Inqui

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.

As Johnny Manziel would say, drop me a line.

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

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).

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.

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.

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.

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

That Vikings pick is a gut punch right there.

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

Please refrain from naming players before they're picked.

Not with Kizer as their guy.

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.

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

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

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.

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

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

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

Or where he didn't land.

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

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.

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

buahahaha