NFL Rebranding Survey for my School Research Project
-
In my research paper I have the ability to define "rebranding" as practically whatever I want considering I'm the one conducting the experiment. I'm not just thinking about team name, location, and uniform changes as rebranding, but rather the identity of a team as a whole. The personality and attitude that a team portrays is what fans cling to the most when choosing their fandom. During the 21st century and practically for their entire existence, the Browns have been perennial losers. Through the heartbreaking playoff loses in the 80's to the constant QB carousel, the Browns have been the epitome of failure and that attitude has been reflected to the public. With the changes to the team listed in my survey, I pointed out the steps that the Browns have taken to reverse their misfortunes and change the public's view of the franchise as a whole. That's why I said that the Browns have "rebranded" since 2018. Let me know if there are any mistakes in my logic (I am a Ravens fan after all), and thank you in advance for those who participate in research process.
-
In my research paper I have the ability to define "rebranding" as practically whatever I want considering I'm the one conducting the experiment. I'm not just thinking about team name, location, and uniform changes as rebranding, but rather the identity of a team as a whole. The personality and attitude that a team portrays is what fans cling to the most when choosing their fandom. During the 21st century and practically for their entire existence, the Browns have been perennial losers. Through the heartbreaking playoff loses in the 80's to the constant QB carousel, the Browns have been the epitome of failure and that attitude has been reflected to the public. With the changes to the team listed in my survey, I pointed out the steps that the Browns have taken to reverse their misfortunes and change the public's view of the franchise as a whole. That's why I said that the Browns have "rebranded" since 2018. Let me know if there are any mistakes in my logic (I am a Ravens fan after all), and thank you in advance for those who participate in research process.
-
In my research paper I have the ability to define "rebranding" as practically whatever I want considering I'm the one conducting the experiment. I'm not just thinking about team name, location, and uniform changes as rebranding, but rather the identity of a team as a whole. The personality and attitude that a team portrays is what fans cling to the most when choosing their fandom. During the 21st century and practically for their entire existence, the Browns have been perennial losers. Through the heartbreaking playoff loses in the 80's to the constant QB carousel, the Browns have been the epitome of failure and that attitude has been reflected to the public. With the changes to the team listed in my survey, I pointed out the steps that the Browns have taken to reverse their misfortunes and change the public's view of the franchise as a whole. That's why I said that the Browns have "rebranded" since 2018. Let me know if there are any mistakes in my logic (I am a Ravens fan after all), and thank you in advance for those who participate in research process.
In my research paper I have the ability to define "rebranding" as practically whatever I want considering I'm the one conducting the experiment. I'm not just thinking about team name, location, and uniform changes as rebranding, but rather the identity of a team as a whole. The personality and attitude that a team portrays is what fans cling to the most when choosing their fandom. During the 21st century and practically for their entire existence, the Browns have been perennial losers. Through the heartbreaking playoff loses in the 80's to the constant QB carousel, the Browns have been the epitome of failure and that attitude has been reflected to the public. With the changes to the team listed in my survey, I pointed out the steps that the Browns have taken to reverse their misfortunes and change the public's view of the franchise as a whole. That's why I said that the Browns have "rebranded" since 2018. Let me know if there are any mistakes in my logic (I am a Ravens fan after all), and thank you in advance for those who participate in research process.
Yeah I think there may be some mistakes in your logic. Just because a team goes from winners to losers or from losers to winners does not mean a team has been rebranded it just means that their current fortunes are either up or down. OK. And in case you didn’t know some of us go back with the team longer than that. And we havePerceptions of our team that are much longer than just these past years. And here’s a clue for you. Only two teams in the entire NFL have one more championships than the Browns. That would be the Packers and the Bears. So it may be your survey but it is our team and we the fans of that team more than you get to set the identity of it.
-
In my research paper I have the ability to define "rebranding" as practically whatever I want considering I'm the one conducting the experiment. I'm not just thinking about team name, location, and uniform changes as rebranding, but rather the identity of a team as a whole. The personality and attitude that a team portrays is what fans cling to the most when choosing their fandom. During the 21st century and practically for their entire existence, the Browns have been perennial losers. Through the heartbreaking playoff loses in the 80's to the constant QB carousel, the Browns have been the epitome of failure and that attitude has been reflected to the public. With the changes to the team listed in my survey, I pointed out the steps that the Browns have taken to reverse their misfortunes and change the public's view of the franchise as a whole. That's why I said that the Browns have "rebranded" since 2018. Let me know if there are any mistakes in my logic (I am a Ravens fan after all), and thank you in advance for those who participate in research process.
