Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 12/19/2019 in Posts

  1. 6 points
  2. 6 points
  3. 5 points
    I find it deliciously ironic that cal holds professional athletes and coaches to a high moral standard that his Captain BoneSpurs would laughably come short at.
  4. 5 points
    Um, IIRC Haslam inherited Pilot from his dad. Sure looks like Jimmy is following the Jerry Jones model of ownership. Who knows, but maybe the blind squirrel can pull a Jimmy Johnson out of his ass this time. But as of now I have no confidence whatsoever he's capable of it.
  5. 5 points
  6. 5 points
    http://www.clevsworld.com/2019/12/the-browns-2019-failures-rest-most.html?m=1 WSS
  7. 5 points
    Yeah you got your wish, be prepard for a step back. Who wants to come here to be GM or coach when you get the axe after a year or two. This team is probably a good HC away from being a playoff team. But now you bring in a new GM who wants his guys. They always want THEIR guys. Players brought in by Dorsey. Landry Ward OBJ Randall Greedy Chubb Wilson Baker Vernon Hunt Richardson Thats a pretty good group of folks in just 2 years. No GM since the Browns cames back in '99 has brought in as much talent. Yes, the Austin Corbett pick was a bust, so what. You bring in the talent above you get to have a mulligan every once in a while. And guess what else this means, we might lose Wolf and Highsmith who are pretty good guys in their own right. This move reeks of stupidity and incompetence. I have no problem canning a GM, I was for Sashi, Farmer and others getting shown the door because they were incompetent at their job. Dorsey is not incompetent. The Haslams want instant gratification and results or they blow crap up. That can't be they way you run your organization. If the Haslams really believe the team is close, then change the HC and keep everything else in place. Best option here is just sell the team to someone who can better run things, I don't doubt the Haslams desires to win, I doubt their mental competence to do so.
  8. 5 points
  9. 5 points
  10. 5 points
    PS just checking- and it's almost time to give NIck Chubb props for taking the league rushing title. After today- both Henry and McCaffery ( the only ones with a shot to catch him) will have to out gain Nick by almost 100 yards this coming Sunday to catch him.
  11. 5 points
    "We need to impeach or he'll get re-elected". "We need to find something to impeach him for" "Impeach the fucker" Statement like these said openly by democrats. If you people can't see through this charade, or refuse to then you are the problem... you know who you are. Trump isn't dividing the country, you are. During this impeachment show trial the dems have subverted the Constitution as they go around openly touting that impeaching Trump is necessary to save it. … riiiight "save the Constitution" when it is convenient for them. How fucking nauseating... These people are not only after Trump, they are after us, we the people who elected him. We deplorables need taught a lesson never to pull a stunt like that again. You favor impeachment for no other reason other than you hate the man. You cheapened it to the point of it being nothing more than administrative coup. You have set a precedent. Don't like him, impeach him. We could have impeached Obama 10 times over. I hop[e this stunt backfires so badly the dem party becomes extinct.
  12. 5 points
    Are you for real? Because we all agree on a topic and there are no imbeciles anymore to deal with doesn't constitute "falling off a cliff". Funny how your narcissism causes you to implicate yourself in this way.
  13. 4 points
    Why? Besides random luck. The blind squirrel finding a nut. The eggbeater splattering it straight occasionally. Why? How 'bout the search committee? Jimmy & Dee Haslam. Two non-football people who are constantly screwing up. They even screwed up the uniforms. Jimmy's son in-law? JW SomethingOrOther. A non football person. Quote - has a bachelor’s degree in broadcast journalism and communications from the University of Mississippi in Oxford. (their Son in-law! That's whose part of the search committee!) lol Chris Cooper. Quote - Before joining the Browns, Cooper served six seasons with NFL headquarters in New York, where he aided the league’s management council in a variety of capacities from 2008-14. He also spent time with the Minnesota Vikings as a law clerk in 2008.....received his bachelor’s degree in sociology from Virginia before securing his JD degree from Brooklyn Law School. (Yup.....THIS GUY) DePodesta. Basically another non-football guy. A number crunching analytics guy whom they never listen to......and HE'S probably our BEST HOPE! and finally, the ever popular...Quote - and various other people in the organization who have had the opportunity to meet and deal with the candidates,” Haslam said. (perhaps the intern who picks up the candidate at the airport) .....as Adam The Bull said on the radio yesterday - I'd have more faith in me, you and Dustin Fox picking the HC & GM. (said something of that nature - basically insinuating that he'd have more faith in a handful of random people as the search committee) --------------------------- HOW'S ALL OF THAT SOUND TO YA --- Give ya the warm fuzzies like it does me? On another note: the other day, one of the 'experts' that 92 The Fan radio calls for inside information and opinions reported that everybody he's ever talked to, past Browns exec's, coaches, etc. and others connected to the Browns have told him that Haslam is a major meddler. Constantly meddling in the football operations on all kinds of levels. (and yet Haslam expects everyone to believe that he had no idea that his Pilot J company had been robbing customers for many years) Let's face the cold, hard truth here. We, as Browns fans, are basically screwed until the Haslam family is removed from ownership of the team. And on that front there seems to be NO light at the end of the tunnel. - We have a meddling blind squirrel running the organization.........
