|
Post by kj on Jun 9, 2002 17:33:03 GMT -5
I'm not the only place that has Parker as 6-7, Hayes at 6-6, Bogans even inflated at 6-4 more like 6-3, Barbour at 6-4. You ever read KSR and jeff drum who is their reporter on the paid side of the site. He has said these guys are smaller than their height, he is up close and personal with them. His credibility is good. You specifically have made your brags #8 in 2002 but many have been making their brags about Tubby's expected results for years now. I would surmise that I could place you in that group from reading your seashells and balloons posts for several months now. Am I wrong?
|
|
Blueblood_Jim
Leading Scorer
I really thought the coin toss ended badly
Posts: 278
|
Post by Blueblood_Jim on Jun 9, 2002 22:20:05 GMT -5
Now that was a post. Making brags am I. I did predict we would win the title last season. In that respect you are correct. Predicting a national championship ain't easy, and it certainly is not bragging. Because somebody says the heights of 4 players are inflated does not make him correct. And I doubt Bogans is 6'3". But regardless, the fact is that Bogans is not undersized and he does rebound. Barbour is not undersized. Hayes and Parker certainly are not small either. And what the hell do you mean by balloons and seashells? I tell ya, kj, your posts are damned negative, regardless of what you say. You look at everything from the most negative angle you can. You focus on the negative. But that is your problem. Unfortunately I get to read your posts, but life goes on 8)
|
|
Blueblood_Jim
Leading Scorer
I really thought the coin toss ended badly
Posts: 278
|
Post by Blueblood_Jim on Jun 9, 2002 22:40:19 GMT -5
Here is some beef for ya 8) [/color]
|
|
|
Post by kj on Jun 10, 2002 3:27:31 GMT -5
Real simple to close your eyes if you don't want to read my stuff , Jim. It's what I do when I don't want to read yours. Kind of works on the same principle as your tv remote control. Anyway your positive posts don't bother me. ;D I kind of like them; they're always very debateable and bring a smile to my face.
|
|
|
Post by Kybluegal on Jun 10, 2002 7:55:18 GMT -5
My starters would be and no reasonings behind any of this..
Hawkins Bogans Estill Hayes Camera
|
|
|
Post by Tummygoat on Jun 11, 2002 7:24:18 GMT -5
This is not a debateable thread ya'll. List your people and move on or I will cut the project. Any more lineups?
|
|
|
Post by blukat on Jun 11, 2002 8:50:09 GMT -5
This is not a debateable thread ya'll. List your people and move on or I will cut the project. Any more lineups? Ain't that the truth, Tummygoat. Some people are just so negative they have to argue even when there is no cause for it in a thread. OK BBJim, you have changed my mind on Bogans. ;D Guess I was just thinking that 2G was what he started at and always felt he and Tay had to play out of position those years. He does do a good job there and putting him there would open up the 2 spot for Barbour.
|
|
|
Post by 4uktrey on Jun 11, 2002 9:21:30 GMT -5
My starters would be and no reasonings behind any of this.. Hawkins Bogans Estill Hayes Camera Thats a good group Bel. Theres one name that pops in my head on your group: EXPERIENCED and the SF puts Hayes in his more natural position. ED
|
|