Gipper, be nice to the little fella, he is after all a high schooler.
In my research paper I have the ability to define "rebranding" as practically whatever I want considering I'm the one conducting the experiment. I'm not just thinking about team name, location, and uniform changes as rebranding, but rather the identity of a team as a whole. The personality and attitude that a team portrays is what fans cling to the most when choosing their fandom. During the 21st century and practically for their entire existence, the Browns have been perennial losers. Through the heartbreaking playoff loses in the 80's to the constant QB carousel, the Browns have been the epitome of failure and that attitude has been reflected to the public. With the changes to the team listed in my survey, I pointed out the steps that the Browns have taken to reverse their misfortunes and change the public's view of the franchise as a whole. That's why I said that the Browns have "rebranded" since 2018. Let me know if there are any mistakes in my logic (I am a Ravens fan after all), and thank you in advance for those who participate in research process.
Now young man, you are so flawed in your assessment of perennial losers. 8 championships in their history. Now, if you wanted to use since 99 when they came back then yes, but you made sure to speak of the 80s.
And for even more evidence for you:
All time record of 522-504-14
Playoff Record 16-20
Winning Seasons 37
Playoff Seasons 28
-
Here is another fact about the identity of the Cleveland Browns, Sonny Jim:
The greatest dynasty in the history of Professional Football? Not the Patriots, not the 49ers, not the Cowboys, not the Steelers, not the Packers, not the Bears: None other than the Cleveland Browns. They played in 10 consecutive Championship games.....and in 11 of 12, winning 7.
No team has come close to matching that record for sustained success. That was the late 40s and 50s. And FYI, the Browns also played in 4 "NFL Championship Games" in the 60s..though they only won 1 of the 4. Still, that made it 15 Championship game appearances in 25 years. To put it in terms you may understand: for the Pats to come close to matching that, they would need to appear in the next 6 Super Bowls when going back to 2001.
So...in fact of the matter, their period of sustained excellence lasted longer than the recent shit show has. And lets not forget who was the producer/director of the shit show: Arthur B. Modell who the fucking idjits in Baltimore revere, even though even after receiving a 75 million dollar cash bribe could not do a thing, and was forced out of the league by the NFL and to sell his next franchise (the Ravens) before the banks foreclosed on it.
-
Here is another fact about the identity of the Cleveland Browns, Sonny Jim:
The greatest dynasty in the history of Professional Football? Not the Patriots, not the 49ers, not the Cowboys, not the Steelers, not the Packers, not the Bears: None other than the Cleveland Browns. They played in 10 consecutive Championship games.....and in 11 of 12, winning 7.
No team has come close to matching that record for sustained success. That was the late 40s and 50s. And FYI, the Browns also played in 4 "NFL Championship Games" in the 60s..though they only won 1 of the 4. Still, that made it 15 Championship game appearances in 25 years. To put it in terms you may understand: for the Pats to come close to matching that, they would need to appear in the next 6 Super Bowls when going back to 2001.
So...in fact of the matter, their period of sustained excellence lasted longer than the recent shit show has. And lets not forget who was the producer/director of the shit show: Arthur B. Modell who the fucking idjits in Baltimore revere, even though even after receiving a 75 million dollar cash bribe could not do a thing, and was forced out of the league by the NFL and to sell his next franchise (the Ravens) before the banks foreclosed on it.
Here is another fact about the identity of the Cleveland Browns, Sonny Jim:
The greatest dynasty in the history of Professional Football? Not the Patriots, not the 49ers, not the Cowboys, not the Steelers, not the Packers, not the Bears: None other than the Cleveland Browns. They played in 10 consecutive Championship games.....and in 11 of 12, winning 7.
No team has come close to matching that record for sustained success. That was the late 40s and 50s. And FYI, the Browns also played in 4 "NFL Championship Games" in the 60s..though they only won 1 of the 4. Still, that made it 15 Championship game appearances in 25 years. To put it in terms you may understand: for the Pats to come close to matching that, they would need to appear in the next 6 Super Bowls when going back to 2001.
So...in fact of the matter, their period of sustained excellence lasted longer than the recent shit show has. And lets not forget who was the producer/director of the shit show: Arthur B. Modell who the fucking idjits in Baltimore revere, even though even after receiving a 75 million dollar cash bribe could not do a thing, and was forced out of the league by the NFL and to sell his next franchise (the Ravens) before the banks foreclosed on it.
