Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 7, 2018 14:19:34 GMT -5
Why does such a simple concept escape you? You realize liking the signing and realizing he's only a two year solution aren't mutually exclusive, right? False. Please point out where I said I hate Nate Solder or anything about his game. And while you're at it, point out where I said I want to tear the whole thing down and start over from scratch.Because going into the 2018 season with either Ereck Flowers, Bisnoty or Wheeler at LT was a death sentence for the season. Again, the simple concept of that statement escapes you. I merely presented a philosophy. Not saying there was a concrete example. And since we're on the topic of "never given an example" do you mind: Please point out where I said I hate Nate Solder or anything about his game. And while you're at it, point out where I said I want to tear the whole thing down and start over from scratch.Thanks. Last reply to you since you're not getting it. I never said you hate Nate Solder. You said you had a problem with the signing because it's only a 2 year fix. We should have gone with someone younger and yes Flowers at LT is a DEATH SENTENCE. He single handedly lost us any chance of having a productive offensive line the last 2 years. Plugging anyone isn't the solution. That's Reese's logic. Saying you want to just plug guys in and not spend on established players via FA, also drafting a QB at 2 is pretty much tearing the thing down. You don't have to SAY THOSE EXACT WORDS to mean it. I hope you get it now, thanks. So you're not going to attempt to substantiate your strawman arguments and fabrications for the fourth time after it's been requested. Thank you for not replying to me again. I'd prefer to discuss football/The Giants with posters that appreciate a higher bar. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 7, 2018 16:29:26 GMT -5
There was no choice. LT was the teams biggest problem by leaps and bounds. Something had to be done. Unfortunately players that can legitimately play LT in the NFL are rare. Fortunately, there was one available. It is what it is. The worse choice would have been trying to do in on the cheap like the Giants have been for many mnay yeras.
|
|
|
|
Post by brownelvis54 on Jun 7, 2018 16:33:16 GMT -5
I don't think the Giants had much choice.....They can move Flowers back...to LT in a few years??!! Or Draft a LT in the next couple of drafts...or move one of our line men in the future....either way....the Giants had no choice but to sign him
|
|
|
|
Post by NAVY2323(ret) on Jun 7, 2018 17:35:07 GMT -5
Quite honestly this was probably a better investment that 15m per to a guard like the dude that ended up in Jax. I'm not saying he isn't a good player, but protecting Eli's blindside with the investment in keeping him around seems paramount IMO. So to me signing Solder actually seems the better choice.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 7, 2018 18:11:14 GMT -5
Quite honestly this was probably a better investment that 15m per to a guard like the dude that ended up in Jax. I'm not saying he isn't a good player, but protecting Eli's blindside with the investment in keeping him around seems paramount IMO. So to me signing Solder actually seems the better choice. I agree to a certain extent. Better to pay that money to a LT than a guard. Only disagreeing slant I have is that Norwell is a 26 year old All Pro in his prime. |
|
|
|
Post by TEM on Jun 7, 2018 18:46:57 GMT -5
First off: I really like Nate Solder as a player and a person. I've seen most every home NCAAF games of his career and have always been psyched to see him succeed in the NFL (it's not that common for my alma mater alum). And I like the Solder signing, I do. We needed it. But here's the problem: The problem with this signing is that it is a two year fix. We don't need a two year fix unless you are under the impression that we have a two year window to compete for a SB. I am not under that impression. I'm in the camp of we are in a two year rebuild, and if done right we can be competing with the best of them. But between Solder's age, wear and tear and low dead cap hit in 2020, I don't see how he is playing for the Giants for more than 2018 and 2019. At that point (hopefully) a new young QB is at the helm and then we are back to square one with needing a starting LT again. Unless of course we can draft one in the 2020 draft. Which, as we know, is extremely tough. You are making an assumption it is a 2 year fix. I think the FO disagrees with you . Actually I like the notion and I have always agreed with it. There are no long-term fixes . You build to win every season . Teams that go into the rebuild mode seem to never win. If you do not build to win every season . You will never win. "The rebuild" That is a fantasy pipe dream. |
