american football

by **JuSnide08** » Aug 13th, '06, 19:34

MuNxMuN wrote:i actually prefer basketball more but football's cool too

ya me 2. I like playing basketball more. Maybe its just becuase I dont understand the rules

by **Chino562** » Aug 13th, '06, 20:46

katastrophe wrote:RAIDERS SUCK!!!!!!!! GO CHARGERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

chargers dont have a good qb anymore :tounge2:

by **katastrophe** » Aug 13th, '06, 21:01

Ghost562 wrote:
katastrophe wrote:RAIDERS SUCK!!!!!!!! GO CHARGERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

chargers dont have a good qb anymore

neither do the raiders. they have the name of a "has been" quarterback but they dont have the talent of a good quarterback

by **Chino562** » Aug 13th, '06, 21:06

katastrophe wrote:
Ghost562 wrote:
katastrophe wrote:RAIDERS SUCK!!!!!!!! GO CHARGERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

chargers dont have a good qb anymore

neither do the raiders. they have the name of a "has been" quarterback but they dont have the talent of a good quarterback

aaron brooks is still better than rivers... and chargers don't have a good receivers, probably just antonio gates if he still play for the chargers

by **katastrophe** » Aug 13th, '06, 21:12

Ghost562 wrote:aaron brooks is still better than rivers... and chargers don't have a good receivers, probably just antonio gates if he still play for the chargers

how do u know if brooks is better than rivers? rivers only played one game and it was a pretty good fucking game. we have a lot of good wide recievers. we got mccardell, parker, and osgood. gates is a tight end and he still plays for the chargers.

by **Chino562** » Aug 13th, '06, 21:16

katastrophe wrote:
Ghost562 wrote:aaron brooks is still better than rivers... and chargers don't have a good receivers, probably just antonio gates if he still play for the chargers

how do u know if brooks is better than rivers? rivers only played one game and it was a pretty good fucking game. we have a lot of good wide recievers. we got mccardell, parker, and osgood. gates is a tight end and he still plays for the chargers.

cus he only play one game

by **katastrophe** » Aug 13th, '06, 21:22

Ghost562 wrote:cus he only play one game

yea...im not gonna base his talent off one game but he has the potential to be good.

by **Chino562** » Aug 13th, '06, 21:28

katastrophe wrote:
Ghost562 wrote:cus he only play one game

yea...im not gonna base his talent off one game but he has the potential to be good.

fair enough... so what u think of the afc west this year? u think it's gonna be a tough division?

by **katastrophe** » Aug 13th, '06, 21:38

Ghost562 wrote:fair enough... so what u think of the afc west this year? u think it's gonna be a tough division?

the AFC West is the best division in football when its based of difficulty. all the teams in the division have the potential to do well. it will be the toughest division to beat in the NFL. i dont think that the 2007 super bowl champion will be any team from the AFC West(my vote goes to Indianapolis) but whoever represents the division will make it far. my prediction is:

1. Denver Broncos
2. San Diego Chargers(wild card)
3. Kansas City Chiefs
4. Oakland Raiders

by **Chino562** » Aug 13th, '06, 21:45

katastrophe wrote:
Ghost562 wrote:fair enough... so what u think of the afc west this year? u think it's gonna be a tough division?

the AFC West is the best division in football when its based of difficulty. all the teams in the division have the potential to do well. it will be the toughest division to beat in the NFL. i dont think that the 2007 super bowl champion will be any team from the AFC West(my vote goes to Indianapolis) but whoever represents the division will make it far. my prediction is:

1. Denver Broncos
2. San Diego Chargers(wild card)
3. Kansas City Chiefs
4. Oakland Raiders

yea AFC west is the toughest division in the NFL... and colts had their chance, i think it's gonna be a team from AFC cus NFC sux

my prediction is:

1. Chiefs
2. Broncos
3. Raiders or Chargers
4. Raiders or Chargers

by **katastrophe** » Aug 13th, '06, 21:50

Ghost562 wrote:and colts had their chance, i think it's gonna be a team from AFC cus NFC sux

ummm...i may have read it and interperated it wrong and i think u know this already but if u dont then im gonna tell u. the colts are in the AFC. they are an AFC South team. and i agree with u...it will be an AFC team once again to win the super bowl. NFC just plain sucks

by **Chino562** » Aug 13th, '06, 21:54

katastrophe wrote:
Ghost562 wrote:and colts had their chance, i think it's gonna be a team from AFC cus NFC sux

ummm...i may have read it and interperated it wrong and i think u know this already but if u dont then im gonna tell u. the colts are in the AFC. they are an AFC South team. and i agree with u...it will be an AFC team once again to win the super bowl. NFC just plain sucks

i kno colts are in the AFC but they're not gonna win the super bowl..
A team from AFC other than colts will win it...

:-k

didn't NFC beat AFC in the pro bowl game?

by **katastrophe** » Aug 13th, '06, 22:00

Ghost562 wrote:
katastrophe wrote:
Ghost562 wrote:and colts had their chance, i think it's gonna be a team from AFC cus NFC sux

ummm...i may have read it and interperated it wrong and i think u know this already but if u dont then im gonna tell u. the colts are in the AFC. they are an AFC South team. and i agree with u...it will be an AFC team once again to win the super bowl. NFC just plain sucks

i kno colts are in the AFC but they're not gonna win the super bowl..
A team from AFC other than colts will win it...

didn't NFC beat AFC in the pro bowl game?

ok...i knew you knew :confusion:

but i just wanted to clear it out. NFC did beat the AFC in the pro bowl 23-17. and that really surprised me

american football

Do you watch football?

Who is online