Let's give him a little credit, maybe he wants to compare the Cleveland Browns to the entire history of Baltimore.
Cleveland Browns 8 championships, Baltimore 7.
Oops, that can't be it.
Hmm???
Ahh I got it now... Buccaneers, Seahawks, Jets, Saints, Vikings, and Ravens TOTAL is 7. Shoot, we were so close.
Heck I give up. Here are the Top 5 championships by team.
1. Green Bay- 13
2. Chicago- 9 (one year as Staleys)
3. Cleveland- 8
3. NY Giants- 8
5. New England-6
5. Pittsburgh- 6
So again @apereg11, tell us again how the Browns have ALWAYS been perennial losers?
-
Here is another fact about the identity of the Cleveland Browns, Sonny Jim:
The greatest dynasty in the history of Professional Football? Not the Patriots, not the 49ers, not the Cowboys, not the Steelers, not the Packers, not the Bears: None other than the Cleveland Browns. They played in 10 consecutive Championship games.....and in 11 of 12, winning 7.
No team has come close to matching that record for sustained success. That was the late 40s and 50s. And FYI, the Browns also played in 4 "NFL Championship Games" in the 60s..though they only won 1 of the 4. Still, that made it 15 Championship game appearances in 25 years. To put it in terms you may understand: for the Pats to come close to matching that, they would need to appear in the next 6 Super Bowls when going back to 2001.
So...in fact of the matter, their period of sustained excellence lasted longer than the recent shit show has. And lets not forget who was the producer/director of the shit show: Arthur B. Modell who the fucking idjits in Baltimore revere, even though even after receiving a 75 million dollar cash bribe could not do a thing, and was forced out of the league by the NFL and to sell his next franchise (the Ravens) before the banks foreclosed on it.
Let's give him a little credit, maybe he wants to compare the Cleveland Browns to the entire history of Baltimore.
Cleveland Browns 8 championships, Baltimore 7.
Oops, that can't be it.
Hmm???
Ahh I got it now... Buccaneers, Seahawks, Jets, Saints, Vikings, and Ravens TOTAL is 7. Shoot, we were so close.
Heck I give up. Here are the Top 5 championships by team.
1. Green Bay- 13
2. Chicago- 9 (one year as Staleys)
3. Cleveland- 8
3. NY Giants- 8
5. New England-6
5. Pittsburgh- 6
So again @apereg11, tell us again how the Browns have ALWAYS been perennial losers?
Let's give him a little credit, maybe he wants to compare the Cleveland Browns to the entire history of Baltimore.
Cleveland Browns 8 championships, Baltimore 7.
Oops, that can't be it.
Hmm???
Ahh I got it now... Buccaneers, Seahawks, Jets, Saints, Vikings, and Ravens TOTAL is 7. Shoot, we were so close.
Heck I give up. Here are the Top 5 championships by team.
1. Green Bay- 13
2. Chicago- 9 (one year as Staleys)
3. Cleveland- 8
3. NY Giants- 8
5. New England-6
5. Pittsburgh- 6
So again @apereg11, tell us again how the Browns have ALWAYS been perennial losers?
Well...if you are going to compare cities....then you have to include the other 5 NFL titles won by teams in Northeast Ohio/Greater Cleveland.
That means that Cleveland and Green Bay are tied for the most Pro Football Championships in history with 13...it just that theirs has been by only one team where we have had 5 different teams.
And, again, if we are talking about City titles......New England would have 7 including the one won by Providence. New York 9 including the Giants 8 and the Jets one. Chicago has 11 including the Bears 9 and the Cardinals 2.
Other cities with multiple teams winning titles:
Philadelphia: Yellow Jackets and Eagles
Baltimore: Colts and Ravens
Dallas: Texans and Cowboys.
Los Angeles: Rams and Raiders
SFO/Oakland: 49ers and Raiders
All this may not fit into what the kid wants for his survey.....nevertheless, it sounded like he needed a football history lesson.
-
Hope things are going better for the kid in other teams' forums...
"When you have a shared vision it is a lot easier to make unpopular decisions." - Paul DePodesta "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." - Paul Brown Complete 2017 Browns Board Mock: http://thebrownsboard.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=46196 -
Hope things are going better for the kid in other teams' forums...
Well....as I said, I just think he got some of his premises wrong. Just because a team gets some new players or a new coach is NOT to me a rebranding. Nor is going from winning to losing and vice versa. Nor is having some slight changes in uniform design.
