well done guys, i dont think we'll miss u wooping our asses 
Zoblefu
offline
offline
Originally posted by Crying Eagle
Originally posted by chi-bob
Well played Bees you certainly gave us a challenge. Chicago you better get ready.
Absolutely. It's a brainstorm on our forums! Good Luck Mustangs! (Go Chelsea)
Selling strategy for 500k?
(edit: of course not really, not that its even possible to pay for it
)
Originally posted by chi-bob
Well played Bees you certainly gave us a challenge. Chicago you better get ready.
Absolutely. It's a brainstorm on our forums! Good Luck Mustangs! (Go Chelsea
)Selling strategy for 500k?
(edit: of course not really, not that its even possible to pay for it
)Last edited Jun 1, 2008 13:08:56
Vlad Dracul
offline
offline
Originally posted by Zoblefu
Originally posted by Crying Eagle
Originally posted by chi-bob
Well played Bees you certainly gave us a challenge. Chicago you better get ready.
Absolutely. It's a brainstorm on our forums! Good Luck Mustangs! (Go Chelsea)
Selling strategy for 500k?
(edit: of course not really, not that its even possible to pay for it)
LOL. Any help is appreciated, but i expect you guys to root for zeta... Holla if I'm wrong...
Originally posted by Crying Eagle
Originally posted by chi-bob
Well played Bees you certainly gave us a challenge. Chicago you better get ready.
Absolutely. It's a brainstorm on our forums! Good Luck Mustangs! (Go Chelsea
)Selling strategy for 500k?
(edit: of course not really, not that its even possible to pay for it
)LOL. Any help is appreciated, but i expect you guys to root for zeta... Holla if I'm wrong...
Pac-boy
offline
offline
Originally posted by chi-bob
I think everyone will be rooting for Chicago, you know everyone loves the underdog!
tbh ur right at least i am
I think everyone will be rooting for Chicago, you know everyone loves the underdog!
tbh ur right at least i am
Yankee Skipper
offline
offline
Originally posted by chi-bob
I think everyone will be rooting for Chicago, you know everyone loves the underdog!
Not sure why Chicago would be an underdog? I get the undefeated thing, but Chicago is the better team?
I just like to root for winners....and conference alliances of course....go Rocks!
I think everyone will be rooting for Chicago, you know everyone loves the underdog!
Not sure why Chicago would be an underdog? I get the undefeated thing, but Chicago is the better team?
I just like to root for winners....and conference alliances of course....go Rocks!
chi-bob
offline
offline
Originally posted by Yankee Skipper
Originally posted by chi-bob
I think everyone will be rooting for Chicago, you know everyone loves the underdog!
Not sure why Chicago would be an underdog? I get the undefeated thing, but Chicago is the better team?
I just like to root for winners....and conference alliances of course....go Rocks!
On what grounds are Rocks a better team?
Originally posted by chi-bob
I think everyone will be rooting for Chicago, you know everyone loves the underdog!
Not sure why Chicago would be an underdog? I get the undefeated thing, but Chicago is the better team?
I just like to root for winners....and conference alliances of course....go Rocks!
On what grounds are Rocks a better team?
S3M1N0L3
offline
offline
Originally posted by chi-bob
Originally posted by Yankee Skipper
Originally posted by chi-bob
I think everyone will be rooting for Chicago, you know everyone loves the underdog!
Not sure why Chicago would be an underdog? I get the undefeated thing, but Chicago is the better team?
I just like to root for winners....and conference alliances of course....go Rocks!
On what grounds are Rocks a better team?
Better owner?
Originally posted by Yankee Skipper
Originally posted by chi-bob
I think everyone will be rooting for Chicago, you know everyone loves the underdog!
Not sure why Chicago would be an underdog? I get the undefeated thing, but Chicago is the better team?
I just like to root for winners....and conference alliances of course....go Rocks!
On what grounds are Rocks a better team?
