Inqui

On 5/2/2017 at 1:22 AM, atomicfront said:

They made the playoffs the last 2 seasons and we didn't.  They don't respect us anymore that is why they appreciate us.  If we knock them out of the playoffs this year they won't appreciate us at all and will go back to hating us.  This has to be the stupidest thread I have ever read.  

Did you guys appreciate the Patriots when they didn't report who was eligible in our last playoff game and humiliated us on the way to the Super Bowl?  Go to a Steelers game in Pittsburgh when we were good with a Ravens jersey on and see how much they appreciate you.  Man reddit can't be worse than this forum. 

In 2014 I wore a CJ jersey to our game in Pittsburgh (two years off our Super Bowl and in the middle of a great season during which we'd belted them once already). There were a few flogs (though I'm pretty sure they could say the same thing about Baltimore) but for the most part there was plenty of respect - they respected me and the distance I'd travelled to see the game, they respected how good both sides were, they respected Joe as a QB and John as a coach, and they respected the Ravens as a strong franchise and a worthy rival for divisional bragging rights. And there have been plenty of people on this forum over the years who've noted similar experiences in Pittsburgh. 

31 minutes ago, LosT_in_TranSlatioN said:

I'll send you and anyone else who requests it a rough draft. 

As Johnny Manziel would say, drop me a line.

CB: Jimmy Smith
CB: Marlon Humphrey
S: Tony Jefferson
S: Eric Weddle

#nohomer

3 hours ago, Florida Ravens Fan said:

Sooo what boards will you guys be signing on now??? Been a member since 08 and do not know of any other to discuss my Ravens.

I'll probably hover around on Russell Street Report, as well as seeing what becomes of the two attempts to recreate this board (purpleflock and the boardhost one, the former looking markedly more professional).

On 5/3/2017 at 5:55 AM, The Mom Gene said:

We can agree to disagree on that.  If there were no good reason, then they wouldn't be shutting it down.

 

I will agree that it was a great place to bring Ravens fans together.  The site isn't going away.  Just the forums are.

Why do you argue so passionately for the decision makers upstairs? Just because someone made the decision through official channels doesn't mean it was the right one or that people are being stubborn for disagreeing as you implied in your next post. Do you also feel that strongly that the Chicago Tribune made the right decision when it canned all its news photographers?

Saying the site will be sticking around is a copout. The news threads are about what you'd expect from an internet comments section (which is hardly surprising since it is an internet comments section) - they're a step up from Facebook but only a small one.

Just now, rmw10 said:

One of my favorite moments, getting to see Ronaldinho and Drogba play live.  I'm sure fans over in Europe feel the same thing.  Just because they don't have the sport doesn't mean they can't be fans and support the team.

And that gets back to the point where if the best you have for discussing the team is Twitter and Facebook then a lot of people won't want to discuss the team.

8 hours ago, arnie_uk said:

Think I will sign up to this site if enough of the regulars do. Looks very well laid out

It's just showing a "coming soon" page for me (for all the good that does) but it does look very professional. I don't post a lot these days but I'll probably register there and see what happens. The main problem new sites often have is the influx of new members (especially when the existing members start to leave when life happens), but that's not an impossible problem or anything.

12 hours ago, Wisdom said:

I don't have a problem with the board closing.  It was nothing more than "I love me some Flacco" forum anyway for selected fans and others.   Totally biased. unrealistic and prejudice towards those with a different opinion and / or idea.  Glad for the shutdown.

I can't say I'm surprised. Facebook's more at your level anyway.

That Vikings pick is a gut punch right there.  

3 minutes ago, LosT_in_TranSlatioN said:

Jinxing it man.... 

Just a reference to the forum mock. I'm just waiting for the 49ers to get skipped now.  

Just now, LosT_in_TranSlatioN said:

You had to say his name. 

Please refrain from naming players before they're picked.  

Just now, pep_meister said:

anyone else think the browns will be a good team soon?

Not with Kizer as their guy.

6 minutes ago, ravensdfan said:

The Ravens received a B minus for the pick. Not a C minus.

Many had him at late first rounder to early 2nd rounder so whether you like his talent or not, we reached at #16. Top 20 picks should be immediate impact players - or at least with that obvious potential - because we all know things don't always go as they seem. Humphrey is not an immediate impact player. Potential, sure. Immediate starter? Don't think so. It was a reach. Three years from now it might be a reach we're glad to have made, but I don't see him bringing any immediate help in the upcoming season.

 

The pundits gave us As for the Matt Elam and Arthur Brown picks fwiw. I think these draft diagnoses (especially in such detail and with such certainty) might be a little premature.

Just now, hn68wb4 said:

Look at the bright side, we're not the freaking Titans right now. Adoree Jackson at 18 is that reach we've been waiting for.

That Titanic reach we've been waiting for, in fact.

Just now, JoeyFlex5 said:

maybe this means we have it in good faith that one of tim williams, carl lawson, takk mckinley, charles harris, or tyus bowser are there at 47?

I think the only thing it means is that we liked Humphrey the best.

1 minute ago, GrimCoconut said:

Yeah, you said he'd be a good pick.  I have gone back and forth on Humphrey.  I didn't like what I saw in him against Clemson but he's got talent and he tests well athletically.  

The hoi poloi here hates the pick, so that means it was probably a good decision.

I was kinda hoping for Howard, but if Humphrey pans out as hoped that'll be huge for the secondary. I'm not sure what to think overall.

1 minute ago, GrimCoconut said:

That was a gut punch.

I was going to use a different word. Same sentiment though.

Just now, rmw10 said:

QB is different because you can't get both guys on the field.  You can easily gets 3 safeties.

Plus the Packers have more than two years of Rodgers still.

1 minute ago, JO_75 said:

Have to echo what NFL Network was saying.. 

Colts - Luck

Titans - Mariota

Texans - Watson

The AFC South is building up a young solid core of QBs. Oh by the way...... we play the AFC South this year. So of course the AFC South gets better when we play them.

The Texans getting a rookie QB doesn't make our schedule that much tougher.

Just now, Grapple Raven said:

Watson seems pretty happy with where he landed.

Or where he didn't land.

Just now, ravefan52 said:

This is really interesting we're gonna get a great player 16... or Ozzie will trade back

I kinda hope we just take someone. Not much point getting cute with the picks imo.

Just now, Adreme said:

I wasnt talking about Webb.  Webb was a very good safety but you are forgetting about Jefferson and as "old" as Weddle was he was the top safety in the NFL last year.  Even if he starts showing his age now thats still 2 more full seasons before Hooker catches up to him and Jefferson is in his prime.

It takes time for DBs to reach their potential. You take the BPA regardless of position. Ignoring the best player (Hooker) just because you've got two years (at best) of Weddle is how you get a S crisis down the line.

1 minute ago, rmw10 said:

You do realize Webb is likely a 1 year deal and Weddle isn't exactly young, right?  You don't draft based on 2017 only.

That's a lesson that seems lost on some here. 

3 hours ago, allblackraven said:

buahahaha

buahahaha