EastCoastNiner

That's right, I mixed them up. I don't know why I was thinking Lackey. In regards to Bedard, that's a stupid case. The bitch wants more money because he's making more money now. Child support laws in this country are completely messed up, and it has nothing to do with him being on the Red Sox. Scum would be a stupid bitch trying to gold dig, and I was obviously being sarcastic with that comment.

I have no clue how I'm in first. . I'm going to continues picking against the Saints, Jets, and Packers, and keep picking the Patriots and 49er's this season, but that may come back to bite me, as it hurt me this week.

I am interested in the following players if the price is right: Ochocinco Branch Chris Johnson ( :glasses: ) Roy Williams I really want an upgrade at WR/HB, so if you have one of those players, or another player you think I may have interest in, let me know!

I had the link of the New York douche-bag from a few days ago that served Lackey with the divorce papers before the game intentionally, and was bragging about it on his Twitter, but I can't find the link right now. Typical New York scum. . Also, where are you reading that Lackey is the one divorcing his wife, and not her divorcing him? Everything I've seen says that his wife is the one serving him with the papers, like I said in the first paragraph.

I can read what he wrote. He said Johnson was better then, and Peterson is now as his final answers. Those "opinions" on who who thought was better with everything factored in was in the last line of both of those posts. It's cute that you like to try and find me on AIM though. .

Stop being a moron. It's not worth arguing with you. You avoided my questions because you would be proven wrong as usual. It's pretty simple. He said C.J. was better then, and now Peterson is better now. His opinion on who the better HB is, like this thread is supposed to be about, has changed. Not, who the better HB is factoring in fumbles, which is already part of an HB's skillset or lack thereof.

On which HB is better? It certainly did. I love how you always try and twist words for your benefit.

I'm arguing about who he said the better HB is, not who he said the better HB is minus this and minus that. Dolt.

Thanks for IM'ing me a minute ago.

1. Yes 2. Yes I haven't denied his stance on that at all. However, you keep using the "if he doesn't fumble" line (that Fish did say). However, those weren't his FINAL answers to each question. You know it, I know it.

That's good. Why can't you answer the question? 1. I have never denied his stance that Johnson was/is the better HB as long as Peterson has fumbling problems. 2. His final answer changed from the beginning of the thread until now on which back is better. You keep throwing "ifs" in there. I know what he stated. I honestly feel bad for Phightins that he has to go to a game with you........I think I would go absolutely crazy, but if you're going to the Giants game in Foxboro this year, let me know, so I can teach you something about football. :glasses: .

There you go again. I stated towards the beginning of this argument that WITHOUT qualifiers, such as fumbled, his opinion has changed. You're arguing something I'm not even arguing about. I never denied his stance. I'm going to make this very simple for you. Use just yes and no for these questions, like I asked earlier. His opinion on who the better HB did change because it's written out for you. 1. Was his final opinion/answer early in the thread that Johnson was the better HB? 2. Did he say in his post the other day that Peterson is now better? 3. Are Chris Johnson and Adrian Peterson the same person?

Good thing I that's not what I'm arguing. I never denied his stance on that. As I stated multiple time (Do I need to quote shit again for you?) that he said C.J. was the better back then, and now Peterson is. His opinion on who the better player is has changed. Elementary 101.

Do I need to spell it out for you?

DID HE SAY JOHNSON WAS BETTER THAN? YES DID HE JUST SAY PETERSON WAS BETTER NOW? YES HAS HIS OPINION CHANGED? YES, OBVIOUSLY. Does he still believe that if Peterson had fumbling problems that Johnson would be better? Yes, most likely from what he's written. You're trying to argue over the semantics of the word "opinion", yet you're [expletive]ing wrong as usual. You are seriously [expletive]ing retarded. His opinion obviously [expletive]ing changed. He can say it didn't, but last time I checked, Johnson plays for the Titans and Peterson plays for the Vikings. They're not the same person.

There you go. Now move along. I've never denied he would take Johnson with Peterson's fumbling problems. All I have maintained is that he did in fact say Chris Johnson was the better HB at the time, the player he picked. NOW, he has chosen Peterson. Two different players, two different answers. This is a dumb argument to have anyways, yet you always want to stir up the pot. This was a simple thread about a comparison of the two players, the only thread with both of their names in the title on this site. It's not that complicated.

No, I'm pretty sure it was a two part bet. I'll find the thread in a minute.

His opinion on who the better HB is has certainly changed .You can fight tooth and nail about opinion/answer, but it's pretty black and white.

There we go. I said WITHOUT qualifiers, such as fumbles. I said that multiple times. Your opinion was Chris Johnson is better because Peterson had fumbling problems at the time. And, as you stated, at that time, you believed he was better. Now, that Peterson has fixed those problems, you believe he is better than Johnson. It's pretty black and white. At the time, you believed Chris Johnson was better (which is fine), and now you believe Peterson is better. Your opinion/answer changed. It's pretty simple.

No shit? I'm saying these were the critical mistakes that game.

Yes, I know that is what you're saying. All I'm saying is it's pretty simple what you said. I'm not calling you out, but trying to have iwill stop being an idiot.. Back then: You picked Chris Johnson Now: You pick Adrian Peterson I don't even care who you think is better, but I'm just saying that is what your opinion/answer was, which he doesn't seem to understand. I'm very aware the knock on Peterson for you was fumbling, and that you actually liked (don't know if you still do) MJD as your #1 HB. I just don't like how he's trying to twist words and stuff.

How is Seymour doing? I hear he's doing well, and I miss his ass. .

I feel bad for Painter.

Ochocinco needs to get his shit together. I'm not looking forward to playing Oakland next week, especially after today. After some time to think about this pathetic display, there are a few plays that really screwed the Patriots. 1. The INT that went off Woodhead at the end of the first half when the Patriots were up 21-7. It was on a first down as well like each of his four INT's, and that could have made the game either 28-7 or 24-7, but instead turned into 21-10. Big change in momentum there. 2. I forget who made the INT, and I think it was Barret for the Patriots, but there was a PI call on that play. That sucked because I guess it was PI, but even without the PI, the INT would have happened. 3. Ochocinco dropping the long pass that would have been a TD. Although the Patriots scored a few minutes later, that time off the clock eventually cost them the game. 4. If Brady placed the throw that was picked off headed to Gronkowski a little better, the game would have been over. That's the only INT that I can place completely on him. Anyways, the defense sucked today, yet again. I think they still have a lot of potential if Haynesworth can stay on the field, and the team can finally gel. It doesn't help that Haynesworth, Chung, Dowling, and some others were out today either.

I did......... .