time at real speed it appears as if he could have arguably pushed off. Other calls were poor, but that's the state of the game (see Pitt v Indy) at the moment which is the larger issue. If the shoe were on the other foot: had Seattle won due to calls that can be discussed forever and a day. Again, I'm reminded of the Rams fans who wanted a second put back on the clock after the Vinatieri FG in their SB loss. Get over it. The breaks didn't go your way, and you're demeaning your own team's accomplishments from thsi season by acting like sore losers. Look at the sig you now wear: "they would have won if it weren't for the refs." That gets this: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted February 8, 2006 Author Share Posted February 8, 2006 That doesn't exemplify nonbias. For the umpteenth time congrats for your team's victory and I apologize that the overwhelming majority of football fans will forever remember this as a horribly officiated game in favor of one team more than anything else. 1313912[/snapback] For the umpteenth time, I have no problem with you or what you have been writing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dead Horse Posted February 8, 2006 Share Posted February 8, 2006 so the Steelers beat the Seahawks? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted February 8, 2006 Author Share Posted February 8, 2006 so the Steelers beat the Seahawks? 1313952[/snapback] No, the referees did. There is NO WAY the Seahawks could ever lose to another team. Where have you been !!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted February 8, 2006 Share Posted February 8, 2006 Look at the sig you now wear: "they would have won if it weren't for the refs." That gets this: 1313917[/snapback] When did you morph into a mental midget? My sig basically symbolizes my thoughts on the game. It states that the Hawks could have played better but who knows what would have happened if the refs didn't severly effect the outcome of the game. You are either woefully ignorant of my take on the game or for some reason your bagina needs a couple hanfuls of sauve more than mine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gdawg Posted February 8, 2006 Share Posted February 8, 2006 so the Steelers beat the Seahawks? 1313952[/snapback] Your timing has been impeccable Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pope Flick Posted February 8, 2006 Share Posted February 8, 2006 When did you morph into a mental midget? My sig basically symbolizes my thoughts on the game. It states that the Hawks could have played better but who knows what would have happened if the refs didn't severly effect the outcome of the game. You are either woefully ignorant of my take on the game or for some reason your bagina needs a couple hanfuls of sauve more than mine. 1314028[/snapback] Mine needs no salve. You sig says they were "robbed" while you think it says "who knows?" Even mental midgets can understand the difference between a blanket statement and a qualification. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh 0ne Posted February 8, 2006 Share Posted February 8, 2006 (edited) I have a quick question, somewhat unrelated, if I may: What's the difference between a blanket statement and a qualification? Edited February 8, 2006 by Hugh 0ne Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonehand Posted February 8, 2006 Share Posted February 8, 2006 This obviously doesn't go out to everyone, but, to a few, the rules seem to be: 1. We Steeler fans can't defend ourselves from the pile-on 2. We Steeler fans can't celebrate the victory because it shouldn't count 3. Only questionable calls against the Seahawks are allowed. Bringing up any questionable calls against the Steelers is uncalled for. 4. We are told to let it go, but Seahawk fans are allowed to continue on and on forever. 5. Seahawk fans and Steeler Haters can make avatars with yellow and black striped officials, blind refs, etc., but posting a logo of a Seahawk baby crying, or Holmgren in a tub is tasteless. 1313870[/snapback] You know, Menudo, you post an awful lot of smack for someone who couldn't man up for a sigline bet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonorator Posted February 8, 2006 Share Posted February 8, 2006 I have a quick question, somewhat unrelated, if I may: What's the difference between a blanket statement and a qualification? 1314316[/snapback] if i said that all huddle users with hugh in their screen name were fektards, that would be a blanket statement. when i say that of all the huddle users with hugh in their screen name, hugh one is the biggest fektard, i've qualified the blanket statement. hope that helps you fecktard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted February 8, 2006 Share Posted February 8, 2006 (edited) Even mental midgets can understand the difference between a blanket statement and a qualification. 1314311[/snapback] Apparently if your observations are incorrect and you are stubborn like a mule, it's a natural defense to disregard the difference. Edited February 8, 2006 by bushwacked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pope Flick Posted February 8, 2006 Share Posted February 8, 2006 I have a quick question, somewhat unrelated, if I may: What's the difference between a blanket statement and a qualification? 