Buzzkill: Neither Saints, ’Boys true contenders
 

Teams have compiled impressive records, but against weak opponents
By Kerry Byrne
Coldhardfootballfacts.com
Updated: 2:13 p.m. CT Dec 7, 2006
Dashing hopes and dreams is something of a Cold, Hard Football Facts specialty.

In fact, it’s kinda the way we celebrate the holidays.

Take, for example, the hopes and dreams of fans in New Orleans and Dallas, who will watch their teams battle Sunday night in the marquee matchup of Week 14.

The Saints’ season so far has been a giddy gridiron Mardi Gras parade passing down booze-soaked Bourbon Street, with the “pundits� on the catwalks, tossing beads of praise at New Orleans newcomers Drew Brees, Reggie Bush and Sean Payton.

Dallas, meanwhile, has fallen in love with the NFL’s newest “It Boy,� quarterback Tony Romo. He has the athleticism, the dimples and the 5-1 record as a starter that make fans and “pundits� swoon.

Both teams are 8-4 and boast two-game leads in their respective divisions. Barring a major collapse, both teams will cruise into the playoffs. The winner of Sunday night’s game will also have a very good shot at a first-round bye. It’s easy to get caught up in the excitement in both cities.

But the sad, spirit-crushing Cold, Hard Football Fact is that neither team will win the Super Bowl.

In fact, the Saints and Cowboys are so fraudulent that the IRS should come in and do an audit. Both teams stand as textbook examples of decent clubs who have fattened themselves on cupcake schedules. Both teams have failed to show any sign that they have what it takes to win three or four straight games against solid competition in the playoffs.

The Cold, Hard Football Facts put a lot of stock in what we call the “Quality Wins Quotient.� We don’t just look at a team’s record. We look at who they played and track their record against “Quality Opponents� (which we define as any team with a winning record).

The theory is quite simple, and has a lot of historical merit: Some teams have great records thanks, in large part, to an easy schedule. These teams are pretenders. Other teams have great records despite playing a difficult schedule. These teams are contenders.

This year, Dallas and New Orleans are the NFL’s biggest pretenders:

Each team has played just two games against Quality Opponents.
Every other team in football has played three or more games against Quality Opponents.
Twenty-eight NFL teams have faced four or more Quality Opponents.
Nine NFL teams have played at least six games against Quality Opponents.
Here’s how New Orleans and Dallas stack up when we look at them through the pigskin prism of the Cold, Hard Football Facts Quality Wins Quotient:

The Saints are 0-2 against Quality Teams. They got smoked in both games, losing 35-22 to Baltimore and 31-16 to Cincinnati.

The Cowboys are 1-1 against Quality Teams. They lost Jacksonville, 24-17, back in the first week of the season. They pulled off one of the biggest wins of the season, with a 21-14 victory over the Colts three weeks ago.

The Saints have gone 8-2 in their other 10 games, beating up opponents with a combined record of 48-72 (.400).

The Cowboys have gone 7-3 in their other 10 games, beating up opponents with a combined record of 47-73 (.392).

The Saints are one of just five teams in the NFL this season without a single victory against a Quality Team. The others are Oakland, Detroit, Green Bay and Arizona. That’s not the company kept by Super Bowl contenders.

The Cowboys can claim one victory over a Quality Team, but so can almost every team over in the AFC (every team but the inept Raiders). AFC also-rans like Cleveland and Houston can each claim two victories over Quality Teams. Again, that’s not the company kept by Super bowl contenders.

At its core, the Quality Wins Quotient tells us that it’s easy to look good when you don’t play anybody. And, this season, no teams have played more nobodies than Dallas and New Orleans.

RE: Buzzkill: Neither Saints, ’Boys true contenders
 

i wanna choke this guy.

RE: Buzzkill: Neither Saints, ’Boys true contenders
 

So, I guess the win over Dallas doesn't count as a win over a quality team either then, since Dallas was also a pretender at 8-4.

He's a Punk!
The Saints didn't set their schedule, they just play it. And so far, they're playing it quite nicely.

