forums

Trey Zuhn = šŸ«

Advertisement
Peter Ariz said:
Bain did not have a sack against Zuhn.

He will be a great pro.
Click to expand...

Glad youā€™re representing him, but Iā€™d caution about how you publicly phrase support for this dude.

He was whooped the entire game by Mesidor, Bain, Lightfoot and anyone that lined up on him.

If you have video showing something different Iā€™d love to see it.
 
Ghandi said:
Glad youā€™re representing him, but Iā€™d caution about how you publicly phrase support for this dude.

He was whooped the entire game by Mesidor, Bain, Lightfoot and anyone that lined up on him.

If you have video showing something different Iā€™d love to see it.
Click to expand...
It doesnā€™t exist. Weird hill to die on for post game Pete
 
Peter Ariz said:
*** clown, I said I loved our DLine over the summer.

I also picked us to go 11-1. There is no crow to eat

YOU, the *** clown who says I don't know **** who continues giving me clicks, said we had multiple DL over 310 pounds - I said we don't, and we don't. I was right and you were wrong.
Click to expand...
They done brought out Pistol Pete!
 
AtlAtty said:
They are both wrong, but Pete didnā€™t initiate this argument. Sometimes that is a factor.
Click to expand...
you didnt ban Pete cause.......
So as long as you dont initiate that gives the person the right to say whatever with no repercussions? Thanks for the info
 
pyhooya said:
you didnt ban Pete cause.......
So as long as you dont initiate that gives the person the right to say whatever with no repercussions? Thanks for the info
Click to expand...
Of course not, but the initiator logically has more responsibility for the argument. In court we call that the ā€œBut forā€ test. For example, but for NicKane bringing Pete into the discussion, is Pete even in the discussion? Obviously not.

Did Pete respond poorly after being attacked? Obviously. But Pete didnā€™t pick the fight, and that matters.

Anyway, if this is too complicated for you to grasp, then so be it.
 
Advertisement
Fart Keyhole said:
I thought Zuhn held his own against Bain on most reps early on. But Bain got the FG block matched up on Zuhn. And Mesidor whipped 60 late for a crucial sack.

Anyways, Trey's trash talk wasn't that *he* would neutralize Bain, but that they as a group would handle him. The smirking ***** put his nuts on the table and got humbled.
Click to expand...
Bain whooped this dudes *** with a sack, blocked field goal, and was dominate against the run when lined up against him. 60 will never forget that *** whopping he took from Bain and company
 
AtlAtty said:
Of course not, but the initiator logically has more responsibility for the argument. In court we call that the ā€œBut forā€ test. For example, but for NicKane bringing Pete into the discussion, is Pete even in the discussion? Obviously not.

Did Pete respond poorly after being attacked? Obviously. But Pete didnā€™t pick the fight, and that matters.

Anyway, if this is too complicated for you to grasp, then so be it.
Click to expand...
Not complicated at all. Its very clear
 
pyhooya said:
Not complicated at all. Its very clear
Click to expand...
What do you want Maudeā€™s to do to D$ā€™s partner, dude???

And Nick is fine with me and other Maudeā€™s but this isnā€™t exactly a new spat. Itā€™s been ongoing with Nick starting the whole thing as a call out.

No judgment on the merits one way or the other but thatā€™s just a fact.
 
Fart Keyhole said:
Who the **** thinks that Pete could get banned for mouthing off on CIS?
Click to expand...
RVA: D$, I banned Pete.

D$: You what???

RVA: I mean he insult-retaliated against NicKane whoā€™s been hounding and insulting him about the weight of our DL before the season or something from a podcast you did.

D$: Ohā€¦ good job RVA. Trinton ā€œBaby Botā€ Breeze can step in Peteā€™s spot for the daily podcast. Thereā€™ll be real meat in each of your soup bowls this Christmas.

šŸ’šŸ»ā€ā™‚ļø
 
Advertisement
1766545900729.gif
 
Back
Top