PDA

View Full Version : Nall Ball


the REAL Rudeman
11-17-2006, 09:56 AM
Nall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall BallNall

That is all.
ICE74129
11-17-2006, 09:59 AM
So you want to start a guy that can't beat out **?
OpIv37
11-17-2006, 09:59 AM
nall sucks balls.


That's why he's 3rd string behind Losnam and Holcomb. If Losnam sucks as bad as you say he does, why hasn't Nall been able to prove to the coaching staff that he's any better? He's been healthy for 3 months now.
patmoran2006
11-17-2006, 09:59 AM
If ****** plays like **** vs Houston Nall Ball is coming the following week at home..

watch.
the REAL Rudeman
11-17-2006, 10:00 AM
he didn't get a fair shake. like when AVP was lightyears better than RJ. Everybody knew it but management.
ICE74129
11-17-2006, 10:00 AM
he didn't get a fair shake. like when AVP was lightyears better than RJ. Everybody knew it but management.

Nall licker.
the REAL Rudeman
11-17-2006, 10:01 AM
dooshbag
Patrick76777
11-17-2006, 10:02 AM
nall sucks balls.


That's why he's 3rd string behind Losnam and Holcomb. If Losnam sucks as bad as you say he does, why hasn't Nall been able to prove to the coaching staff that he's any better? He's been healthy for 3 months now.


Honestly! Because just about everyone was demanding that ** get 16 games for some crazy reason.

I wounldn't be shocked if they're riding him all 16 so they can say, "Hey, we gave the guy a shot and it's obvious he doesn't have it."

Just so that can get a free pass at the end of the year.

But now a few of the ** guys are demanding another season. That blows me away.
Patrick76777
11-17-2006, 10:04 AM
he didn't get a fair shake. like when AVP was lightyears better than RJ. Everybody knew it but management.


He was injured for most of TC.


Who knows what would have happened.
OpIv37
11-17-2006, 10:17 AM
Honestly! Because just about everyone was demanding that ** get 16 games for some crazy reason.

I wounldn't be shocked if they're riding him all 16 so they can say, "Hey, we gave the guy a shot and it's obvious he doesn't have it."

Just so that can get a free pass at the end of the year.

But now a few of the ** guys are demanding another season. That blows me away.

I said ** should get the whole season and I stand by that.

But so far he doesn't look any better. If he still looks this bad at the end of week 17, cut his ass or at least relegate him to back-up and find a new starter.

If we're not gonna make the playoffs (and we're not), just let him play out the season and get this thing resolved once and for all. I don't want the hardcore ** supporters to be able to say "he only got 11 games in the new system! he hasn't really had a chance yet!"

We've tried plugging in other teams' backups as starters in other positions and it's been a complete disaster.
Patrick76777
11-17-2006, 10:26 AM
I said ** should get the whole season and I stand by that.

But so far he doesn't look any better. If he still looks this bad at the end of week 17, cut his ass or at least relegate him to back-up and find a new starter.

If we're not gonna make the playoffs (and we're not), just let him play out the season and get this thing resolved once and for all. I don't want the hardcore ** supporters to be able to say "he only got 11 games in the new system! he hasn't really had a chance yet!"

We've tried plugging in other teams' backups as starters in other positions and it's been a complete disaster.


Part of me totally understands and agrees with that. The other part of me thinks that we know KH stinks but we have no idea if Nall can play. So part of me would like to give him a few games. I don't know which way to go.
Romes
11-17-2006, 10:32 AM
All the discusion about Nall reminds me of when people would say the same things about Travis Brown.
Patrick76777
11-17-2006, 10:38 AM
All the discusion about Nall reminds me of when people would say the same things about Travis Brown.


Not even close! T. Brown was an also ran. Nall was given a large deal to come here.
Kerr
11-17-2006, 10:46 AM
avp sucks.
Romes
11-17-2006, 10:53 AM
Not even close! T. Brown was an also ran. Nall was given a large deal to come here.

Ok, their contracts were different but its not like Nall's was that big. Both locked up the 3rd QB spot, without much competition behind them.
Jimbuktu
11-17-2006, 10:55 AM
Ok, their contracts were different but its not like Nall's was that big. Both locked up the 3rd QB spot, without much competition behind them.

**** YA MOTHA
Jimbuktu
11-17-2006, 10:56 AM
whoops, meant to quote the guy that said "avp sucks"
patmoran2006
11-17-2006, 11:30 AM
Maybe cause Nall got HURT and missed most of preseason?

The last pass I seen Nall throw this year in preseason was a DART in perfect stride down the sideline to Andre Davis who scored on a 70-something yard Touchdown.
Bill Cody
11-17-2006, 11:35 AM
The QB of the future for the Bills is not on the roster.
jamze132
11-17-2006, 02:53 PM
It could be that Dick has faith in John Paul. Obviously he doesn't like the idea of Nall Ball.


And by the way, why do a lot of people have Nall's ball's slapping them in their chin?
SABURZFAN
11-17-2006, 03:09 PM
I said ** should get the whole season and I stand by that.




i agree. :up:


i know...i know....a lot of you people are in shock.let's be real now.we wouldn't want holcomb or nall to come in and rattle off a few victories.it would ruin our draft position.it happened last year,didn't it?
OpIv37
11-17-2006, 03:23 PM
i agree. :up:


i know...i know....a lot of you people are in shock.let's be real now.we wouldn't want holcomb or nall to come in and rattle off a few victories.it would ruin our draft position.it happened last year,didn't it?

and the year before that with Bledsoe.

But honestly, the whole offense blows, not just the QB. I'd be shocked if Nall or Holcomb could do any better.

And I wouldn't want to pick any higher than 8 anyway - even being in the top 10 requires forking over tons of cap space for a completely unproven player.
SABURZFAN
11-17-2006, 03:26 PM
and the year before that with Bledsoe.

But honestly, the whole offense blows, not just the QB. I'd be shocked if Nall or Holcomb could do any better.

And I wouldn't want to pick any higher than 8 anyway - even being in the top 10 requires forking over tons of cap space for a completely unproven player.


or maybe we can blow three draft picks for a QB that just as pathetic as the one we have now.
ParanoidAndroid
11-17-2006, 04:36 PM
he didn't get a fair shake. like when AVP was lightyears better than RJ. Everybody knew it but management.

Ummm....no he wasn't. I bet AVP would be the first to admit it.

Nall should get a shot at some regular time if J P continues to struggle, however.