By his logic, any loss of ours would count as a 'quality win' for the opponent since we have a 9-4 record. Yet, because our opponents don't have good records, we suck?

This guy must have had a BS sandwhich for lunch, because what he's saying stinks.

RE: Buzzkill: Neither Saints, ’Boys true contenders
 

and no mention of the bears cupcake schedule

How did we get and easy schedule facing Baltimore, Philadelphia, Atlanta (x2), Carolina(x2), the Giants, Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, and Dallas?

We beat Philadelphia with McNabb when they were hot, we beat Atlanta when they were the #1 rushing attack in the NFL, we beat the Bucs when Gradowski was going to blow over us, we embarrased Dallas when all of the sports media was lusting over Dallas and Romo (they reallly hate us for that BTW). We shut down Frank Gore. We have the number 1 offense in the NFL, not the Colts, Bears or the Chargers.

I actually love that people like this guy are so utterly angry and full of hate that we are suceeding. We could have beat every team on our schedule and goofs like this would still make up reasons why we stink and will never win the next game. It's great to watch these miserable people squirm at goodness.

RE: Buzzkill: Neither Saints, ’Boys true contenders
 

I read this too. BS as far as I'm concerned.

Why you guys even bother reading stuff like that is beyond me.
Here are some hard facts:

Week 3, the hottest, unstoppable team that everyone was salivating over was the 2-0 Vicks. SPANKED!!

Week 6, the hottest, unstoppable team that everyone was salivating over was the 4-1 Eagles. BEATEN!!

Week 14, the hottest, unstoppable team that everyone was salivating over was the 8-4 Cowboys. HUMILIATED IN THEIR HOME ON PRIMETIME NATIONAL TV!!

There...

I think this article was written before the Saints-Dallas game, looks like Dec 7th!!!!!!!!!!

THATS WHAT I'M TALKIN' BOUT TOBIAS!!!!

This guy gets paid for stirring the pot.

Who cares what his statistics say about opponents. On any given Sunday (thursday/saturday/monday), if you don't bring your game, you get beat. The NFL isn't the SEC playing non-conference schedules.

Does this guy offer an analysis of "contenders" losing to "pretenders" or "losers"? Of course not. It would undermine his argument that pretenders can't win in the playoffs. I'll bet this guy said the same thing about the Steelers last season.

I wouldn't worry what these guys have to say, enjoy this season, we've been waiting for a season like this for years.

#1 offense in the NFL.
Can clinch the NFC South come this Sunday.
Only 1 loss in our division.
Payton will be coach of the year.
Colston could be rookie of the year.
Bush is turning out to be the real deal.
Brees should be MVP. (# 1 passer in the NFL)

I could go on and on but you know all of this already..

Enjoy...

I told you guys this week it would be something different. It's not going to end until we get to the Super Bowl. Until then we will get BS every week.

You guys....don't forget this important fact!!! Do you remember one of the reasons why the Saints were predicted to do soooo poorly this year? It was because at the start of the season when none of the games were played yet everybody thought and figured that the demise of the Saints would be the toughness of the schedule. Everybody beilieved that the Saints schedule was too difficult despite coming off the 3-13 season. I still have the NFL preview issue from Sports Illustrated where it predicts the success for the season and all that crap. On the top of each teams page it had a difficulty ranking for the toughness of schedule and the Saints were tied for 3rd in THE LEAGUE!! So now that we are cruisin through the season and kicking serious ASS....you wanna come with this garbage that we are not beating quality teams?!?!? MAKE UP YOUR MINDS!!!!! WAS OUR SHCEDULE TOUGH OR NOT?!?!?!?
Eat that sucka!!

What hacks me off is that they talk about the strength of the Saints' opponents and don't bring up the Bears' schedule when talking about them.

At the beginning of the season, everyone was saying how tough the Saints schdule was. Now it's an easy schdule. I hope people make up their minds.

