SportsAndLady;1870360 wrote:Uh no dumbass. I argued with you because you said the browns have 11 winnable games.

Well, technically they are winnable for someone....just probably not the Browns.

like_that;1870174 wrote:1. I don't give a fuck if the Browns tank.

How would you know if they did?

kizer permanente;1870371 wrote:Yes I'm butthurt because the least knowledgeable football fan on here disagrees with me lol. And you're in his camp here like_that. Good company :RpS_blink:

My stance hasn't changed. 11 winnable games is a dumbass thought.

SportsAndLady;1870373 wrote:Anyway, ignoring the dumbass...

http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2017/09/myles_garretts_ankle_injury_co.html

That fucking sucks.

I don't even react to such things anymore.

like_that;1870376 wrote:My stance hasn't changed. 11 winnable games is a dumbass thought.

I don't even react to such things anymore.

We've been thru this earlier on the thread. You can't seem to grasp a bunch of shitty teams play each other this year. I can't help you.

kizer permanente;1870377 wrote:We've been thru this earlier on the thread. You can't seem to grasp a bunch of shitty teams play each other this year. I can't help you.

I perfectly understand, and yet 11 winnable games is still fucking stupid.

No what would be fucking stupid is asserting a statement that there aren't 11 winnable games, but "feeling good about the Steelers in week 1" and "Browns by 6". Because, and I assure you, the Steelers... let alone in week 1.. aint one of our 11 easiest games. Now I know it's unfair to saddle you with his quote, but you do chime in in defense of the idiot every time. So I have no choice but to stick you in there with him.

Ill now await the comeback from the walking contradiction that is S&l. I'm sure it will be worth waiting for.

Thavoice getting butthurt because someone predicted a win against his Steelers. Lulz

Thavoice is a ND fan, and how strangely coincidental that a "new" poster shows up who's a huge Kiser fan (and knows all the members of the forum and it's history).

Congrats on reaching Quaker status by being shown how dumb you are and claiming the other person is just butthurt.

For future reference, don't argue with people when you have no clue what you're talking about. Don't say we don't have many winnable games then predict a win over the best team we play. It's very very stupid.

You guys are in midseason form already.

As for winnable games: Bengals (x2), Baltimore at home, Jets at home, at Detroit, Jacksonville at home, at Chicago.

I'm not sure about Pittsburgh and Tennesse at home so we'll split it and count one of them.

So I'd say eight winnable games.

kizer permanente;1870418 wrote:Congrats on reaching Quaker status by being shown how dumb you are and claiming the other person is just butthurt.

For future reference, don't argue with people when you have no clue what you're talking about. Don't say we don't have many winnable games then predict a win over the best team we play. It's very very stupid.

Congrats on proving S&L's point. Care to dispute anything he said in the last post? How do you know this site's entire history, yet you are somehow a new poster?

like_that;1870424 wrote:Congrats on proving S&L's point. Care to dispute anything he said in the last post? How do you know this site's entire history, yet you are somehow a new poster?

What exactly do you want me to dispute? And more importantly, do you care to dispute he's an idiot? I notice you avoid that point like the plague. You're quick to jump on what everyone says here. it's your shtick.. but for whatever reason, you leave S&L alone at all costs. Very strange.

But I'll play your little game... you think I'm thavoice...you've come up with this b/c.. you're a really smart person? S&L has parroted the idea like the mindless drone he is. You two both seem to be very sure of yourselves. So if I am, I'll delete this SN and thavoice and you 2 can continue your ill-informed circle jerk you like to play. If I'm not, you guys delete your SN's. Sound good?

friendfromlowry;1870421 wrote:You guys are in midseason form already.

As for winnable games: Bengals (x2), Baltimore at home, Jets at home, at Detroit, Jacksonville at home, at Chicago.

I'm not sure about Pittsburgh and Tennesse at home so we'll split it and count one of them.

So I'd say eight winnable games.

Here's my reference post.. http://www.ohiochatter.com/forum/showthread.php?48435-2017-Browns-Off-Season-Thread&p=1868854&viewfull=1#post1868854

I agree generally with you except Pitt and Tenn. Pitt is the best team on our schedule so they'd be the biggest stretch. Technically every game should be "winnable" and def more fun to watch this year. Luckily we have a pretty easy schedule for Kizer to get his feet wet. Hoping Garrett isn't too serious as that will be a big blow to the defense. He was making an impact already. Regardless, it should be a lot better season than lately. We probably don't win much, but we should be in most games and they should be fairly entertaining. Can't really ask for more than that.

SportsAndLady;1870417 wrote:Thavoice is a ND fan, and how strangely coincidental that a "new" poster shows up who's a huge Kiser fan (and knows all the members of the forum and it's history).

I don't know how you ever came up with myself being a Notre Dame fan.

Far from it. I would consider myself a Hoosier fan so there isn't much to root for come CFB season and I am not one to root for one college in basketball and then another college in some other sport.

All things being considered though, I think the Browns to surprise a number of people this year.

Also, I only have one user name on here as I know some have hinted and insinuated that I have a few of them.

You give me too much credit, I am not smart enough to create more than one persona's on the site.


As for the week 1 matchup with the browns and steelers. I think with it being in Cleveland they give them a dogfight and I will not be surprised one bit if they beat Pittsburgh.

I am just hoping they show the game on camp here on sunday. It will be like Sunday Night Football for me here!

kizer permanente;1870426 wrote:What exactly do you want me to dispute? And more importantly, do you care to dispute he's an idiot? I notice you avoid that point like the plague. You're quick to jump on what everyone says here. it's your shtick.. but for whatever reason, you leave S&L alone at all costs. Very strange.