Better owner?
chi-bob
offline
offline
Originally posted by S3M1N0L3
Originally posted by chi-bob
Originally posted by Yankee Skipper
Originally posted by chi-bob
I think everyone will be rooting for Chicago, you know everyone loves the underdog!
Not sure why Chicago would be an underdog? I get the undefeated thing, but Chicago is the better team?
I just like to root for winners....and conference alliances of course....go Rocks!
On what grounds are Rocks a better team?
Better owner?
Lets contest that theory, ok Cryin seems like a nice guy and I think both him and I are liked by our players. We both were able to put together strong teams early on and to an extent have remained dominant. In terms of management I cant really speculate that much on Chicago, except on the fact that we are a financially sounder team. Our highest payed player is a level 15 SS on 88k, wheras Chicago are paying 8 players 120k or more. Now it is debatable whether this is a good thing or bad thing, personally I feel overpaying players only hurts the team regardless if it is good for the individual. This is shown through each teams bank roll, our $5,972,743.00 to there $2,405,910.00. Also in terms of developement, I have developed a team and Cryin has bought one. Ive put a team together in the similair way Alex Ferguson does and hes more like Abromovich; this is proven by our considerably different team chemistries. Now looking at the matchup we see that overall Manchester is 33 and Chicago 30, now these ratings dont mean much but if you look at Chicago advantages: blocking and passing. Well blocking is correct, Id say they are a better blocking team but passing, I cant really get my head round that one, they have 3 QBs a level 15,13,11 wheras we have 1, a level 15. Now it might be that since we have only one QB we get a lower rating or it might also factor in receivers, so I dont know. But overall I dont think anyone can say which team is better until we play, and on top of that I think the better owner is something that cant be solved through debate or even through the games result, it all comes down to opinion.
Originally posted by chi-bob
Originally posted by Yankee Skipper
Originally posted by chi-bob
I think everyone will be rooting for Chicago, you know everyone loves the underdog!
Not sure why Chicago would be an underdog? I get the undefeated thing, but Chicago is the better team?
I just like to root for winners....and conference alliances of course....go Rocks!
On what grounds are Rocks a better team?
Better owner?
Lets contest that theory, ok Cryin seems like a nice guy and I think both him and I are liked by our players. We both were able to put together strong teams early on and to an extent have remained dominant. In terms of management I cant really speculate that much on Chicago, except on the fact that we are a financially sounder team. Our highest payed player is a level 15 SS on 88k, wheras Chicago are paying 8 players 120k or more. Now it is debatable whether this is a good thing or bad thing, personally I feel overpaying players only hurts the team regardless if it is good for the individual. This is shown through each teams bank roll, our $5,972,743.00 to there $2,405,910.00. Also in terms of developement, I have developed a team and Cryin has bought one. Ive put a team together in the similair way Alex Ferguson does and hes more like Abromovich; this is proven by our considerably different team chemistries. Now looking at the matchup we see that overall Manchester is 33 and Chicago 30, now these ratings dont mean much but if you look at Chicago advantages: blocking and passing. Well blocking is correct, Id say they are a better blocking team but passing, I cant really get my head round that one, they have 3 QBs a level 15,13,11 wheras we have 1, a level 15. Now it might be that since we have only one QB we get a lower rating or it might also factor in receivers, so I dont know. But overall I dont think anyone can say which team is better until we play, and on top of that I think the better owner is something that cant be solved through debate or even through the games result, it all comes down to opinion.
S3M1N0L3
offline
offline
Wasn't opening a debate.. It was a joke based off your comment about where Rocks may be better..