|
|
|
Post by JoeyCush on Jun 7, 2018 19:28:06 GMT -5
Quite honestly this was probably a better investment that 15m per to a guard like the dude that ended up in Jax. I'm not saying he isn't a good player, but protecting Eli's blindside with the investment in keeping him around seems paramount IMO. So to me signing Solder actually seems the better choice. I absolutely agree for more than one reason. Our line consisted of zero talent at tackle and we got rid of our best Guards and starting center. If we signed Norwell we still have holes at Guard and both tackles. Even if they drafted Hernandez, still Eli being protected by Flowers at LT most likely. Signing Solder instead stabilized Eli's blindside, in addition to a rookie guard who should have been a first rounder. Also signing Solder helped us get Omameh, who is a serviceable veteran to start at RG. Watching Andrew Whitworth play into his mid 30s and vastly helping that Rams oline gives me more confidence in Solder than the OP does saying he will be done in 2 years. Plus the fact that the new regime is sticking with Eli for 2018 and possibly beyond, they were forced to get the best LT available and they did. Regardless if you agree or disagree with sticking with Eli, thats the plan for this team. And in doing so, you couldnt script a better off season after deciding to stick with Eli. Everything they did helps Eli win in 2018. That is the goal. To win. |
|
|
|
Post by NAVY2323(ret) on Jun 7, 2018 19:40:18 GMT -5
Quite honestly this was probably a better investment that 15m per to a guard like the dude that ended up in Jax. I'm not saying he isn't a good player, but protecting Eli's blindside with the investment in keeping him around seems paramount IMO. So to me signing Solder actually seems the better choice. I absolutely agree for more than one reason. Our line consisted of zero talent at tackle and we got rid of our best Guards and starting center. If we signed Norwell we still have holes at Guard and both tackles. Even if they drafted Hernandez, still Eli being protected by Flowers at LT most likely. Signing Solder instead stabilized Eli's blindside, in addition to a rookie guard who should have been a first rounder. Also signing Solder helped us get Omameh, who is a serviceable veteran to start at RG. Watching Andrew Whitworth play into his mid 30s and vastly helping that Rams oline gives me more confidence in Solder than the OP does saying he will be done in 2 years. Plus the fact that the new regime is sticking with Eli for 2018 and possibly beyond, they were forced to get the best LT available and they did. Regardless if you agree or disagree with sticking with Eli, thats the plan for this team. And in doing so, you couldnt script a better off season after deciding to stick with Eli. Everything they did helps Eli win in 2018. That is the goal. To win. Great post, my only counter to what you said is that Andrew Whitworth is an elite Tackle in this league, Solder a solid one. |
|
|
|
Post by JoeyCush on Jun 7, 2018 19:56:18 GMT -5
I absolutely agree for more than one reason. Our line consisted of zero talent at tackle and we got rid of our best Guards and starting center. If we signed Norwell we still have holes at Guard and both tackles. Even if they drafted Hernandez, still Eli being protected by Flowers at LT most likely. Signing Solder instead stabilized Eli's blindside, in addition to a rookie guard who should have been a first rounder. Also signing Solder helped us get Omameh, who is a serviceable veteran to start at RG. Watching Andrew Whitworth play into his mid 30s and vastly helping that Rams oline gives me more confidence in Solder than the OP does saying he will be done in 2 years. Plus the fact that the new regime is sticking with Eli for 2018 and possibly beyond, they were forced to get the best LT available and they did. Regardless if you agree or disagree with sticking with Eli, thats the plan for this team. And in doing so, you couldnt script a better off season after deciding to stick with Eli. Everything they did helps Eli win in 2018. That is the goal. To win. Great post, my only counter to what you said is that Andrew Whitworth is an elite Tackle in this league, Solder a solid one. Thankyou. I wasnt as much comparing their skills, more of the age and decline as OP suggested. I believe OL is the one position that gets better with age, as long as you dont suffer a significant injury of course. As an older player you rely more on technique and less on speed and power. Simple things like Flowers dropping his head to contact is something we wont see anymore at LT. |
|
|
|
Post by ocgiant on Jun 7, 2018 23:46:33 GMT -5
It is a bit of kicking the can down the road but Giants needed stability now with OL, leadership, experience and locker room... IMO was worth it.
