I, LynneSin do solemnly swear I will no longer make bets with other DUers

[LynneSin]

My ass has been exposed and I have a sneaking suspicision I'll probably end up in a bunny suit to boot.

You want to make a bet - find someone else. My ego can only handle so much!

That is all


ps - and yes it was posted yesterday! If you missed it you snoozed you losed. I'll probably show up at some freeper site with a bad photo-op job

[Midlodemocrat]

1. Betcha five bucks you can't stick to this.

:evilgrin:

[Murphys_Unlawful]

2. I bet you can't go one week!

[russian33]

3. It was glorious...we're all thrilled you lost

;) Can't wait till the bunny suit pic :)

[matcom]

4. but will there be a 'trap door' to your bunny suit?

:evilgrin:

[LynneSin]

6. You had your ass picture now move on

And believe me you better never show your white ass in my presense or I'll make it a point to post it on DU

[Ramsey]

20. What are you saying!!

We WANT matcom ass!!! It's so adorable.

:evilgrin:

[Beaverhausen]

5. you won't be wearing the bunny suit

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/3363116

Why the Eagles will win Super Bowl XXXIX
Daryl Johnston / FOX Sports
Posted: 13 hours ago


This year's Super Bowl matchup could (or should) have happened twice already, in 2001 and 2003.

And I really think this year's playoffs have followed historical trends. Other than seeing the first 8-8 teams to win a playoff game (a dubious point impugning the quality of teams that were beaten: Seattle and Green Bay), everything after that has fallen into place. Marty Schottenheimer goes one-and-out again. Peyton Manning can't beat the Patriots. A dome team gets outside in the elements and struggles. The running game is again more important than passing in the championship round.
This year's playoffs began with history being rewritten, and now it will finish with something that's also never happened before. The Eagles will win the Super Bowl, and here's why:



Andy Reid has dumped the conservative approach
I talked to Eagles coach Andy Reid and offensive coordinator Brad Childress before the regular season, and they said they were going to make a conscious effort throughout this entire season to be more aggressive. And they have been. Examples have been throwing to Greg Lewis into the wind against Atlanta in the NFC championship game and sticking with the downfield passing in the playoff game against Minnesota, even with a lead. Those are some things they did not do in the past.

I think Reid took a lot of criticism about being too conservative after losing the NFC championship game to Carolina last year. A lot of people said, "Well, they couldn't be aggressive since they couldn't get off press coverage." But I think there are other ways to do it.

Last year when the team wasn't healthy, Reid tried to tighten the fences, and to me he should have gone the other way and opened it up instead of trying to close it down. The problem with playing it close to the vest, it only takes one or two mistakes to totally derail everything that you've done.



Pats haven't faced elusive QB like McNabb
When the Patriots have faced Indy's Peyton Manning, they've been able to focus on covering the wide receivers, because the defense doesn't have to worry at all about Manning running for a potentially game-changing play to keep a drive alive.

With Terrell Owens likely out, or at least limited with his injury, I think you're going to see more scrambling from McNabb. It doesn't have to be the Michael Vick-type of 45-yard run. It could be a 10-yard scramble on third-and-9 that creates more opportunities. The Patriots are going to have to play better than they did against Indianapolis because of McNabb's presence as a scrambler.

Do the Pats elect to spy him and have one guy assigned to make sure McNabb does break a long one? Well, here's the thing, T.O. or no T.O., Philly has a lot of guys that can get out on routes and become pass-catchers. And will the Patriots be willing to commit a guy to McNabb and take a chance on being a man short in the secondary?


more at the link

[LynneSin]

8. Great I have Fox News on my side - I'm fucking doomed

:cry:

[DS1]

10. Three responses

1 ) The Falcons were a fluke team that should have never been in the playoffs
2 ) The Vikiings were a fluke team that should have never been in the playoffs
3 ) The Pats LIVE off articles like these, and prove them wrong time and time again but nobody ever gets it.

[lancdem]

17. What are you talking about?

The vast majority of analysts are picking the Pats. An article like this is a rarity. The Eagles are the clear underdog in this (check the Vegas line), or haven't you been paying attention? There are 10 times as many stories on why the Pats will win. If the above article gets the Pats fired up, then I guess the Eagles will be 10 times more fired up, huh? This whole "The Patriots get no respect" line is getting real old. BTW, the Falcons were 11-3 before resting their starters the final two games. Any team with Michael Vick is potentially very dangerous. Am I predicting an Eagles win? No. I'm just tired of the chip on the shoulder of SOME Pats fans.

[bobbobbins]

7. where can i see your ass at?

[LynneSin]

9. You can't - it came and it went

Once a freeper sight picked it up I replaced it with a "Bush Wanted" poster

[bobbobbins]

12. well now my day is ruined

:cry:

[name not needed]

14. You still can

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=105&topic_id=2545169&mesg_id=2545276&page=
:)

[ContraBass Black]

11. I waited all this time and I didn't get to see it?

:cry:

[Murphys_Unlawful]

13. I heard it was posted somewhere here, right now!

[MikeG]

15. I think the Pirates are going to KICK THE REDS' ASS this year.

[Murphys_Unlawful]

16. Why did you do that?

[WilliamPitt]

18. What's the matter, Colonel Sanders?

Chicken?

[Ramsey]

19. That is a wise decision

Silly girl