I say we go in and win 35-3. Then we can get the win, cover the spread and let the Jags say they've held to us to less points than any other team has so far.
I say we go in and win 35-3. Then we can get the win, cover the spread and let the Jags say they've held to us to less points than any other team has so far.
It was the Spurs resting starters, not the Heat. I had no problem with the Spurs doing it though, because it's a long season and one game is insignificant. But NFL fans only get 8 home games, and it would be absolutely cheating the fans who paid big money to see the game to not even play Manning. Now if a team does it in week 17 I have no problem with it, because fans know they run that risk in going to a week 17 game. But if they are going to a week 6 game, I think they expect to see the best players on the field. I would be pissed if that was my one game of the year I spent big bucks to go see and Peyton wasn't playing.
OOOpzzz .. right the Spurs lol ... thanks
Oh, valid point. I thought you meant all starters, you should take the time to be more descriptive, don't be shy. —Jaded
Never confuse frustrated candor and disloyal malice.
Love can't be coerced. —Me
Man, I hope the team isn't taking this game as light as the fans are.
“If there are no animals in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went.” - Will Rogers (paraphrased)
(the previous comment was not directed at any particular individual and was not intended to slander,disrespect or offend any reader of said statement)
Exactly what kind of a message would that send to the rest of the teams if we would sit Manning? The only way it might work is come up with a lame injury he has. I think it is a terrible idea.
Thanks to MasterShake for my great signature
Rest in Peace - Demaryius (88) - Darrent (27) - Damien (29) - Kenny (11)#7 - JOHN - #44 - FLOYD - #80 - ROD
THIS ONES FOR JOHNWOULD YOU RATHER WIN UGLY, OR LOSE PRETTY?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)