Page 1 of 2

Super Bowl

Posted: 2011.01.26 (04:32)
by moonlight
Steelers or Packers? I live in Milwaukee, so I am very proud to say, GO PACK!

Discuss.

Re: Super Bowl

Posted: 2011.01.26 (04:34)
by aids
Two of my friends will castrate me if I say the Steelers. Plus I watched The Packers' last game and they seem favored.

Re: Super Bowl

Posted: 2011.01.26 (04:45)
by Vyacheslav
I'm sick of the Steelers. Go Pack. Also, Rodgers, if he can stay healthy, will be one of the best QBs ever.

Re: Super Bowl

Posted: 2011.01.26 (05:02)
by smartalco
Who do I want to win? Completely don't care. Who do I expect to win? Packers.

Re: Super Bowl

Posted: 2011.01.26 (05:21)
by Tanner
SPORTS

Re: Super Bowl

Posted: 2011.01.26 (05:25)
by capt_weasle
I neither have any pie nor want some. The only good thing the Superbowl does for me is keep customers out of my store so I can be lazy at work for a chance, with the exception of the small rush of to-go orders at half-time.

Re: Super Bowl

Posted: 2011.01.26 (06:07)
by t̷s͢uk̕a͡t͜ư
Image

Re: Super Bowl

Posted: 2011.01.26 (19:31)
by unoriginal name
I don't like either of these names, but I'll go with steelers because steel is pretty cool.

Re: Super Bowl

Posted: 2011.01.26 (20:53)
by t̷s͢uk̕a͡t͜ư
xVxCrushloaderusSupremusxVx wrote:I don't like either of these names, but I'll go with steelers because steel is pretty cool.
Actually, they're just uneducated thieves.

Re: Super Bowl

Posted: 2011.01.26 (22:03)
by Universezero
xVxCrushloaderusSupremusxVx wrote:I don't like either of these names, but I'll go with steelers because steel is pretty cool.
This was exactly the basis I voted on.

Personally, I never liked football that much. They always stop the game too much; needs more constant action, like Rugby.

Re: Super Bowl

Posted: 2011.01.27 (03:21)
by scythe
I agree with gloomp, because BLACK AND YELLOW BLACK AND YELLOW BLACK AND YELLOW BLACK AND YELLOW.

Re: Super Bowl

Posted: 2011.01.27 (04:11)
by moonlight
oeuvre wrote:I'm sick of the Steelers. Go Pack. Also, Rodgers, if he can stay healthy, will be one of the best QBs ever.
Agreed. Also, expect the packers to do good next year with their star tight end and running back returning. Plus many growing players like Sam Sheilds, and James Starks.

Re: Super Bowl

Posted: 2011.01.27 (05:15)
by Vyacheslav
Starks=last year's Shonn Greene.

Re: Super Bowl

Posted: 2011.01.28 (04:30)
by moonlight
oeuvre wrote:Starks=last year's Shonn Greene.
Yeah. With Ryan Grant back next year, it will definatly be a LT Shonn Green type of thing.

Re: Super Bowl

Posted: 2011.01.28 (18:02)
by capt_weasle
T̷s͢uk̕a͡t͜ư wrote:Image

Some of my friends were talking about Bob Marley when a mutual acquaintance walked up, asking who they were talking about. When they told him, he asked who Bob Marley was because he hadn't heard of him, to the surprise of everyone else.

"Wait, so you don't know who Bob Marley is!?"
"No, I don't really watch football."

Re: Super Bowl

Posted: 2011.01.28 (18:19)
by t̷s͢uk̕a͡t͜ư
capt_weasle wrote:Some of my friends were talking about Bob Marley when a mutual acquaintance walked up, asking who they were talking about. When they told him, he asked who Bob Marley was because he hadn't heard of him, to the surprise of everyone else.

"Wait, so you don't know who Bob Marley is!?"
"No, I don't really watch football."
This is something I do all the time, intentionally. That is, when someone makes a reference to some kind of sport, I comment that I don't watch a totally different one ("The World Series is coming up." "Oh, I don't watch hockey.")

Re: Super Bowl

Posted: 2011.01.28 (20:37)
by capt_weasle
Unfortunately, this guy was completely serious. The rest of the day they were making quips like, "I hear that the Beatles have the best defense in the NFL."

Re: Super Bowl

Posted: 2011.01.29 (04:06)
by otters~1
T̷s͢uk̕a͡t͜ư wrote:Image
Those are both men.

Re: Super Bowl

Posted: 2011.01.29 (04:11)
by Vyacheslav
Problem, Nostromo?

Re: Super Bowl

Posted: 2011.01.29 (04:56)
by otters~1
oeuvre wrote:Problem, Nostromo?
To me, it opens the comic up to a whole new level of interpretation.

Re: Super Bowl

Posted: 2011.01.29 (05:28)
by Tanner
Nostromo wrote:
oeuvre wrote:Problem, Nostromo?
To me, it opens the comic up to a whole new level of interpretation.
Which level of interpretation might that be?

Re: Super Bowl

Posted: 2011.01.29 (06:24)
by Kablizzy
hairscapades wrote:
Nostromo wrote:
oeuvre wrote:Problem, Nostromo?
To me, it opens the comic up to a whole new level of interpretation.
Which level of interpretation might that be?
The one with gays.

Also, Pavel - Who is the chick in your sig? The one in grey? I've gotta know, it's been bugging me for months.

Re: Super Bowl

Posted: 2011.01.29 (07:35)
by scythe
JUICE SPRINGSTEEN wrote:
Also, Pavel - Who is the chick in your sig? The one in grey? I've gotta know, it's been bugging me for months.
I, um, he, um, uses a random image tool.

"http://a.random-image.net/handler.aspx? ... m=917.1113"

Re: Super Bowl

Posted: 2011.01.29 (07:43)
by  yahoozy
scythe wrote:
JUICE SPRINGSTEEN wrote:
Also, Pavel - Who is the chick in your sig? The one in grey? I've gotta know, it's been bugging me for months.
I, um, he, um, uses a random image tool.

"http://a.random-image.net/handler.aspx? ... m=917.1113"
How is this relevant to Kablizzy's question?

Re: Super Bowl

Posted: 2011.01.29 (14:54)
by Vyacheslav
Image

This one? Eva Wyrwal.