ryanbabs
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 5,565
- Reaction score
- 5,435
I think they already do, TBH...It would be awesome if this guy somehow recovers to his previous form and solidifies our line. The rest of the league would hate us.
I think they already do, TBH...It would be awesome if this guy somehow recovers to his previous form and solidifies our line. The rest of the league would hate us.
Pardon me, but you used "that guy," and I think you must have meant "one of those guys."
And I don't apologize for telling "everyone what I think" is the "proper amount of optimism"... key word being think. That's different from "everyone what definitively is." by the way. Right? There's an important difference. You, me, everyone can say what we think, and that should be alright... right?
Then, you step over the line in making the accusation that I indicated what you should be "allowed" to feel. You can't find that in anything I said because it's just not there. I have boundaries in how I interact with posters on internet boards, and that's one of them. I may state my opinion in a strong way using as much substance as I can find to support my point... but that (again) is different than asserting myself as god of the board that others must bow down to... as-if.
Just want to be clear on those things. Hope we're all good going forward. You aren't ignorant, and neither am I, at least where our reasoning concerns this discussion.
When you're telling me "There's reason for optimism. But not the degree of optimism you seem to be conveying" - your exact words above - that's exactly what you're doing. Maybe it was unintentional, but that was the message conveyed.
I don't want to belabor the point, particularly b/c I think you've otherwise met me halfway and we're good. But for the record, I was stating what I think when I wrote "there's reason for optimism but not the degree of optimism you seem to be conveying." You were/are not told to not offer an opposing perspective (... apologies for the double negative, but it seems to better convey the point). Now, I suppose I could have added the words, "in my opinion" just to be clear, but I do already do that with some regularity in my posts, and I'd like to not have to end every thought posted with that phrase if I could just be afforded that inherent assumption. I'm just not "one of those guys" who feels it important to claim omniscience, but rather am content with my human-ness.
And hope they hate us more after we win the Super Bowl this Year !!!lol. The rest of the league already hates us!!
And hope they hate us more after we win the Super Bowl this Year !!!
The Cooper signing is a great example of option theory. Assuming he is with the team next year, the Cowboys have numerous options to high-grade the RT position and (seamlessly) back-filling for Leary if he is not resigned.I would rather pay Leary than Free........Leary may take less to stay especially since his knee situation is explosive......if DAL can get him for 5m a year for 3 years they have the room
That may mean they have to use Collins at RT or trade him to someone for a RT..... I also think CGreen can handle the job with a guy like Cleary as backup......if Cooper works out thats even better
Its just too much money to spend on the oline. He could very well get 8 to 10 million a year. You cant spend 40 million a year on the oline. Would you rather Leary over Martin?
No Zach Martin?The big 3
Collins
Green
Cooper
Looney
Cleary
That's your OL next year
No Zach Martin?
Sorry, folks...I never did buy into a label for Jerry as baboso...
Ah, gotcha.He's one of the big 3 (Tyron, Fred, Zack)