Originally Posted by BroncoBuff:
Wow, look who's talking here. Right now there are serious and respected observers questioning what's up with strange calls going to the Chiefs. You must know that. If anything is going on, I do not believe the team has anything to do with it. But PI calls and misses are the most questionable because they can't be reviewed.
And Mahomes with those histrionics last year on the sidelines ... He actually said "You're supposed to warn us!"
Oh man, that is bad, REALLY bad. Game officials have no duty to warn about anything. I suppose they they might casually say "you guys watch your step" or whatever, but there's nothing even close to a requirement.
I wish you hadn't brought that up cuz now I'm going to take tons more incoming. But that's just the way things are right now.... I will admit that the holding call in the Philly Super Bowl - technically was holding, but that was your classic example of a moment where you let the players decide it on the field.
Welcome to 1997, 1998, 2013, and 2015 Donkeys-style football being orchestrated on a league-wide scale in the current and modern day. [Reply]
Yeah, I suppose that's me ... I'm sure that's what Taco John will tell you.
I understand he posts here now, is he making friends and influencing people?
Woah that’s incredible!
Taco has been a DC-only poster for a decade+. Probably longer, to be honest. If you talk to him there, he’s got the world 100% figured out. No room for gray areas or nuance. I will say that he does have a few friends over there. [Reply]
Yes, common draft and decent TV revenue in the AFL'S 8th year, I said that dempsey.
RaidersCellar, just this guy brdempsey, maybe just on this and the last page, more and more pungent vitriol than I think I see in a good chunk of time on the Orange Huddle's chiefs thread ... Seriously.
Honestly, do not remember a single accusation of referee favoritism in those years. [Reply]
Originally Posted by BroncoBuff:
(A)Yes, common draft and decent TV revenue in the AFL'S 8th year, I said that dempsey.
(B)RaidersCellar, just this guy brdempsey, maybe just on this and the last page, more and more pungent vitriol than I think I see in a good chunk of time on the Orange Huddle's chiefs thread ... Seriously
(A) The TV revenue came in year SIX (1965)..............try again.
(B) GOOD....then let's continue by all means. I'm not to blame for you coming here and continually spewing your false narratives, nor your little fee-fees being hurt because you can't stomach the truth and reality.......that falls squarely on YOU.
Go take your Donkey doo-doo posting to a Donks fan site where you and all the other Donks fans can be totally happy feeding one another bales of hay filled with Donkey doo-doo (which is essentially what you're trying to do here, but as jjChief pointed out, nobody here is buying what you are trying to sell). [Reply]
Originally Posted by RaidersOftheCellar:
More teams makes the road automatically tougher? As if they have to play them all?
Sure, it's simple math ... Take the new College super conferences as examples: Do you think it'll be harder for Ohio State to win the national championship with UCLA, USC, Oregon and Washington in the Big Ten now? Of course it will, LOTS harder. MUCH more likely they're going to get dinged along the way, complicating their chances to get into the playoff (notwithstanding the larger field now).
Would it be easier if those schools hadn't joined, and Penn State, Iowa, Michigan State and Nebraska left? Damn right it would.
Originally Posted by :
Btw, you don't want to compare roads. Imagine if the best team standing in Mahomes' way was a team QB'd by Bernie Kosar. He'd never miss the Super Bowl.
Originally Posted by BroncoBuff:
Sure, it's simple math ... more teams there are, the more chances one or more will be better than you.
Take the new College super conferences as examples: Do you think it'll be harder for Ohio State to win the national championship with UCLA, USC, Oregon and Washington in the Big Ten now? Of course it will, LOTS harder.
Would it be easier if they hadn't joined, and Penn State, Iowa, Michigan State and Nebraska left? Damn right it would.
League expansion dilutes competition and creates parity.
Every single player on those Len Dawson teams was really good. Since then, not so much. [Reply]
Originally Posted by BroncoBuff:
I see your point, but I disagree, at least for myself. I am definitely NOT obsessed. I wasn't even po'd about our long losing streak to you - I didn't like it, but if we're not going to the playoffs, I want a good draft pick. If we popped up and upset you a couple times, we wouldn't have Patrick Surtain.
We have a couple of chiefs trolls over there now (Zerovoltz, RockyMountainOyster), and there have been some heated talk, but honestly, nothing like what I've experienced in here the past few days. And I'm not even a flamethrower.
I saw that thread as comedy until Mahomes showed up, that's when everything changed. I'm not a Mahomes hater or any of that - I definitely hope we kick your ass in a couple weeks, but I'm not in denial about young Patrick. In fact when my cousin visited a couple months ago, we sat down with cigars on the patio and talked about our Top 10 lists, like all red-blooded American men do. I had to acknowledge that young Patrick had leap-frogged #18 into 3rd on my all-time QB list. If you think that was easy you're crazy.
Jealousy? The last five years maybe, not before that. C'mon. That 48 years I been pointing out, that's no joke.
�� ... I am not in denial, my friend. I know what's up. We've had some pretty good success this millennium, but we don't compare at ALL to the crayon-red-clad native Americans ��
Yes they do count, that was part of the merger agreement. But there are very very few that ever pop up.