People will always find a way to try and drag others who succeed down. Crabs, all of em! They are haters, obviously, and I think it just adds to the fodder that will be shown lacking come January '07. They just got to go out there and play their game, regardless of the talk. I know in my heart that is what Peyton tells em. Because with this team, its the actions on the field, not the talk in the (press)box that makes us proud to be Saints fans, in the end. :saintsfan:

Check out the letter I sent Mr. Byrne, on his analysis. I will post his reply when I get it.

To Mr. Kerry Byrne,

Your analysis on the Saints and Cowboys schedules, was very interesting. Statistically on point. The only problem is, that you don't remember your history very well. I remember a few teams winning the Superbowl, that had what you would term as a "cupcake" schedule, in the history of the NFL. This isn't college ball, this is the NFL. The BCS computer system has already wrecked quite a few title games in the past few years, so your analysis doesn't hold water with me at all. In case you haven't noticed, teams that looked real good at the beginning of the season, are falling by the wayside in December, because of injuries, and emotional drain, from the long weeks of practice, and game days.

This is the Pro Football league, and every team may not have as much talent as the other, but they are all pro players none the less. Getting to the play offs, is all that a team needs to do, because that's when the wins really count anyway.

Most every predictor, prognosticator, and so called football expert, has looked more like an "educated guesser", in the past few months, considering, the fact that an average of six underdogs, have won every week. Teams, that people in your profession considered shoe ins, are failing miserably, while you guys scramble each Sunday night, to come up with an excuse for your incompetence, and apparent ignorance on the subject of football.

Last time I checked, there is no NFL Master's Degree program anywhere, so to assume the role of a football expert, is pretty much as arrogant as one person can be. You can factor every kept statistic, for every team, in the league, since the first game, and your computers are still going to be wrong at least fifty percent of the time, if not more. Also, considering, that you do not factor in heart, determination, and the will to win, how do you publish this kind of analysis, and feel good about what you write?

The amazing thing to me I guess, is that you get paid to do this. Which tells me that snake oil salesmen are alive and well in 2006. I have an idea, that will save your journalistic integrity, if you ever had any to begin with: Let the teams play the game, and then write about it, after it's over. Anything you do before that, is nothing more, than what I can hear down at the barber shop, on Friday morning.

I will keep this article you wrote on hand, so when the Superbowl is over, I will write you back, and wait to read what you have to say then. I'm sure it will be more of an excuse piece for yourself, than an intellectual piece of sports journalism. Thank you for your time.

Wicked!

SFIAH

Not enough indignant edge, but a great start. Keep stroking that menacing pen.

Sorry, that didn't sound so gay in my head when I wrote it.

Just another one guys. we have gone thru this the entire year. I am glad it is still going on. let the other teams we play believe this BS. It only works in our favore

Isn't that website just a thinly-veiled Patriots fan site anyway? I always remember them having articles about how Brady was so much better than Manning and Marino combined.

And just one more thing to point out, and thats the fact he just looked at the final score in those losses to those "quality teams". Never mind the fact that w/o the turnovers we would've won at least 3 of those.

The Bears look who they beat seattle and the gaints lost to newengand who esle did they play?

I would add a last snipe at the end saying something to the effect of, "you might want to consider going back to college (football, that is)."

AWESOME LETTER, TOO!!

:party: :party: :band: :party:

I would suggest all of you send a letter, just to read the condescending letter that pops up, telling you that if you are praising their football knowledge, then you will reciever a nice reply. If you question their abilities, and form your own opinions, then they will send you a nasty reply. I am paraphrasing, so if you want to read it, send them an email. It's funny to read.

Sweet letter, i still want to stand on this guys throat.

This is Great!
 

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com...e.php?Page=966

A link from ColdHardFootballFacts themselves and I quote:

Wait, it gets better:

And here are their predictions:

I see an awful lot of Dallas in there :wink:

Here's a link to them backpeddaling and saying Bledsoe sucks and the NFC East is weak after the previous aricle where the NFC East is the firecracker NFC division and Bledsoe and weapons will be great for Dallas:

http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com....php?Page=1088

RE: This is Great!
 

People in their line of work, have to learn how to back peddle early in their careers. Walking backwards is a way of life for them.