Dropping your name.....ala Redskins to WTF or WFT...that counts
Moving.....like the Chargers/Rams/Raiders (Not sure why he did not include the Raiders on his list)....those count.
Moving/changing your name/changing your colors out right....like the Houston Oiler/Tennessee Titans, certainly counts. (I know I am going back there).
And saying the Browns have been perennial losers their entire existence just required a woodshed-like lesson to be applied.
-
Look guys I'm sorry for offending your beloved Browns, but I was just trying to clarify why I considered the past few years a rebrand for Cleveland. You all have the right to your own opinions, but so do I, and thankfully you guys aren't the ones grading my synthesis paper. I'm willing to put AFC North differences aside here and just ask a fellow human for some help with my research project. The survey only takes about 30 seconds to complete, so please consider taking some time out of your day to fill it out. Thank you again.
-
Hope things are going better for the kid in other teams' forums...
And yes, numerous fans of the Washington Football Team were more than willing to fill out my survey.
-
Look guys I'm sorry for offending your beloved Browns, but I was just trying to clarify why I considered the past few years a rebrand for Cleveland. You all have the right to your own opinions, but so do I, and thankfully you guys aren't the ones grading my synthesis paper. I'm willing to put AFC North differences aside here and just ask a fellow human for some help with my research project. The survey only takes about 30 seconds to complete, so please consider taking some time out of your day to fill it out. Thank you again.
Look guys I'm sorry for offending your beloved Browns, but I was just trying to clarify why I considered the past few years a rebrand for Cleveland. You all have the right to your own opinions, but so do I, and thankfully you guys aren't the ones grading my synthesis paper. I'm willing to put AFC North differences aside here and just ask a fellow human for some help with my research project. The survey only takes about 30 seconds to complete, so please consider taking some time out of your day to fill it out. Thank you again.
It is not a matter of being offensive. It is a matter of being misinformed. There are piss poor opinions, there are neutral opinions, and there are learned opinions. Yours was NOT a learned opinion. But its not that it was totally piss poor....we know how bad the Browns have been during the tenure of your short life. What was piss poor was your statement that the Browns have been perennial losers for their entire existence. That opinion was based on pure ignorance of the facts. (the benign kind of ignorance...in that you probably just did not know their history....fair to say?).
And, indeed you are partially wrong when you say that we are not the ones grading your paper. When you involve the public for input....you also request their assessment of what you are doing, wrong and right , along with everything else. You can ask your teacher....the commentary about your survey is as much or more important of a part of your study as the 1-5 questions you ask. I personally disagree, again, with your characterization of "my team" as being a "rebranded" team, per your definition. But you do not account for that, and I believe you must. I think...and I think your teacher would think that if there is input made to you that your premises may flawed.....or if there was some other disputable contention about your survey that you elicited from the public, that must be included as a part of your study.
Example of a bad sort of poll : (and I provide this to you as a political scientist).....Your poll is not much different from a political poll. If there are flaws in the subject...if you make assumptions that you shouldn't, it could be garbage in, garbage out. Like the 2016 Presidential polls. While those were not far off as the entire country is concerned, there were certain local/state issues with the polling that caused them to be all wrong.
So, you see the importance of certain contrary input.
-
-
Let's give him a little credit, maybe he wants to compare the Cleveland Browns to the entire history of Baltimore.
Cleveland Browns 8 championships, Baltimore 7.
Oops, that can't be it.
Hmm???
Ahh I got it now... Buccaneers, Seahawks, Jets, Saints, Vikings, and Ravens TOTAL is 7. Shoot, we were so close.
Heck I give up. Here are the Top 5 championships by team.
1. Green Bay- 13
2. Chicago- 9 (one year as Staleys)
3. Cleveland- 8
3. NY Giants- 8
5. New England-6
5. Pittsburgh- 6
So again @apereg11, tell us again how the Browns have ALWAYS been perennial losers?
Well...if you are going to compare cities....then you have to include the other 5 NFL titles won by teams in Northeast Ohio/Greater Cleveland.
That means that Cleveland and Green Bay are tied for the most Pro Football Championships in history with 13...it just that theirs has been by only one team where we have had 5 different teams.
And, again, if we are talking about City titles......New England would have 7 including the one won by Providence. New York 9 including the Giants 8 and the Jets one. Chicago has 11 including the Bears 9 and the Cardinals 2.