Again, believe it or not, I am not obsessed. I was trying to make a point ... I wish I'd never said "minor league". My point was for the first 7 years the only care the AFL had was surviving to press the issue of merger. As the franchise most cash-poor in the bank and piss poor on the field, I can accurately point to our top priority of survival as making our on-field performance unfair to be judged at this late a date. Especially with a silly record like 1-19 vs a wealthy team.
When I said "you're" obsessed, I meant collectively. It'd be hard to deny that Denver fans are very obsessed with KC/Mahomes, to the point of blaming officiating for every win and rooting for injuries to Mahomes. Then again, they're not alone. Most fanbases are obsessed with KC these days.
Denver fans have been jealous for at least 7 seasons, beginning with Mahomes blasting out of the gates with 50 TDs/5000 yds. That's no insignificant amount of time. A lot of KC fans were probably jealous circa 1998, when Denver surpassed them in SBs and went back to back. And again for a few years about a decade ago. But consistently jealous? Nah. Why? It's not like they had a Patriots-esque run that went on for decades. Just a few great years, with a lot of average/mediocrity in-between.
Think about it....if Denver had killed it for nearly 50 years while KC was really bad, as you claim....how could the Broncos find themselves behind in all-time win %, division titles, playoff wins, and Lombardis? Doesn't compute.
You guys want to somehow turn it into an advantage that the bulk of your success was 25+ years ago. If the roles were reversed and it were KC fans making these arguments, you'd laugh your asses off. Admit it. [Reply]
Originally Posted by brdempsey69:
(A) The TV revenue came in year SIX (1965)..............try again.
(B) GOOD....then let's continue by all means. I'm not to blame for you coming here and continually spewing your false narratives, nor your little fee-fees being hurt because you can't stomach the truth and reality.......that falls squarely on YOU.
Go take your Donkey doo-doo posting to a Donks fan site where you and all the other Donks fans can be totally happy feeding one another bales of hay filled with Donkey doo-doo (which is essentially what you're trying to do here, but as jjChief pointed out, nobody here is buying what you are trying to sell).
You are so frigging TIRESOME!
This is the last time I do your research for you ... you gotta stop making wild unsupportable accusations and instead figure out how to work the Google.
Broncos owners were unquestionably the most cash poor of all AFL owners. I know you hate and distrust claims of "stadium problems" Mr. Demp-see, but it was the same problem in the 60s as it was in the 90s. I even included the part about Curley Culp - JUST FOR YOU
Fok yer Stone age v bulletin
FOUR CLICKS BELOW ... tell the story + curly Culp. Educate yer-seff demp-see
Don't kid yourself you're detective Columbo or something and stitch together some ridiculous timeline that PROVES BEYOND THE SHADOW OF A DOUBT that the Broncos are lying!!!!
Before I was having a hard time figuring out whether you were 1) a real tough guy ... 2) just a bully or ... 3) just an internet. tough guy. But I think I've got it figured out now (but I'm not going to tell you)
Originally Posted by BroncoBuff:
You are so frigging TIRESOME!
This is the last time I do your research for you ... you gotta stop making wild unsupportable accusations and instead figure out how to work the Google.
Broncos owners were unquestionably the most cash poor of all AFL owners. I know you hate and distrust claims of "stadium problems" Mr. Demp-see, but it was the same problem in the 60s as it was in the 90s. I even included the part about Curley Culp - JUST FOR YOU
FOUR CLICKS BELOW ... tell the story + curly Culp. Educate yer-seff demp-see
Aww, fok your primitive vBulletin version ... there's four links there, click on top to bottom and it'll explain why Broncos ownership was still cash poor ...
Had to expand the Stadium to NFL requirements.
Don't kid yourself you're detective Columbo or something and stitch together some ridiculous timeline that PROVES BEYOND THE SHADOW OF A DOUBT that the Broncos are lying!!!!
Before I was having a hard time figuring out whether you were 1) a real tough guy ... 2) just a bully or ... 3) just an internet. tough guy. But I think I've got it figured out now (but I'm not going to tell you)
.
TRANSLATED: Hi, my name is BroncoBuff & all I'm telling anyone is that I can't truthfully answer or refute any truth put in front of me that destroys my false narratives & self-delusions that I've been harboring for who knows how long. All I can do is try to employ the old proverbial copout of "can't attack the message, so attack the messenger"
News flash: The timeline that I provided isn't ridiculous, it is stone-cold fact that you don't want to accept because it destroys the false narrative of "deferring payments to fund a new stadium" & exposes Bowlen to be a blatant liar in that regard. [Reply]
Originally Posted by brdempsey69:
TRANSLATED: Hi, my name is BroncoBuff & all I'm telling anyone is that I can't truthfully answer or refute any truth put in front of me that destroys my false narratives & self-delusions that I've been harboring for who knows how long. All I can do is try to employ the old proverbial copout of "can't attack the message, so attack the messenger"
News flash: The timeline that I provided isn't ridiculous, it is stone-cold fact that you don't want to accept because it destroys the false narrative of "deferring payments to fund a new stadium" & exposes Bowlen to be blatant liar in that regard.
What are you talking about?
The timeline "you constructed..."
*SIGH* ...
i'm done with you, go bother somebody else. [Reply]