RE: This is Great!
 

Another thing to recognize this season, is the number of teams, that are in contention for a wildcard spot. How many seasons before this one, have you seen this many teams still in it this time of year? There's like 4 teams tied for the final spot right now, and two more, one game behind. Teams that weren't supposed to win, did, and the one's who were supposed to win, lost. That's AFC, and NFC.

This has been the craziest year in the NFL, I have seen in quite sometime. I like it, but it's weird. Strength of schedule, this season, to me, means squat.

RE: This is Great!
 

Don't get your panties in a bunch over self-important dweebs who are paid to stir the pot. The only thing to believe is your eyes and the current record. Nothing or anybody else matters.

RE: This is Great!
 

They were saying the same about the Steelers this time last year and we know how that turned out.

You'll be happy to know, folks, that the "Cold, Hard Football Facts Takes Its Medicine Tour" continues Friday afternoon on WWL in New Orleans.

It's been a tough week in the cardboard-box world headquarters:

http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com...amp;Category=1

But let it never be said that the CHFF don't have the stones to face the music.

I'm going to post this, because it's just too funny. I even found my letter in there. Crazy.


When trolls attack
Cold, Hard Football Facts for December 14, 2006

Want to make friends all over the country? Insult not one but two teams with the same article, which is what we did last week with our look at the schedules the Saints and Cowboys had faced heading into their Week 14 Sunday night showdown. No article in the brief, shameful history of Cold, Hard Football Facts.com has engendered so much wrath.

At first, we were assaulted in the most colorful terms primarily by Cowboys fans. These trolls snuck back under their bridges when Dallas got hammered by New Orleans. But that prompted Saints fans to come out in full celebratory force, like worms climbing up out of the earth on the first warm day of spring. What follows is a compendium of some of the most entertaining and most colorful responses we've received from people this week.

The Cold, Hard Football Facts will take another beating Friday night when publisher Kerry J. Byrne appears with former Saints running back Hokie Gajan on WWL in New Orleans. Details are mixed below in the Mail Pouch. You'll enjoy looking for it.

This section is rated PG-13.

TO: Kerry Byrne
RE: BOYS/Saints Pretenders.

Nice piece of facts you wrote. You had some very good points. I don't think the ‘Boys are contenders either since they haven't won against quality teams. However you might want to look in the mirror, "Cold Hard Football Facts" is in fact a pretender as well. This site reminds me of XFL. Get a real job at Fox Sports or if you’re really good: ESPN. I'll be waiting to read your articles there. Granted, we all have to start somewhere. – Ryan Gripp

CHFF: That was downright polite, folks. They get much worse.

Kerry Byrne has A BIG STEAMY PILE OF **** FOR BRAINS!!! You might want to do a better job editing the garbage he spews in his articles! – Steve Oullette

CHFF: That’s more like it.

Your theory about the Saints and Cowboys being overrated based on lack of "quality opponents" is flawed and makes no sense. You state that every other team has faced at least three "quality opponents." Ironically, anyone who has played the Saints or Cowboys has a "quality opponent" on their schedule - how do you explain that? – Michael Estes

CHFF: Do we really have to explain that part?

Re: Quality Opponents

Dear Mr. Byrne, Are you retarded? Sincerely – Andrew S. Michaelson, Maplewood, NJ

CHFF: We prefer to call him “handi-capable.�

As a Saints fan who heard you on the Jerry V. show this week, I said at the time that your process to rate teams was flawed. Today and especially tonight proved it. The Saints, according to you, were 0-2 against quality teams and were still the “’Aints.� After today all of a sudden they are now 4-2 against "quality teams" because Atlanta and Philadelphia won and now are "quality teams" since they have winning records. Quality teams don't appear and disappear in a matter of one game. Not to mention the ass whipping that the Saints just put on the great, awesome, incredible Dallas Cowgirls. Your process can be used at the end of the season but not during the season. This is a much nicer post than I really wanted to tell you. GO SAINTS!!!!! – Brad Prendergast

CHFF: It was an unusual situation. The Saints had three wins over Atlanta (twice) and Philly. Both were 6-6 heading into the week. Both won, so the Saints instantly got three quality wins, plus their victory over Dallas. There’s a good chance that Atlanta and/or Philly could finish at .500. So, at the end of the season, those may not count as quality wins. But you gotta draw the line somewhere when defining a quality opponent. We define it as a team with a winning record. It’s a pretty solid definition.