Other cities with multiple teams winning titles:
Philadelphia: Yellow Jackets and Eagles
Baltimore: Colts and Ravens
Dallas: Texans and Cowboys.
Los Angeles: Rams and Raiders
SFO/Oakland: 49ers and Raiders
All this may not fit into what the kid wants for his survey.....nevertheless, it sounded like he needed a football history lesson.
Well...if you are going to compare cities....then you have to include the other 5 NFL titles won by teams in Northeast Ohio/Greater Cleveland.
That means that Cleveland and Green Bay are tied for the most Pro Football Championships in history with 13...it just that theirs has been by only one team where we have had 5 different teams.
And, again, if we are talking about City titles......New England would have 7 including the one won by Providence. New York 9 including the Giants 8 and the Jets one. Chicago has 11 including the Bears 9 and the Cardinals 2.
Other cities with multiple teams winning titles:
Philadelphia: Yellow Jackets and Eagles
Baltimore: Colts and Ravens
Dallas: Texans and Cowboys.
Los Angeles: Rams and Raiders
SFO/Oakland: 49ers and Raiders
All this may not fit into what the kid wants for his survey.....nevertheless, it sounded like he needed a football history lesson.
I think the rub i was trying to point to for the "high schooler" went over your head. I wasn't trying to compare cities, only used Baltimore to prove a point since he referred to Browns as perennial losers.
So his entire city pro football history would be more of a loser. Its the reason I added 6 franchises up and they didn't reach the level of the BROWNS.
-
Well...if you are going to compare cities....then you have to include the other 5 NFL titles won by teams in Northeast Ohio/Greater Cleveland.
That means that Cleveland and Green Bay are tied for the most Pro Football Championships in history with 13...it just that theirs has been by only one team where we have had 5 different teams.
And, again, if we are talking about City titles......New England would have 7 including the one won by Providence. New York 9 including the Giants 8 and the Jets one. Chicago has 11 including the Bears 9 and the Cardinals 2.
Other cities with multiple teams winning titles:
Philadelphia: Yellow Jackets and Eagles
Baltimore: Colts and Ravens
Dallas: Texans and Cowboys.
Los Angeles: Rams and Raiders
SFO/Oakland: 49ers and Raiders
All this may not fit into what the kid wants for his survey.....nevertheless, it sounded like he needed a football history lesson.
I think the rub i was trying to point to for the "high schooler" went over your head. I wasn't trying to compare cities, only used Baltimore to prove a point since he referred to Browns as perennial losers.
So his entire city pro football history would be more of a loser. Its the reason I added 6 franchises up and they didn't reach the level of the BROWNS.
I think the rub i was trying to point to for the "high schooler" went over your head. I wasn't trying to compare cities, only used Baltimore to prove a point since he referred to Browns as perennial losers.
So his entire city pro football history would be more of a loser. Its the reason I added 6 franchises up and they didn't reach the level of the BROWNS.
No, your point didn't go over my head......I just took your references as an opportunity to further educate the kid on some historical points.
-
One last time I just ask as a fellow human if any of you would be willing to help me out and fill out my survey (5-10 more responses would be ideal). This whole thing wasn't meant to be an attack on the Browns in any way. I know it's not often that a Ravens fan appears on a Browns fan page, so I know obliterating me with facts must have been tempting and enjoyable. This is a lot to ask for, but if there's any way that the few people who filled out the survey can share it with close friends or family, that would be greatly appreciated. Thank you all again and I wish you all the best of luck on Monday night against Baltimore, it's gonna be a good one.
-
Look guys I'm sorry for offending your beloved Browns, but I was just trying to clarify why I considered the past few years a rebrand for Cleveland. You all have the right to your own opinions, but so do I, and thankfully you guys aren't the ones grading my synthesis paper. I'm willing to put AFC North differences aside here and just ask a fellow human for some help with my research project. The survey only takes about 30 seconds to complete, so please consider taking some time out of your day to fill it out. Thank you again.
Look guys I'm sorry for offending your beloved Browns, but I was just trying to clarify why I considered the past few years a rebrand for Cleveland. You all have the right to your own opinions, but so do I, and thankfully you guys aren't the ones grading my synthesis paper. I'm willing to put AFC North differences aside here and just ask a fellow human for some help with my research project. The survey only takes about 30 seconds to complete, so please consider taking some time out of your day to fill it out. Thank you again.
You see young man, like I said before, YOU are the one who changed your criteria. You 1st just went with your statement of rebranding. And as you said, that for your purposes can be defined by you.