But I'll play your little game... you think I'm thavoice...you've come up with this b/c.. you're a really smart person? S&L has parroted the idea like the mindless drone he is. You two both seem to be very sure of yourselves. So if I am, I'll delete this SN and thavoice and you 2 can continue your ill-informed circle jerk you like to play. If I'm not, you guys delete your SN's. Sound good?

S&L is a big boy he can handle you alone. It doesn't change the fact your 11 winnable games comment was idiotic.

Quit deflecting and answer the question. How are you so in tune with this site's history?

like_that;1870432 wrote:S&L is a big boy he can handle you alone. It doesn't change the fact your 11 winnable games comment was idiotic.

Quit deflecting and answer the question. How are you so in tune with this site's history?

He very well could be a big boy. He also says idiotic shit that contradicts himself. Which is the point. It's just odd how you love to call everyone out for what they say but give his idiotic shit a free pass. Very strange behavior.

let me quote myself since you apparently missed it.

kizer permanente;1870426 wrote:
But I'll play your little game... you think I'm thavoice...you've come up with this b/c.. you're a really smart person? S&L has parroted the idea like the mindless drone he is. You two both seem to be very sure of yourselves. So if I am, I'll delete this SN and thavoice and you 2 can continue your ill-informed circle jerk you like to play. If I'm not, you guys delete your SN's. Sound good?

I"ll be waiting for you to accept.
ps.. i know you're way too chicken shit to ever accept that.. its ok.

friendfromlowry;1870421 wrote:You guys are in midseason form already.

As for winnable games: Bengals (x2), Baltimore at home, Jets at home, at Detroit, Jacksonville at home, at Chicago.

I'm not sure about Pittsburgh and Tennesse at home so we'll split it and count one of them.

So I'd say eight winnable games.

Add Indianapolis. Will Luck even be ready by then?

Should know later this morning on Garrett. FWIW, Cleveland.com is reporting the Browns think it "could be serious" and he "could miss 4 weeks, or more." It's the Cleveland media so........

BR1986FB;1870436 wrote:Add Indianapolis. Will Luck even be ready by then?

Yeah I had a Luck-less Indianapolis too. Tennessee isn't great, but Mariota is good and has enough around him that they should be able to beat us without too much worry.

The only teams I see that shouldn't worry about us are Pitt (2 games) Tennessee, Packers, and Vikings. The rest of them just aren't that good. Some are even worse than us.

New to this site yet says I've been saying dumb shit forever. Lol. Okay thavoice.

But anyways, I'm done with that talk.

I stick to my bold prediction that we upset Pittsburgh Sunday. Gonna hurt if Garrett is out, though. If kizer limits his mistakes and the defense can keep AB and bell from breaking long plays, I think we could squeek this out.

SportsAndLady;1870439 wrote:New to this site yet says I've been saying dumb shit forever. Lol. Okay thavoice.

But anyways, I'm done with that talk.

I stick to my bold prediction that we upset Pittsburgh Sunday. Gonna hurt if Garrett is out, though. If kizer limits his mistakes and the defense can keep AB and bell from breaking long plays, I think we could squeek this out.

Bell just signed his tender, didn't he? Will he play on Sunday?

I will say that if the Browns can pull this one out of their ass Sunday, this town will be on fire.

kizer permanente;1870438 wrote:Yeah I had a Luck-less Indianapolis too. Tennessee isn't great, but Mariota is good and has enough around him that they should be able to beat us without too much worry.

The only teams I see that shouldn't worry about us are Pitt (2 games) Tennessee, Packers, and Vikings. The rest of them just aren't that good. Some are even worse than us.

Vikings aren't a lock, to me. Bradford doesn't impress me at all.

SportsAndLady;1870439 wrote:New to this site yet says I've been saying dumb shit forever. Lol. Okay thavoice.

But anyways, I'm done with that talk.

I stick to my bold prediction that we upset Pittsburgh Sunday. Gonna hurt if Garrett is out, though. If kizer limits his mistakes and the defense can keep AB and bell from breaking long plays, I think we could squeek this out.

Well obviously he has to be a different user with multiple names and not myself.

Funny how smart you believe you are yet so far off in this instance but you go ahead and believe whatever you want. Why don't you get your gestapo together and look at IP addresses. I am not a betting man, but I bet they don't match.



As far as this game, Bell did sign his tender and reports are he will play sparingly.

I call BS on that. He will play a lot but likely will be ineffective. You cannot just miss all of camp and the preseason and sign 10 days before and expect to make a great impact on the game.

BR1986FB;1870441 wrote:Vikings aren't a lock, to me. Bradford doesn't impress me at all.

No they definitely aren't a lock. Bradford's still pretty decent though. And their defense is still good. Line issues are what's hurting them right now.

kizer permanente;1870435 wrote:He very well could be a big boy. He also says idiotic shit that contradicts himself. Which is the point. It's just odd how you love to call everyone out for what they say but give his idiotic shit a free pass. Very strange behavior.

let me quote myself since you apparently missed it.



I"ll be waiting for you to accept.
ps.. i know you're way too chicken shit to ever accept that.. its ok.

I am not 100% sure you are thavoice, but you sure as hell aren't a new poster. It does seem odd, that you have the same posting style as thavoice, and he conveniently appears when we are having this discussion... There is no way to 100% prove you are thavoice, but you check many boxes. There are definetely plenty of ways to hide the fact you are a specific username and deny it. I do know for a fact you aren't a new poster.

Why are you too chicken shit to answer a simple question? How are you so in tune with OC, if you are a new poster? I'll be waiting for you to answer that simple question, but we all know you are full of shit. Also, I would like to remind you again thavoice or not, you are a moron for saying the Browns have 11 winnable games.