Quote:
|
Originally Posted by funandgunner
Like you, I am entitled to my personal opinion as I stated in the post - and yeah (in my personal opinion, because that's what all these posts really are) without gibbs there is no team - there are no 4 wins - and lastly the attitude and moral of this team would be SHIT. I'd take not having Lavar, just as long as it meant having gibbs. And also I think part of the argument is that lavar was not actually putting the team first - he was putting his playing time ahead of team goals - you have to remember that he was complaining when the team was performing well (as a team).
And if you want to be enraged for me posting my opinion - then I'd call that HYPOCRISY.
|
You know, you people crack me up. You argue the same point back and forth. Peoples words are getting turned around to suit arguementative points. You say LaVar is not the TEAM, you are right. But Gibbs is not the TEAM either, GW is not the TEAM, Portis is not the TEAM. It is a TEAM from top to bottom. there is no picking gibbs or lavar, thats rediculous. the defense was playing chicago, Dallas, and then Seattle, which seattle took advantage of Holdmans side too with a couple of long runds. then Denver, KC, both took advantage of the weakside. Look, are you going to argue that Holdman is better? Are you serious. that is just obviously wrong.