  14. 4 points
  15. 4 points
    Put the crack pipe down sonny.
  16. 4 points
  17. 4 points
    He's neither entertaining nor edgy - he's just an annoying asshole with zero to add to any conversation. He's basically a racist with the sex appeal of a school bus fire.
  18. 4 points
  19. 4 points
    If the Browns were a house, with the Haslams building it since they took over, it would have seven kitchens, zero bathrooms, three bedrooms with no closets and a basement with no staircase to the main floor.
  20. 4 points
    Looks like 11-5 to me...
  21. 4 points
    The kid set the rookie season TD record in less than a full season last year, so calling him trash is a stretch. Bad coaching, coupled with a shoddy o line makes for a long season for any QB.
  22. 4 points
  23. 4 points
    Generally I do not participate on this forum, because, quite frankly, I would generally expect to be compensated for my consultations on political matters; but here is something for free. I generally try to be straight forward here, non partisan, with the information and speculations that I exposit here. Reprinted from another forum: Here are some factors you may all want to be aware of respecting this impeachment matter:, and where and why it may go from here: A. In essence, the impeachment action taken is not really distinct from any other action the House has taken up and moved on, be it a bill on health care, or a bill on making a day national goof off day, or national peanut butter day. In other words, there are NO time requirements to send it to the Senate any more than those other actions have time requirements. (other than see below near the end) The only types of bills that have time requirements are budgetary and appropriation bills, because those bills provide spending authorization to operate the government. B. Because impeachment is a political proceeding, it is not subject to other procedures that apply in criminal procedures. That is the reason that, in this case, people have been able to resist subpoenas to testify. In a criminal trial if a person refuses a subpoena, the Judge in a case can have that witness forced marched into court. Obviously we have seen that that does not happen here. The pertinent issue in this regard about this at this point in the proceeding is that impeachment, a political, non-criminal procedure, does not enjoy the protections of the 6th Amendments "speedy trial" provisions. There is nothing in the constitution that requires the trial in the Senate to be held at any particular point. There is nothing that requires the Speaker of the House to send the impeachment bill to the Senate at any particular point. So, she is exercising her power here....just like the President and the Senate exercise their powers. If you were at all familiar with the federal criminal process, you would be aware that often those trials do not get held for nearly a year or more after indictments. Example, on a related front: Paul Manafort was charged in October 2017...but his case did not go to trial until August 2018. C. Pelosi could in fact be using the same tactics that Mitch McConnell has taken so often: delaying matters in order to get a strategic advantage over a particular issue. McConnell we know sat on the Garland Merrick nomination for 10 months from March 2016 until January 2017...knowing the nomination would expire; and we know that he is sitting on like 250-300 bills that have passed the House that are awaiting action on the Senate floor but which he will not bring to a vote. Pelosi could say (and maybe she is saying) "Mr. McConnell, you need to treat whatever we send you with equal priority. You there in the Senate have so much other work to do with all those bills sitting there, that you need to pay attention and act on those before we can possibly send these very time consuming Articles of Impeachment to you for adjudication. Do your work on all that stuff that is very important to the people of America before you tackle this very important matter. " D. Then there are a couple of other issues: 1. It is NOT beyond the realm of possibility that they could hold up sending this to the Senate in the event they believe that it may be in order to augment the action with additional articles of impeachment. After all Giuliani is still taking trips to Ukraine trying to do more of whatever it is he thinks he is doing at the authorization of the President (so he claims) ...so who knows what additional allegations could be perceived to be necessary and forthcoming. Unless and until Trump decides to put a muzzle on Giuliani , they may want to hold things up. And who knows what else could be going on. It is also possible that they may want to hold impeachment over his head as a deterrence...to what they perceive as Trump's continued corrupt behavior. We ALL know that this Senate will not convict him, so one strategic view is to not allow him to be emboldened, thinking that since he beat impeachment he is allowed to do anything he wants and get away with it...at least as long as they can.2. Then there is the "election" issue. Do the Dems think that holding up the impeachment trial...to drag it on into the 2020 election season would somehow be advantageous to them? They would have to weigh that possibility against some feelings for Trump that he is being unduly put through the grinder over this impeachment and that it should have been dealt with much more swiftly. I don't have any answers to these questions, they are all so speculative. The only thing I believe must happen is that the articles of impeachment must be brought to the Senate before the end of this Congressional term, which ends on Dec. 31, 2020. So, in theory, we could be in for a long run here.
  24. 4 points
    In the past 2 weeks all the teams the Browns needed to lose, did lose But, of course, the Browns went full blown Brownsian, and lost both games.
  25. 4 points
    Stop giving this hack the site hits.
This leaderboard is set to New York/GMT-05:00
×