But then you went to calling the Browns perennial losers. If you had simply quantified that as being from the resumption in 1999 then you would not have gotten the responses you did. But when YOU entered into data the 80s, then you open that up to the entire history.
So would you quantify an organization with 8 titles as a perennial loser? Now, if I were you, you better hope that your teacher doesn't have the knowledge or does the research to quantify what a perennial loser is. Because then you would be starting on a false premise.
And speaking of, wouldn't your premise of a rebranding be a bit premature anyway? Because just a couple years ago by your original thought would have been bestowed upon the Jaguars. And look at them now.
-
Look guys I'm sorry for offending your beloved Browns, but I was just trying to clarify why I considered the past few years a rebrand for Cleveland. You all have the right to your own opinions, but so do I, and thankfully you guys aren't the ones grading my synthesis paper. I'm willing to put AFC North differences aside here and just ask a fellow human for some help with my research project. The survey only takes about 30 seconds to complete, so please consider taking some time out of your day to fill it out. Thank you again.
You see young man, like I said before, YOU are the one who changed your criteria. You 1st just went with your statement of rebranding. And as you said, that for your purposes can be defined by you.
But then you went to calling the Browns perennial losers. If you had simply quantified that as being from the resumption in 1999 then you would not have gotten the responses you did. But when YOU entered into data the 80s, then you open that up to the entire history.
So would you quantify an organization with 8 titles as a perennial loser? Now, if I were you, you better hope that your teacher doesn't have the knowledge or does the research to quantify what a perennial loser is. Because then you would be starting on a false premise.
And speaking of, wouldn't your premise of a rebranding be a bit premature anyway? Because just a couple years ago by your original thought would have been bestowed upon the Jaguars. And look at them now.
You see young man, like I said before, YOU are the one who changed your criteria. You 1st just went with your statement of rebranding. And as you said, that for your purposes can be defined by you.
But then you went to calling the Browns perennial losers. If you had simply quantified that as being from the resumption in 1999 then you would not have gotten the responses you did. But when YOU entered into data the 80s, then you open that up to the entire history.
So would you quantify an organization with 8 titles as a perennial loser? Now, if I were you, you better hope that your teacher doesn't have the knowledge or does the research to quantify what a perennial loser is. Because then you would be starting on a false premise.
And speaking of, wouldn't your premise of a rebranding be a bit premature anyway? Because just a couple years ago by your original thought would have been bestowed upon the Jaguars. And look at them now.
I'll be a man here and admit I was wrong. I shouldn't have included the 80's playoff loses in my original explanation. I understand that the rebooted Browns of '99 are a completely different organization than the one that moved to Baltimore in '96. I also want all of you to know that I'm not including the background of each team in my synthesis paper, so your beloved Browns reputation won't be tarnished.
I should have also mentioned that with my definition of a rebrand, I view the 2014 Browns as also having rebranded. The 2018 point that I clarified in my survey was an attempt for the Browns (yet again in my eyes) to reverse their reputation because they knew they had a lot of young talent and a new reputable coaching staff.
In regard to the Jags, their recent rebrand was the opposite of what I view the Browns rebrand to be. The Jags are going from a defensive minded Super Bowl contender to a rebuilding team who's only real identity is looking forward to the future where as the Browns are going from an unsuccessful team (in the 21st century) to one that looks to be a contender for years to come with loaded young talent.
-
Zombo said:
It won't be a "good one" for you, you little history-denying Ratbird Bastard, I hope no one else fills out your gay survey.
Z
Do you feel accomplished for attacking a child? At least the rest of the people here have the dignity to correct me with facts and offer suggestions for my survey. I don't understand how an adult can feel dignified by saying that.
-
Zombo said:
It won't be a "good one" for you, you little history-denying Ratbird Bastard, I hope no one else fills out your gay survey.
Z
Do you feel accomplished for attacking a child? At least the rest of the people here have the dignity to correct me with facts and offer suggestions for my survey. I don't understand how an adult can feel dignified by saying that.
Do you feel accomplished for attacking a child? At least the rest of the people here have the dignity to correct me with facts and offer suggestions for my survey. I don't understand how an adult can feel dignified by saying that.
yes, you are childish and insulting. In the past, we've met a few ratbird fans at a tailgate - a few years ago - and they
were great guys.
You, not so much. I kick squealer and ratbird players off my fantasy football teams, if the computer picked them for me when I was out of town, don't care about your survey...but don't you have 9th grade homework to do?
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login