|
Post by Mr Bismarck's Electric Donkey on Mar 9, 2009 15:10:49 GMT
Buffalo's colour scheme will do your nut. Remember CM00/01 Barcelona, reading red on blue as Patrick Kluivert scored again? Yeah.
I would suggest the Loins, but with fake players they might turn out to be good, which would break my mind.
And fake players, aye. It takes longer to learn who's who, but you don't have any preconceived notions about players and some of the randomly generated names are funny.
|
|
|
Post by Moo on Mar 9, 2009 15:32:05 GMT
I never thought about the colours, good shout, Buffalo are deffo out then. As are the Phish, because Orange plus anything is just wrong. Packers are out, Chicago on principle... we could go to Norlins or Minnesota, I suppose.
|
|
|
Post by hornet on Mar 10, 2009 12:28:16 GMT
Minnesota's a good shout. 69ers? Eagles? Washington Racists?
|
|
|
Post by Mr Bismarck's Electric Donkey on Mar 10, 2009 13:18:27 GMT
If you play the 69ers I'll ask for my license back.
Wait...
|
|
|
Post by Moo on Mar 10, 2009 13:25:15 GMT
I've started a preference draft with the Purple idiots. Am I doing an update thread?
|
|
|
Post by Mr Bismarck's Electric Donkey on Mar 10, 2009 13:44:40 GMT
Yes. Yes you are.
|
|
|
Post by Sonic on Mar 10, 2009 14:25:32 GMT
Isn't that what Narkle was doing, faking it?
|
|
|
Post by Moo on Mar 10, 2009 15:29:18 GMT
Remember I was going to do one with Seattle but couldnt because I could install a printer? (I needed to do that to print the files to text) So we might be screwed.
|
|
|
Post by Moo on Mar 16, 2009 15:48:44 GMT
In other news, I see that Sky's contract with the NFL has expired and there's no word on any negotiations. Surely they can't cut the NFL? I'd be gutted!
It might mean having to try and watch the draft online like a couple of years ago, which was ok, but there was some glitches. Last year, the first two rounds was on Sky Sports and it was intriguing to watch. I'm not sure I could go back to tInternet again.
I just hope that Channel Five don't get it, as I'd hate to think that John Barnes could be roped into anything again.
|
|
|
Post by elth on Mar 16, 2009 19:05:40 GMT
Better than not being on at all, presumably.
|
|
|
Post by Moo on Mar 17, 2009 9:09:51 GMT
It's a tough call.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Bismarck's Electric Donkey on Mar 17, 2009 12:05:12 GMT
Jay Cutler failed to show up for yesterday's "voluntary" training day with the Broncos and has requested a trade.
|
|
|
Post by Moo on Mar 17, 2009 12:36:28 GMT
I've been reading about this over the last week or so. It seems to be that last week, the experts were putting the blame on Cutler, he should do what he's told, not as good as he thinks he is, yadda yadda. But there has since been a couple changed their mind and have said that McDaniels should have been more sympathetic to the QB he obviously doesn't want, or at least more up front with him. One of the nfl.com dudes has suggested that McD should have said "Look, my offense is going to be way different to what you were running last year. I know Cassell can ru it, so I'm going for him, but if I can't get him, then we'll have to work hard at it." Fine, i suppose, but shouldn't Cutler be wanting to run Denver's offense no matter what? My take on it is pretty much in the middle (splinters ahoy!) where McDaniels probably should have been more vocal with Cutler (and it appear that he's been backtracking a little about who offered what in negotiations) and Cutler really should stop behaving like a whiny bitch and playing on the opinions of the fans, who seem to think he's teh aw350m3. I hate Denver anyway, so I'm siding with Josh McDaniels here, hoping he's a NE plant.
|
|
|
Post by elth on Mar 17, 2009 12:52:13 GMT
Because, y'know, Denver's biggest problem last season was the offense. Cutler's a whiny little bitch who should SHUT UP AND JAM shut up and play but McDaniels could hardly have dealt with this situation worse. When you've got a hyper talented franchise QB who's a little sensitive at your team, telling him you'll move him if you get the right offer and if not, he can suck it up, is possibly not the right way to go about making him happy.
|
|
|
Post by Moo on Mar 17, 2009 12:57:14 GMT
I read something today that said he wasn't happy with Shanahan being fired, so the whinging was before McDaniels got on the plane to Denver.