The Saints aren't pretending to be anything anymore. We are, for the first time since 1967, a football TEAM. Yes, we the fans are having a great time. Please allow us that. – Buckie

CHFF: Thanks for the note. Loved your work on American Idol.

Tell Kerry Byrne to eat his words. The Saints are coming, the Saints are coming! WHO DAT?!!!! Eat that, Kerry. What are you, a bitter Panthers fan?? You should be ashamed of yourself! Just look at that game last night!! Eat it. – Katharine Boylan

CHFF: He’s eaten worse, and has the body to prove it.

Please contact me for an on-air interview about the recent article on your web site claiming the Saints have not yet beaten a team with a winning record. – Kristian Garic, producer, WWL Radio, New Orleans

CHFF: We’ll be on WWL Friday (Dec. 15) at 6:30 p.m. (ET) with Garic, Bob Mitchell and former Saints star Hokie Gajan. Should be colorful radio, to say the least.

Hey does this mean that San Diego's 10 wins against teams with a combined record of 47-73 makes them a pretender? Or the fact that NE & Baltimore's nine wins don't get much better at 50-58 combined records for the teams they beat( in the “dominant� AFC)? Or that the Colts 10 wins are against 60-60 combined record teams (and they lost to the Cowboys)???? How is a 7-5 team a "quality team" with four games left, when some/all of them could still end up with 7-9 records at the end of the season making them bunk like your article. Please enlighten us all with what teams are not pretenders when writing an article about the ones that are? – Big Fan Chris Miner

CHFF: The numbers are what the numbers are. We don’t massage them. We just report what they tell us. If people don’t like it, well … tough ****.

Cold Hard Fact: Your website sucks!!! So much for Saints being the Aints!!! Quality wins, huh!!! – Michael Estes

CHFF: Our website also blows. It’s a Christmas miracle!

With all due respect, you sound like a whining petulant college student who feels his team got ripped in the BCS poll. Go cry somewhere else. Neither team has made a claim that required your angst. I've sent to the address of CHFF.com, a PISS REMOVER to fix your cereal. Sincerely – Brad Dickey

CHFF: Nice, a piss remover. We can cross that off our Christmas wish list.

Your system is flawed. Strength of opponent should be based on the opponent record at the time of the game, not 3 weeks or so later. Also, your system is flawed because If team A is (3-0) and plays team B (2-1), the only team that can get a Quality win is Team B. If team A wins, B is now 2-2 and no longer Quality. But if B wins, team A is suddenly 3-1 and B gets a Quality mark for it. Same thing happens with 3-2, 4-3, 5-4, 6-5, 7-6. Just so you know... – Mike Watson

CHFF: No, a system that's based on the record at the time of the game is flawed. If a team’s 3-0 and you beat them, and they go on to lose every other game, it tells us they weren’t very good to begin with.

How does one interpret saying Cowboys and Saints are not Super Bowl contenders but have them ranked highly in the Dominant Dozen? – Jonathan Kwoh

CHFF: They’re behind several more likely Super Bowl contenders.

In response to your recent article "The Great Pretenders," your methodology for determining quality opponents is pretty absurd. The Cowboys have beaten two teams (the Panthers and Giants) who are currently 6-6 overall. Those teams aren't above .500, and therefore, aren't quality opponents by your definition, BECAUSE the Cowboys beat them. If Dallas had lost both of those games, you'd say they'd played 4 quality teams. It's ridiculous to count a team's own wins against them when calculating a measure of strength-of-schedule. It's much more reasonable to factor out a team's own results when determining their quality opponents, like virtually everybody else does. That way, you're not punishing a team for winning or rewarding a team for losing. – Dan Thaler, Comstock Park, MI

CHFF: How do you explain the other five losses each team suffered?