Also, allows some breathing room to supplement via draft and FA
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2018 8:41:12 GMT -5
First off: I really like Nate Solder as a player and a person. I've seen most every home NCAAF games of his career and have always been psyched to see him succeed in the NFL (it's not that common for my alma mater alum). And I like the Solder signing, I do. We needed it. But here's the problem: The problem with this signing is that it is a two year fix. We don't need a two year fix unless you are under the impression that we have a two year window to compete for a SB. I am not under that impression. I'm in the camp of we are in a two year rebuild, and if done right we can be competing with the best of them. But between Solder's age, wear and tear and low dead cap hit in 2020, I don't see how he is playing for the Giants for more than 2018 and 2019. At that point (hopefully) a new young QB is at the helm and then we are back to square one with needing a starting LT again. Unless of course we can draft one in the 2020 draft. Which, as we know, is extremely tough. You are making an assumption it is a 2 year fix. I think the FO disagrees with you . Actually I like the notion and I have always agreed with it. There are no long-term fixes . You build to win every season . Teams that go into the rebuild mode seem to never win. If you do not build to win every season . You will never win. "The rebuild" That is a fantasy pipe dream. It works in the NBA and MLB to an extent. I have yet to see it work in the NFL. The Browns always get top picks and yet to do something substantial with them. |
|
|
|
Post by GameTime on Jun 8, 2018 8:56:40 GMT -5
Was a solid signing......plain and simple.
One can debate how this will affect the future of the online but for the near future the LT position “should” be good to go.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2018 11:29:23 GMT -5
You are making an assumption it is a 2 year fix. I think the FO disagrees with you . You're making an assumption that the FO disagrees with me. You and I both know just as much about what the FO is thinking. Which is exactly absolutely nothing. So I can only examine the facts. NFL contracts are never fully realized (unless it's a rookie contract where the last year option is picked up). So thinking that FO believes Solder can play four years based on the contract terms is not prudent, IMO. The standard practice for NFL contracts is to front load the deal, especially with guarantees, and make the contract easily voidable on the back end. That's the norm. Looking at the contract it's obvious (to me at least) that it's a two year deal. Given Solder's age, wear and tear, and the fact that he'll be in the league 10 years in 2019/20... all points to a two year plan for him IMO. Also factor in Gettleman's penchant for drafting and building OLs. I can't see him foregoing finding a potential LT replacement by being under the impression Solder will be playing 4+ years here. Could they restructure his contract and extend him beyond 2019 at the age of 32? Absolutely. I will not dismiss that notion. However IMO I don't see it happening. I always get into these discussions and respond with the same. Call it what you want. Rebuild, retool, reshape, replenish, transition... whatever. Semantics mean nothing to me. I understand your philosophy mantra and it makes perfect sense. But reality is reality. Roster talent, salary cap, contracts, age, etc all factor in to where your team stands. And right now the Giants are clearly in a replenishment mode. And I think Gettleman has done as best a job as possible given how depleted our roster was in 2017. Does that mean the Giants aren't expected to compete and win? Of course not. We do still have a lot of talent on this roster. |
|
|
|
Post by Speedman on Jun 8, 2018 12:30:25 GMT -5
You are making an assumption it is a 2 year fix. I think the FO disagrees with you . You're making an assumption that the FO disagrees with me. You and I both know just as much about what the FO is thinking. Which is exactly absolutely nothing. So I can only examine the facts. NFL contracts are never fully realized (unless it's a rookie contract where the last year option is picked up). So thinking that FO believes Solder can play four years based on the contract terms is not prudent, IMO. The standard practice for NFL contracts is to front load the deal, especially with guarantees, and make the contract easily voidable on the back end. That's the norm. Looking at the contract it's obvious (to me at least) that it's a two year deal. Given Solder's age, wear and tear, and the fact that he'll be in the league 10 years in 2019/20... all points to a two year plan for him IMO. Also factor in Gettleman's penchant for drafting and building OLs. I can't see him foregoing finding a potential LT replacement by being under the impression Solder will be playing 4+ years here. Could they restructure his contract and extend him beyond 2019 at the age of 32? Absolutely. I will not dismiss that notion. However IMO I don't see it happening. I always get into these discussions and respond with the same. Call it what you want. Rebuild, retool, reshape, replenish, transition... whatever. Semantics mean nothing to me. I understand your philosophy mantra and it makes perfect sense. But reality is reality. Roster talent, salary cap, contracts, age, etc all factor in to where your team stands. And right now the Giants are clearly in a replenishment mode. And I think Gettleman has done as best a job as possible given how depleted our roster was in 2017. Does that mean the Giants aren't expected to compete and win? Of course not. We do still have a lot of talent on this roster. What are the terms of Solder's contract? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2018 14:03:36 GMT -5