I might not be reading what you wrote correctly, Elth, but you seem to be having a pop at McDaniels there. He's been "brought up" with the "team is everything" mantra rather than "pamper the individual" one in New England, so my guess would be that he's thought it should be that way from Day One. Naive, should have handled it better, sure, I'm sure he'll learn from it and move on.
|
|
|
Post by DC on Mar 17, 2009 14:41:19 GMT
Reverse the situation - can you imagine anyone turning up to coach the Pats and then starts discussing trading Tom Brady because of a "team is everything".
Obviously that's the extreme, but y'know McDaniels did pretty much the most stupid thing ever by even entertaining the trade offer.
I also don't expect the response from the QB would have been much different had he done it to the Falcons, Texans, Ravens, Bills or any other team with an already defined "Franchise" QB.
Nobody would have batted an eyelid if he'd done it at the Jets were there's no set starter, or if the starter is questionable (Lions, Bears, Vikes - even the Dolphins).
|
|
|
Post by Mr Bismarck's Electric Donkey on Mar 17, 2009 14:43:20 GMT
We'll gladly take Cutler. He's a bit rough around the edges at times, but he's better than anything we've had this century.
|
|
|
Post by Moo on Mar 17, 2009 14:58:17 GMT
Reverse the situation - can you imagine anyone turning up to coach the Pats and then starts discussing trading Tom Brady because of a "team is everything". But that culture already exists, DC. I have no doubt that Cutler was as important to the Broncos last year as Brady is to the Patriots most years, but there's a definite talent gap IMO and I can't see many teams picking Cutler before Brady (knee injury notwithstanding). I think that's the problem. McDaniels claims he wasn't the one who instigated the trade, but that is different to entertaining the idea, I agree. No doubt the situation could have been handled better though.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Bismarck's Electric Donkey on Mar 17, 2009 15:14:53 GMT
McDaniels should have called Cutler in and said "we were contacted by the Buccs talking about a trade for you. Obviously, if someone wants to trade me their draft picks for the next ten years for any one player, then we're going to listen.
So we spoke to them, listened to what they had to offer and the deal wasn't of the exceptional sort it would have to be to consider trading someone with the value to the Bronco organisation that you have, so we said thank you and no thank you."
Of course the other option is to let him find out through non-team sources, seriously annoy him and then sign Chris "Perforated Internal Organs" Simms as a contingency plan.
|
|
|
Post by elth on Mar 17, 2009 18:44:35 GMT
Yeah, I don't have a problem with them considering the deal, it's more the way they've dealt with it since then.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Bismarck's Electric Donkey on Mar 19, 2009 1:26:13 GMT
Talk tonight on ESPN of Miami sending their 1st round draft choice (#25) and Chad Pennington to Denver for Jay Cutler. Or sending Pennington and both second round choices they have to Kansas, who send Matt Cassell and a 2 Denver, who send Jay Cutler to Miami.
Will never happen of course, but it made me happy for a day.
|
|
|
Post by DC on Mar 19, 2009 7:16:09 GMT
Given the situation, I can see Denver haven't to settle for a Round 2 and a conditiional - in which case someone like the Lions is more likely to get involved if it saves them a 1st Rounder being spent on a QB in the draft.
|
|
|
Post by Moo on Mar 19, 2009 8:40:49 GMT
And Detroit have 2 first rounders as well, they pick #20, IIRC.
Cutler to Miami would be excellent for the Dolphins, but it would mean they'd have to spend a lot of effort trying to get a deep threat of a WR for Cutler to throw to. It would also mean not doing that silly Wildcat thing any more, I can't see Cutler being happy with that after the shenanigans of the last two weeks.
|
|
|
Post by DC on Mar 19, 2009 14:57:02 GMT
Which makes it all the more likely.
Plus they can offer Cutler a bonafide A1 receiver in Calvin Johnson, plus a couple of journeymen in McDonald and Bryant Johnson (who still has a lot of potential as yet unfulfilled) and Travis Taylor (who admittedly is a Culpepper sweetener).
|
|
|
Post by elth on Mar 19, 2009 19:32:31 GMT
Lions don't have a QB for Denver, though.
|
|