Seahawks vs Saints Preview

[burgers_59]

From my blog, hope you all enjoy. Let me know what you think!

http://pugetpower.weebly.com/sports.html

 

[RichNhansom]

Nice blog and good write up. Thanks for the work.

 

[hawk79]

Decent write up but your sentence structure was hard to read. Need to work on your puncuation if you're going to be a writer and use spell check.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Grammar police? really? Come on man. Keep doing your thing Burgers, good stuff.

 

[Hawks46]

Grammar police? really? Come on man. Keep doing your thing Burgers, good stuff.

Umm, yeah. It's one thing to police a guy's post on a forum, it's another to point out spelling errors, grammatical errors and sentence structuring flaws to a guy trying to write an online article. It's contstructive criticism, it's not meant to be negative. People need to stop being so damned sensitive.

Good write up Burgers, but I have a question: where did you hear that Thurmond was talking about signing an extension at $5mil/year and now it's lowered to 1-2 ? Just curious as that's a very good contract for us.

 

[Seahawkfan80]

Just a couple of Questions. Do you think Michael will play in the return role? Where did the pic on the top of your page come from? I am curious.

 

[burgers_59]

Thanks for the feedback guys, I go kind of comma crazy lol.

As for the Thurmond info, Michael Silver had a quick writeup about the negotiations. Also bleacher report had an excerpt of it . I agree that it's definitely a discount price, hopefully he doesn't go elsewhere for more money.

Christine Michael should be a good return specialist but I think they're going to continue to use Kearse. Wouldn't be surprised to see Michael as a returner by the end of the season or playoffs though. I got the picture from Creative Commons when I looked up, "Pacific Northwest".

 

[drdiags]

Quick note. Browner's current appeal is for substance abuse so when you mention that this is his second failure in two separate areas I am assuming you are tying the performance enhancement suspension with this current one in appeal. If so, that would not be correct.

 

[burgers_59]

Quick note. Browner's current appeal is for substance abuse so when you mention that this is his second failure in two separate areas I am assuming you are tying the performance enhancement suspension with this current one in appeal. If so, that would not be correct.

That's not what I was trying to say, but I see how you might've got that. Apparently the NFL is trying him for a failed substance test that he took back when he was in the CFL. Which seems a bit odd to me.