Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
12 minutes ago, Bigbend1812 said:

Rejected Watch Out GIF by Tomi Ferraro, Sportz

I've done this before.  Not that hard, but I had a huge bark-textured scrape on my right cheek for weeks.

  • Haha 3
Posted
26 minutes ago, JBJ said:

I've done this before.  Not that hard, but I had a huge bark-textured scrape on my right cheek for weeks.

Same. I remember playing in the front yard as a kid. Those Mississippi loblollies could lay the wood.

Posted
1 minute ago, Bevo said:

Same. I remember playing in the front yard as a kid. Those Mississippi loblollies could lay the wood.

They can be very useful against tight man coverage.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
Rice had some iffy looking cheerleaders, but they were probably all going to be doctors or physicists. Something tells me there are no physicists in that bunch.

Pfft, doctors and physicists. Surly there is few future RNs in that bunch!
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
5 hours ago, closetojumping said:

Boy, ugly got all over that ULM squad. Yikes. 

I once called a young lady "cuteless" which I defined as the opposite of "cuteness".

I would not call this squad "cuteless" but it is struggling....

Posted
1 hour ago, JBJ said:

I've done this before.  Not that hard, but I had a huge bark-textured scrape on my right cheek for weeks.

You should wear underwear and shorts/pants to prevent that from happening. Nude football is all fun and games until cheeks get scratched (among other things).

  • Haha 1
Posted
18 minutes ago, bigup2dahorns said:

No depth charts for the season is certainly one way to go. Kinda wild if you ask me.

Public depth charts aren’t necessary. We will see who is starting when the game starts anyway. Probably helps save some upperclassman embarrassment too. 

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted

I've never understood why the 9.95 "media" goes so freaking batshit crazy over the depth chart.  If Sark doesn't want to put one out, that's his damn choice. I can just see Brian Davis furiously typing up a piece right now lamenting that he does not a have a DEPTH CHART!

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

I'm OK with this. Depth charts have seen diminished importance for years now. Offensive starters will likely be dependent on opponent and what package we want to start with. Multiple looks mean multiple people play different downs. Same with situational defense. Instead of Sark telling the world some guy is 3rd string, he can tell that guy he's important in certain situations.

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted
2 hours ago, JBJ said:

I've done this before.  Not that hard, but I had a huge bark-textured scrape on my right cheek for weeks.

Yup. Same …been there, done that. I was 8. 
There was ONE freaking tree in the yard; ONE.  I WAS WIDE FREAKING OPEN, RANDY.  All you had to do was throw it IN THE MIDDLE OF THE DAMN YARD. 
But no; you want to “throw” the out pattern. F you, Randy C. 
 

  • Haha 1
Posted (edited)
56 minutes ago, Atticus said:

Public depth charts aren’t necessary. We will see who is starting when the game starts anyway. Probably helps save some upperclassman embarrassment too. 

Good point. An upperclassman that was a starter last year being dropped to 3rd string after being passed by freshmen on the depth chart may hurt some egos

Edited by perfectchaos007
Posted
28 minutes ago, 6th Street said:

Can't risk upsetting Max Merrill

Merrill and Goram-Welch are on portal watch. They delivered an ultimatum to Flood, who reportedly called both players the most vital tackling dummies on the roster in his presser a few weeks back. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 2

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...