Vlad Dracul
offline
offline
Originally posted by chi-bob
Lets contest that theory, ok Cryin seems like a nice guy and I think both him and I are liked by our players. We both were able to put together strong teams early on and to an extent have remained dominant. In terms of management I cant really speculate that much on Chicago, except on the fact that we are a financially sounder team. Our highest payed player is a level 15 SS on 88k, wheras Chicago are paying 8 players 120k or more. Now it is debatable whether this is a good thing or bad thing, personally I feel overpaying players only hurts the team regardless if it is good for the individual. This is shown through each teams bank roll, our $5,972,743.00 to there $2,405,910.00. Also in terms of developement, I have developed a team and Cryin has bought one. Ive put a team together in the similair way Alex Ferguson does and hes more like Abromovich; this is proven by our considerably different team chemistries. Now looking at the matchup we see that overall Manchester is 33 and Chicago 30, now these ratings dont mean much but if you look at Chicago advantages: blocking and passing. Well blocking is correct, Id say they are a better blocking team but passing, I cant really get my head round that one, they have 3 QBs a level 15,13,11 wheras we have 1, a level 15. Now it might be that since we have only one QB we get a lower rating or it might also factor in receivers, so I dont know. But overall I dont think anyone can say which team is better until we play, and on top of that I think the better owner is something that cant be solved through debate or even through the games result, it all comes down to opinion.
Wow! Chi-bob, keep in mind that Mustangs had been around before season 2... Chicago Rocks was assembled just a couple of days before season start. You know how hard it was for us to recruit for a team with initially low level players, but I'm really happy how we turned out.
High salaries: FIY, we have a dedicated financial adviser who's experience is unquestionable. You choose to pay low salaries, and then send out big bonuses for equipment upgrades. Well, we look at things differently...
Match-up ratings? You don't seem like you're doing your homework too well.
I respect you as am owner, but would sure love to wipe off your sarcastic smile...
Lets contest that theory, ok Cryin seems like a nice guy and I think both him and I are liked by our players. We both were able to put together strong teams early on and to an extent have remained dominant. In terms of management I cant really speculate that much on Chicago, except on the fact that we are a financially sounder team. Our highest payed player is a level 15 SS on 88k, wheras Chicago are paying 8 players 120k or more. Now it is debatable whether this is a good thing or bad thing, personally I feel overpaying players only hurts the team regardless if it is good for the individual. This is shown through each teams bank roll, our $5,972,743.00 to there $2,405,910.00. Also in terms of developement, I have developed a team and Cryin has bought one. Ive put a team together in the similair way Alex Ferguson does and hes more like Abromovich; this is proven by our considerably different team chemistries. Now looking at the matchup we see that overall Manchester is 33 and Chicago 30, now these ratings dont mean much but if you look at Chicago advantages: blocking and passing. Well blocking is correct, Id say they are a better blocking team but passing, I cant really get my head round that one, they have 3 QBs a level 15,13,11 wheras we have 1, a level 15. Now it might be that since we have only one QB we get a lower rating or it might also factor in receivers, so I dont know. But overall I dont think anyone can say which team is better until we play, and on top of that I think the better owner is something that cant be solved through debate or even through the games result, it all comes down to opinion.
Wow! Chi-bob, keep in mind that Mustangs had been around before season 2... Chicago Rocks was assembled just a couple of days before season start.
You know how hard it was for us to recruit for a team with initially low level players, but I'm really happy how we turned out. High salaries: FIY, we have a dedicated financial adviser who's experience is unquestionable. You choose to pay low salaries, and then send out big bonuses for equipment upgrades. Well, we look at things differently...
Match-up ratings? You don't seem like you're doing your homework too well.
I respect you as am owner, but would sure love to wipe off your sarcastic smile...