You're making an assumption that the FO disagrees with me. You and I both know just as much about what the FO is thinking. Which is exactly absolutely nothing. So I can only examine the facts. NFL contracts are never fully realized (unless it's a rookie contract where the last year option is picked up). So thinking that FO believes Solder can play four years based on the contract terms is not prudent, IMO. The standard practice for NFL contracts is to front load the deal, especially with guarantees, and make the contract easily voidable on the back end. That's the norm. Looking at the contract it's obvious (to me at least) that it's a two year deal. Given Solder's age, wear and tear, and the fact that he'll be in the league 10 years in 2019/20... all points to a two year plan for him IMO. Also factor in Gettleman's penchant for drafting and building OLs. I can't see him foregoing finding a potential LT replacement by being under the impression Solder will be playing 4+ years here. Could they restructure his contract and extend him beyond 2019 at the age of 32? Absolutely. I will not dismiss that notion. However IMO I don't see it happening. I always get into these discussions and respond with the same. Call it what you want. Rebuild, retool, reshape, replenish, transition... whatever. Semantics mean nothing to me. I understand your philosophy mantra and it makes perfect sense. But reality is reality. Roster talent, salary cap, contracts, age, etc all factor in to where your team stands. And right now the Giants are clearly in a replenishment mode. And I think Gettleman has done as best a job as possible given how depleted our roster was in 2017. Does that mean the Giants aren't expected to compete and win? Of course not. We do still have a lot of talent on this roster. What are the terms of Solder's contract? |
|
|
|
Post by trueblueatnyc on Jun 8, 2018 14:12:31 GMT -5
The signings and draft strategy would seem to suggest that DG thinks this team can compete for a title during Eli's last couple of years.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave_NYG on Jun 8, 2018 14:35:04 GMT -5
Was a solid signing......plain and simple. One can debate how this will affect the future of the online but for the near future the LT position “should” be good to go. Agreed....you're not going to find a 26 year old stud LT tackle on the market. Either have to draft (didn't work out so well w/ Flowers) or grab a veteran who can contribute for a bit and teach the young guys. |
|
|
|
Post by Speedman on Jun 8, 2018 14:47:05 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by TEM on Jun 8, 2018 15:37:34 GMT -5
You're making an assumption that the FO disagrees with me. You and I both know just as much about what the FO is thinking. Which is exactly absolutely nothing. So I can only examine the facts. NFL contracts are never fully realized (unless it's a rookie contract where the last year option is picked up). So thinking that FO believes Solder can play four years based on the contract terms is not prudent, IMO. The standard practice for NFL contracts is to front load the deal, especially with guarantees, and make the contract easily voidable on the back end. That's the norm. Looking at the contract it's obvious (to me at least) that it's a two year deal. Given Solder's age, wear and tear, and the fact that he'll be in the league 10 years in 2019/20... all points to a two year plan for him IMO. Also factor in Gettleman's penchant for drafting and building OLs. I can't see him foregoing finding a potential LT replacement by being under the impression Solder will be playing 4+ years here. Could they restructure his contract and extend him beyond 2019 at the age of 32? Absolutely. I will not dismiss that notion. However IMO I don't see it happening. I always get into these discussions and respond with the same. Call it what you want. Rebuild, retool, reshape, replenish, transition... whatever. Semantics mean nothing to me. I understand your philosophy mantra and it makes perfect sense. But reality is reality. Roster talent, salary cap, contracts, age, etc all factor in to where your team stands. And right now the Giants are clearly in a replenishment mode. And I think Gettleman has done as best a job as possible given how depleted our roster was in 2017. Does that mean the Giants aren't expected to compete and win? Of course not. We do still have a lot of talent on this roster. What are the terms of Solder's contract? All the moves they made with FAs suggest the are in win now mode. It is illogical to bring in expensive FAs to begin a retool. You only plug blatant holes if you are wanting to win. |