1314316[/snapback] Blanket statement: "Here's what Bill Levy's crew did point blank: it robbed Seattle." Qualification: "It states that the Hawks could have played better but who knows what would have happened if the refs didn't severly effect the outcome of the game." So what is it? Was Seattle robbed of a victory, or is it a "who knows what would have happened" scenario? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Red Posted February 8, 2006 Share Posted February 8, 2006 Congrats Menudo. The Steelers had their back against the wall at 7-5 but came out and just killed everyone to get to the SB. Man, you are going to be IMPOSSIBLE to argue with for at least an other 25 years. Now that you have a ring that isn't rusted out, can you ask Cowher to stop spitting so much? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted February 8, 2006 Author Share Posted February 8, 2006 You know, Menudo, you post an awful lot of smack for someone who couldn't man up for a sigline bet. 1314336[/snapback] C'mon, you know why I didn't take that bet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted February 8, 2006 Author Share Posted February 8, 2006 Congrats Menudo. The Steelers had their back against the wall at 7-5 but came out and just killed everyone to get to the SB. Man, you are going to be IMPOSSIBLE to argue with for at least an other 25 years. Now that you have a ring that isn't rusted out, can you ask Cowher to stop spitting so much? 1314485[/snapback] Thanks Big Red, I'll try to take it easy on you. That really was a classy post from a Ravens fan. Try not to read some of the things I've been saying about the Ravens and their fans recently........ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Red Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 Thanks Big Red, I'll try to take it easy on you. That really was a classy post from a Ravens fan. Try not to read some of the things I've been saying about the Ravens and their fans recently........ 1314494[/snapback] You knocked the Colts out of the playoffs, and if there is one team I hate more than the Steelers..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted February 9, 2006 Author Share Posted February 9, 2006 You knocked the Colts out of the playoffs, and if there is one team I hate more than the Steelers..... 1314537[/snapback] I still can't believe we did it (beat the Colts), but it sure was fun to watch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 Blanket statement: "Here's what Bill Levy's crew did point blank: it robbed Seattle." Qualification: "It states that the Hawks could have played better but who knows what would have happened if the refs didn't severly effect the outcome of the game." So what is it? Was Seattle robbed of a victory, or is it a "who knows what would have happened" scenario? 1314458[/snapback] Okay here we go, as stupid as this little diatribe is, I'll play along with you even though it is obvious you are purposefully acting like a nimwitted twit, where every statement is black and white, with no room for intrepretation. You stated the words "they would have won if it weren't for the refs" earlier to describe my sigline and falsely insinuate my opinion. Despite the fact you are acting like freaking semantical idiot with selective reading sklls, I'll break it down for you anyway. It's really not that difficult to understand moran. Seattle was robbed, they were robbed of several scoring opportunities in the game from questionable officiating calls. Despite those calls, they shot themselves in the foot many a time and still could have won that game. The Hawks did not take advantage of every opportunity, the dropped passes and the one turnover was huge. Despite the mistakes of Seattle, if the officials wouldn't have made so many one-sided questionable calls, the Seahawks still may have won the game. Every freaking person with half a brain and less than 12 beers in them by the 4th quarter understands this. What is your major malfunction? That concludes today's third grade lesson plan. Blanket statement: "Point blank: Pope Flick is a resonably intelligent guy." Qualification: "Unless he acts like a stupid asstard." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pope Flick Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 That concludes today's third grade lesson plan. Blanket statement: "Point blank: Pope Flick is a resonably intelligent guy." Qualification: "Even when he acts like a stupid asstard." 1314550[/snapback] fixed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 fixed 1314609[/snapback] Good God, When does the draft start? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beavers Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiegie Posted February 2, 2009 Share Posted February 2, 2009 bump Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skippy Posted February 2, 2009 Share Posted February 2, 2009 bump Maybe someone needs a timeout? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.