chi-bob
offline
offline
Originally posted by Crying Eagle
Originally posted by chi-bob
Lets contest that theory, ok Cryin seems like a nice guy and I think both him and I are liked by our players. We both were able to put together strong teams early on and to an extent have remained dominant. In terms of management I cant really speculate that much on Chicago, except on the fact that we are a financially sounder team. Our highest payed player is a level 15 SS on 88k, wheras Chicago are paying 8 players 120k or more. Now it is debatable whether this is a good thing or bad thing, personally I feel overpaying players only hurts the team regardless if it is good for the individual. This is shown through each teams bank roll, our $5,972,743.00 to there $2,405,910.00. Also in terms of developement, I have developed a team and Cryin has bought one. Ive put a team together in the similair way Alex Ferguson does and hes more like Abromovich; this is proven by our considerably different team chemistries. Now looking at the matchup we see that overall Manchester is 33 and Chicago 30, now these ratings dont mean much but if you look at Chicago advantages: blocking and passing. Well blocking is correct, Id say they are a better blocking team but passing, I cant really get my head round that one, they have 3 QBs a level 15,13,11 wheras we have 1, a level 15. Now it might be that since we have only one QB we get a lower rating or it might also factor in receivers, so I dont know. But overall I dont think anyone can say which team is better until we play, and on top of that I think the better owner is something that cant be solved through debate or even through the games result, it all comes down to opinion.
Wow! Chi-bob, keep in mind that Mustangs had been around before season 2... Chicago Rocks was assembled just a couple of days before season start. You know how hard it was for us to recruit for a team with initially low level players, but I'm really happy how we turned out.
High salaries: FIY, we have a dedicated financial adviser who's experience is unquestionable. You choose to pay low salaries, and then send out big bonuses for equipment upgrades. Well, we look at things differently...
Match-up ratings? You don't seem like you're doing your homework too well.
I respect you as am owner, but would sure love to wipe off your sarcastic smile...
No I took over the team on day 1 of season 2, and it had only one human player, a level 1 centre. Since then I have done eactly the same amount of work as you in putting a team together. Also sarcasm? What sarcasm, I was sincere in what I said about both teams. To be honest the one who should feel agrieved in all this is myself, since Manchester has always been down-talked on its' ability just like the Zeta conference has unfairly been.
Originally posted by chi-bob
Lets contest that theory, ok Cryin seems like a nice guy and I think both him and I are liked by our players. We both were able to put together strong teams early on and to an extent have remained dominant. In terms of management I cant really speculate that much on Chicago, except on the fact that we are a financially sounder team. Our highest payed player is a level 15 SS on 88k, wheras Chicago are paying 8 players 120k or more. Now it is debatable whether this is a good thing or bad thing, personally I feel overpaying players only hurts the team regardless if it is good for the individual. This is shown through each teams bank roll, our $5,972,743.00 to there $2,405,910.00. Also in terms of developement, I have developed a team and Cryin has bought one. Ive put a team together in the similair way Alex Ferguson does and hes more like Abromovich; this is proven by our considerably different team chemistries. Now looking at the matchup we see that overall Manchester is 33 and Chicago 30, now these ratings dont mean much but if you look at Chicago advantages: blocking and passing. Well blocking is correct, Id say they are a better blocking team but passing, I cant really get my head round that one, they have 3 QBs a level 15,13,11 wheras we have 1, a level 15. Now it might be that since we have only one QB we get a lower rating or it might also factor in receivers, so I dont know. But overall I dont think anyone can say which team is better until we play, and on top of that I think the better owner is something that cant be solved through debate or even through the games result, it all comes down to opinion.
Wow! Chi-bob, keep in mind that Mustangs had been around before season 2... Chicago Rocks was assembled just a couple of days before season start.
You know how hard it was for us to recruit for a team with initially low level players, but I'm really happy how we turned out. High salaries: FIY, we have a dedicated financial adviser who's experience is unquestionable. You choose to pay low salaries, and then send out big bonuses for equipment upgrades. Well, we look at things differently...
Match-up ratings? You don't seem like you're doing your homework too well.
I respect you as am owner, but would sure love to wipe off your sarcastic smile...
No I took over the team on day 1 of season 2, and it had only one human player, a level 1 centre. Since then I have done eactly the same amount of work as you in putting a team together. Also sarcasm? What sarcasm, I was sincere in what I said about both teams. To be honest the one who should feel agrieved in all this is myself, since Manchester has always been down-talked on its' ability just like the Zeta conference has unfairly been.
Last edited Jun 2, 2008 08:22:43
You are not logged in. Please log in if you want to post a reply.