|
|
|
Post by TEM on Jun 8, 2018 15:46:53 GMT -5
Was a solid signing......plain and simple. One can debate how this will affect the future of the online but for the near future the LT position “should” be good to go. It hardly works in the NFL. I am having trouble to find one team that stripped their entire team down and did it. How many decades did it take the Eagles to get "rebuild mode right" It is a stupid mind set. Teams that are consistently in the playoffs throughout their history ( NE, GB, Pitts, Denver, NY Ravens) only bolster their rosters, They are never rebuild. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2018 15:55:09 GMT -5
What are the terms of Solder's contract? All the moves they made with FAs suggest the are in win now mode. It is illogical to bring in expensive FAs to begin a retool. You only plug blatant holes if you are wanting to win. Why do their FA moves suggest a "win now" mode? How long, in your opinion, is "now?" And what happens when "now" is over? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2018 16:01:24 GMT -5
Was a solid signing......plain and simple. One can debate how this will affect the future of the online but for the near future the LT position “should” be good to go. It hardly works in the NFL. I am having trouble to find one team that stripped their entire team down and did it. How many decades did it take the Eagles to get "rebuild mode right" It is a stupid mind set. Teams that are consistently in the playoffs throughout their history ( NE, GB, Pitts, Denver, NY Ravens) only bolster their rosters, They are never rebuild. The Broncos went through a major rebuild of the roster in 2011 after 5 or 6 seasons of missing the playoffs. Just an FYI. And the reason why those type of teams are able to sustain playoff appearances and rosters is because they draft well enough that when their rosters turn over they have replenishment that has been acquired through the draft. Then they just plug holes here and there with a FA or two. The Giants current situation has been exacerbated by the fact Reese has been pretty horrible at drafting. Only Zack DeOssie remains as a player Reese drafted who has played beyond his rookie contract. Let that sink in. That's how rosters get devastated and depleted. And thus become in need of replenishment, retooling, rebuilding... whatever term you want to use. |
|
|
|
Post by TEM on Jun 8, 2018 16:13:05 GMT -5
All the moves they made with FAs suggest the are in win now mode. It is illogical to bring in expensive FAs to begin a retool. You only plug blatant holes if you are wanting to win. Why do their FA moves suggest a "win now" mode? How long, in your opinion, is "now?" And what happens when "now" is over? This is my entire take on the subject : You must treat every season as a island . This player is going to last this long idea, is an fantasy . He may last only 1 play he may last 500 plays. This whole long term goal is , chasing bigfoot, combing the night sky for alien spacecraft. it is all the same. Your goal (Owner GM, HC) must be to build a team that can win every year. Even if there are teams that deemed to be better that the team that you field. You must have a team that can be in a position to pounce on the misfortune of others. The NFL is a fickle women , One day you are on top of the world with her. The next you in the dog house scraping scraps and she has he eye on another. If you are that other. You better have your best suit on . Because if yo don't fait is going to stomp on your butt also. That is why as an Owner GM and HC. Tomorrow must be viewed as a fantasy and all you have is the season or game in front of you. If you do not have that win now mind set every single season. You are no different then that guy hearing noises in the woods chasing Sasucauch. |
|
|
|
Post by TEM on Jun 8, 2018 16:21:38 GMT -5
Why do their FA moves suggest a "win now" mode? How long, in your opinion, is "now?" And what happens when "now" is over? This is my entire take on the subject : You must treat every season as a island . This player is going to last this long idea, is an fantasy . He may last only 1 play he may last 500 plays. This whole long term goal is , chasing bigfoot, combing the night sky for alien spacecraft. it is all the same. Your goal (Owner GM, HC) must be to build a team that can win every year. Even if there are teams that deemed to be better that the team that you field. You must have a team that can be in a position to pounce on the misfortune of others. The NFL is a fickle women , One day you are on top of the world with her. The next you in the dog house scraping scraps and she has her eye on another. If you are that other. You better have your best suit on . Because if yo don't fait is going to stomp on your butt also. That is why as an Owner GM and HC. Tomorrow must be viewed as a fantasy and all you have is the season or game in front of you. If you do not have that win now mind set every single season. You are no different then that guy hearing noises in the woods chasing Sasucauch. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2018 16:22:54 GMT -5
