Jump to content

2017 DAYTON BRONCOS


Bronco94

Recommended Posts

Part of being a good parent and a good person is to support your kiddos with all activities no matter if it's sports or debate or honor society or Buisiness professionals of America, so you see I've had my kids go different routes and they were supported by me and my wife. And I too just had a son graduate from college and land a great job with a major gas company. So even though you seem to have hatred towards the Dayton Broncos and other towns other than your own mystery town, we doing ok too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do think the Dayton Broncos will beat fightfaith's team this year. Probably will be a shutout ballgame, with the Broncos having 650 yards total offense, 400 passing 0 ints and 250 on the ground. Defense adds 6 ints and 9 sacks. Poor poor fightfaith didn't know just what to do. See fightfaith anyone can stoop to your level of sarcasm and stupidity. But this topic is titled 2017 Dayton Broncos. Later!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, L-Train11 said:

People like thrive on attention. Quit giving attention to the absurd comments and the problem will eventually go away. If it doesn't have anything to do with Dayton, or the topic at hand, I would simply ignore it.

Ok L-train I'm sure gonna try. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Bronco94 said:

I do think the Dayton Broncos will beat fightfaith's team this year. Probably will be a shutout ballgame, with the Broncos having 650 yards total offense, 400 passing 0 ints and 250 on the ground. Defense adds 6 ints and 9 sacks. Poor poor fightfaith didn't know just what to do. See fightfaith anyone can stoop to your level of sarcasm and stupidity. But this topic is titled 2017 Dayton Broncos. Later!!!!

Keep dreaming over there Bronco94 quote me if you want to, but Dayton will be 0-2 to start off the season. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, L-Train11 said:

So will Dayton beat splendora to make them 1-2, or will they lose again to go 0-3? 

Dayton is gonna start out this season 4-0 and then we will finally play somebody, being New Caney. After that we got the hill, both of those games should be good ones. I'm hoping for different results of course, and with us pulling out the wins. Then we possibly could be 6-0 at this point, then we have porter which we can win this ball game, 7-0, you following me here fightfaith, next we have the Mecca of football, Crosby. Hell (Heck, for fightfaith) yea they're good, but we prepare well for better games, so expect a good one. So by now we could be 8-0, maybe 7-1, but possibly 8-0. Then we have two games left, kingwood park which we had a good one last year away that was real exciting which the Dayton JV won, so by now we could be 9-0, maybe 8-1, but possibly 9-0, and then to finish strong we play Caney creek, and end the season 10-0, possibly 9-1. These could be the results of this 2017 All Mighty Dayton Bronco football team. Jsn 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Bronco94 said:

Dayton is gonna start out this season 4-0 and then we will finally play somebody, being New Caney. After that we got the hill, both of those games should be good ones. I'm hoping for different results of course, and with us pulling out the wins. Then we possibly could be 6-0 at this point, then we have porter which we can win this ball game, 7-0, you following me here fightfaith, next we have the Mecca of football, Crosby. Hell yea they're good, but we prepare well for better games, so expect a good one. So by now we could be 8-0, maybe 7-1, but possibly 8-0. Then we have two games left, kingwood park which we had a good one last year away that was real exciting which the Dayton JV won, so by now we could be 9-0, maybe 8-1, but possibly 9-0, and then to finish strong we play Caney creek, and end the season 10-0, possibly 9-1. These could be the results of this 2017 All Mighty Dayton Bronco football team. Jsn 

I thought if you use profanity in this forum you would be removed?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Fightfaith said:

What rules have I broken? Please let me no. I didn't do nothing wrong, but you keep people here that uses profanity and your a imposter director.

I'm no admin, but I'm pretty sure thats rule #17 you just broke with that last statement.... since you asked..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Member Statistics

    45,937
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    jacobmartin
    Newest Member
    jacobmartin
    Joined



  • Posts

    • There is a difference, but I wouldn't at all put it past Trump to do so if he had the infrastructure in place to get away with it like the Dems currently do.  With the amount of effort he's invested in ruining those republicans who've opposed him, it wouldn't surprise me one bit.
    • I think it will be an interesting case and could potentially come up for appeal on a different constitutional point.  The Supreme Court has ruled in the past that the government doesn’t have to take possession of property in order to take it under the meaning of the Fifth Amendment.  If they take away the enjoyment or use of the property, it is no different than physically seizing it to build a highway for example. In a lawsuit as opposed to a criminal trial, a person/plaintiff doesn’t have to prove something beyond a reasonable doubt but rather by a preponderance of evidence or “more likely” to have happened. Maybe it could be described as more likely yes than no or 51%-49%.  ”IF” it can be shown at a trial by a preponderance of evidence that Texas more likely yes than no caused the flooding with its engineering of the project, the people suing might have a case. But…. Does that alone win the case under the Fifth Amendment taking clause? I am not so sure. In US v Causby the Supreme Court ruled that the US government took a man’s property by flying airplanes over it. It was a public airport lawfully leased by the US in WWII and used to fly heavy bombers from it. Causby had an egg farm and the extremely loud noise of some airplanes under full power and sometimes at night with a landing lights being so close, it bothered and scared the family and damaged his egg farm production. Some chickens died and some quit laying eggs due to the extreme disturbances and lights at night. The Supreme Court ruled in Causby’s favor saying that the US had taken away the enjoyment and use of his land even though they didn’t physically seize it. The use of the land was hampered and that was enough for the taking clause under the Fifth Amendment. So in the IH-10 case, did Texas take away the use or enjoyment of the property?  A point of Causby was that the military bombers at a public airport was certainly for “public use”. The planes were public/taxpayers’ and the airport and lease were taxpayers’ property so the “public” definitely used it   My question in this lawsuit against Texas, even in they can prove the damage, was the damage (like in Causby) for “public use”? If not would it then not be a Fifth Amendment case but rather a state law case?  If Texas law denies such a lawsuit under state sovereignty and the families can’t prove a Fifth Amendment case of “public use”, could they prove the damages but still lose the case under state law? I haven’t read that anywhere and just thinking out loud. I could be way off base. But I think it could be interesting…..
    • Both sides...that is, everyone tries to get their people elected. Trump has not weaponized the government to bankrupt and imprison his political opponents. Night and day difference for me.
    • Surely you're aware of the great lengths Trump has gone to disrupt the elections and destroy the careers of republican politicians who haven't supported some of his most outlandish claims, or dared to question him or disagree with him about January 6.  You and I actually agree on this issue, although it must only go one way for you, because Trump's actions against republicans who didn't fall into lockstep with him is one of my biggest concerns about reelecting him.  The fact that he took action to affect literally hundreds of republican primaries from national elections down to municipal levels across the country, is concerning. It would've been one thing had he done it in an effort to help republicans win. Instead his purpose was to push out his perceived detractors and install MAGA politicians at every level of government in as many places as possible, and has resulted in a fractured republican party.
    • Lmao. No doubt. With a name like that, he would've gotten made fun of even if he was home-schooled.
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...