Say no to Woodson

[MJZiggy]

I thought the same thing and wondered "what huge holes on both sides of the ball?"

Thought maybe bulldog got into the catnip or something.

[Joemailman]

Although I didn't post it at the time, I thought that signing Woodson and getting rid of javon were great moves.

[gbgary]

Although I didn't post it at the time, I thought that signing Woodson and getting rid of javon were great moves.

although i didn't post it at the time i thought keeping Brett as the #1, after Majik's ankle was healed, was a brilliant move. wait...was there anywhere to post when that happened?

[Zool]

I saw the headline, and thought maybe he was asking for a contract extension or something!

Shouldn't there be a statute of limitations on using our old comments against us??!!

Nope. This is the only consequence that can be had on an internet forum.

[CaliforniaCheez]

I saw the headline, and thought maybe he was asking for a contract extension or something!

Shouldn't there be a statute of limitations on using our old comments against us??!!

Nope. This is the only consequence that can be had on an internet forum.

Somebody had the time and inclination. Sometimes other than an "I gotcha" moment it is nice to see sometimes how the majority or minority were wrong on an issue.

No harm no foul.

[packers11]

Exactly there is no harm... It is entertaining though to go back in the forum ...

If you go farther back, when Woodson played his preseason game against the Bengals and got smoked everyone was calling for T.T's head...

[Patler]

I saw the headline, and thought maybe he was asking for a contract extension or something!

Shouldn't there be a statute of limitations on using our old comments against us??!!

Nope. This is the only consequence that can be had on an internet forum.

Didn't the little smiley face at the end of my remark indicate to you that I was only kidding? I didn't even have a comment in the original thread. Of course, I RARELY do!

[Rastak]

My take on getting out of previous comments is this.


If you express an opinion like:

"I think Arod will lead the NFC North in passing"

then you are expressing your guess/opinion.


If you are an idiot and say "Arod will lead the NFC North is passing", then if he doesn't you are open to someone calling you out. You shouldn't "declare shit" unless you have inside knowledge and know it for a fact.

[Guiness]

I saw the headline, and thought maybe he was asking for a contract extension or something!

Shouldn't there be a statute of limitations on using our old comments against us??!!

Nope. This is the only consequence that can be had on an internet forum.

Didn't the little smiley face at the end of my remark indicate to you that I was only kidding? I didn't even have a comment in the original thread. Of course, I RARELY do!

Oh, I think Zool knew full well you were kidding. His reply was so heavily doused with sarcasm, the blooms fell off my petunia!

[Scott Campbell]

If you are an idiot and say "Arod will lead the NFC North is passing", then if he doesn't you are open to someone calling you out.

Agreed.

Though it'd take an even bigger idiot to come out and say "T-Jack will lead the NFC North in passing".

[Rastak]

If you are an idiot and say "Arod will lead the NFC North is passing", then if he doesn't you are open to someone calling you out.

Agreed.

Though it'd take an even bigger idiot to come out and say "T-Jack will lead the NFC North in passing".

Probably.....


Point remains the same, if you "declare it to be" and it isn't, you get what you deserve.