Why do their FA moves suggest a "win now" mode? How long, in your opinion, is "now?" And what happens when "now" is over? This is my entire take on the subject : You must treat every season as a island . This player is going to last this long idea, is an fantasy . He may last only 1 play he may last 500 plays. This whole long term goal is , chasing bigfoot, combing the night sky for alien spacecraft. it is all the same. Your goal (Owner GM, HC) must be to build a team that can win every year. Even if there are teams that deemed to be better that the team that you field. You must have a team that can be in a position to pounce on the misfortune of others. The NFL is a fickle women , One day you are on top of the world with her. The next you in the dog house scraping scraps and she has he eye on another. If you are that other. You better have your best suit on . Because if yo don't fait is going to stomp on your butt also. That is why as an Owner GM and HC. Tomorrow must be viewed as a fantasy and all you have is the season or game in front of you. If you do not have that win now mind set every single season. You are no different then that guy hearing noises in the woods chasing Sasucauch. Sorry I guess I don't really understand all your posts as a consummate whole. You suggest that the FA signings means we are in a "win now" mode. That literally suggests there is an end to the "win now" window. I'm asking how long of a duration do you think that window is? And I reiterate: I understand your philosophy mantra and it makes perfect sense. But reality is reality. Roster talent, salary cap, contracts, age, etc all factor in to where your team stands. To build a team that "can win every year" you must be constantly be building through the draft. You need as much production from rookie contracts as possible. So what happens when your team drafts and retention of draft picks suffer? Your roster suffers tremendously and you need to rebuild it. |
|
|
|
Post by GameTime on Jun 8, 2018 16:26:55 GMT -5
The Giants do have a good mix of young players an older vets. They can certainly be on a path that only requires some tweaks each season.
|
|
|
|
Post by TEM on Jun 8, 2018 16:27:16 GMT -5
This is my entire take on the subject : You must treat every season as a island . This player is going to last this long idea, is an fantasy . He may last only 1 play he may last 500 plays. This whole long term goal is , chasing bigfoot, combing the night sky for alien spacecraft. it is all the same. Your goal (Owner GM, HC) must be to build a team that can win every year. Even if there are teams that deemed to be better that the team that you field. You must have a team that can be in a position to pounce on the misfortune of others. The NFL is a fickle women , One day you are on top of the world with her. The next you in the dog house scraping scraps and she has he eye on another. If you are that other. You better have your best suit on . Because if yo don't fait is going to stomp on your butt also. That is why as an Owner GM and HC. Tomorrow must be viewed as a fantasy and all you have is the season or game in front of you. If you do not have that win now mind set every single season. You are no different then that guy hearing noises in the woods chasing Sasucauch. Sorry I guess I don't really understand all your posts. You suggest that the FA signings means we are in a "win now" mode. That literally suggests there is an end to the "win now" window. I'm asking how long of a duration do you think that window is? And I reiterate: I understand your philosophy mantra and it makes perfect sense. But reality is reality. Roster talent, salary cap, contracts, age, etc all factor in to where your team stands. To build a team that "can win every year" you must be constantly be building through the draft. You need as much production from rookie contracts as possible. So what happens when your team drafts and retention of draft picks suffer? Your roster suffers tremendously and you need to rebuild it. It should never end, you play to win every year, If you don't why play? I agree you build through the draft and you augment with FAs . Exactly what the Giants did. Reese put more than a few good players on this team. The core is already in place. |
|
|
|
Post by Speedman on Jun 8, 2018 17:47:39 GMT -5
All the moves they made with FAs suggest the are in win now mode. It is illogical to bring in expensive FAs to begin a retool. You only plug blatant holes if you are wanting to win. Why do their FA moves suggest a "win now" mode? How long, in your opinion, is "now?" And what happens when "now" is over? If done correctly now is never over. |
|
|
|
Post by DonnieYen on Jun 13, 2018 19:22:28 GMT -5
And DonnieYen ... Don't let @bronxpinstripes get away with this...   A Steak Dinner Would be nice From Long Horn, @bronxpinstripes If your ever in the Port Charlotte Florida area Give me a PM may be you can rescind that Steak Dinner? |
|