Regarding the Saints, obviously Kerry Byrne doesn't know what he's talking about. Must be some kind of homo who never played a game in is life. – Marc Q

CHFF: Oh, you’ve met him.

Are you kidding me about the Cowboys being only 1-1 against "quality" opponents? Carolina was 4-3 when they got whooped by the Boys. The Giants were 6-5 when their season was taken away from them by Dallas last week. Get your damn facts straight, dip ****s. – Wade Brown

While it is true that Dallas has played as of right now 2 quality opponents going 1-1, you are missing another point. After the Saints game this week adds another quality opponent to their list, the Giants and Panthers who are both 6-6 are playing each other. Since Dallas beat the Panthers and split 2 games with the Giants, whichever team wins that game will add to the Dallas total as well. If it's the Giants that win, then Dallas assuming they beat the Saints will then have a record of 3-2 against quality opponents. – Mark Rosenthal

Kerry Byrne, here are some facts for you. New Orleans is lucky to even have an NFL team. The Saints won three games last year and the city was destroyed by Katrina. The fact that the Saints won't win the Super Bowl is hardly anything to cry about. That the Saints won nine games and that is unreal. I don’t care if they beat blind teams. So you can kiss our happy asses down here. – Paul LaNoue

To Mr. Kerry Byrne: I remember a few teams winning the Super Bowl that had what you would term as a "cupcake" schedule, in the history of the NFL. This isn't college ball, this is the NFL. The BCS computer system has already wrecked quite a few title games in the past few years, so your analysis doesn't hold water with me at all. This is the Pro Football league. Last time I checked, there is no NFL Master's Degree program anywhere, so to assume the role of a football expert, is pretty much as arrogant as one person can be.

The amazing thing to me I guess, is that you get paid to do this, which tells me that snake oil salesmen are alive and well in 2006. I have an idea that will save your journalistic integrity, if you ever had any to begin with: Let the teams play the game, and then write about it, after it's over. Anything you do before that is nothing more than what I can hear down at the barber shop, on Friday morning.

I will keep this article you wrote on hand, so when the Super Bowl is over, I will write you back, and wait to read what you have to say then. I'm sure it will be more of an excuse piece for yourself, than an intellectual piece of sports journalism. Thank you for your time. – Hard Reality

CHFF: Kerry got fired from his job as a snake oil salesman. That’s how he ended up with this ****ty gig.

Friends, football fans, Romans, countrymen, Lend me your ears. I come not to praise the Saints but to, sort of, defend the Cowboys. That 1-1 vs. quality opponents includes a loss during the Bledsoe era. Yes, they are untested. So were the 1972 Dolphins at this point. There is a difference between untested and failed (or fraudulent). – William Berry

What easy schedule? It's not like The Boys played the Jets you know. What I can't figure out is how the Jets have a winning record, forget about the Dallas question. – Pops

Now that the Saints have the most quality wins in the NFC, does that make them contenders to win the Super Bowl? Don't mean to rag on your theory but it's pretty weak that an article written last week calls out the Saints record and your very same formula a week later suggests they're the best team in the conference. – Jeff Asher

Pretenders? Here’s why your article has no merit: 1) The NFC has only four teams with winning records; 2) four teams the Cowboys played and beat are 6-6, all could be 7-6 come Sunday. Now the Cowboys have a 5-2 vs "Quality wins" as you put it?; 3) Next week your contenders are pretenders and the pretenders are contenders??? Not consistent enough to even care about. Point is, this changes from week to week in HUGE margins and to use this to identify who the better teams are is just well ... stupid. – Tony Welch

CHFF: So the No. 1 reason this article has no merit is because most of the teams in the NFC suck?

Stats are for Fantasy Dorks that can't tell the difference between numbers and reality. Stats tell me one thing - there are idiots out there writing all that crap down so they can justify their meaningless life with silly prognostications like yours. Watch how wrong you become in eight weeks then look for a career as a weather forecaster where mediocrity is the norm and 50/50 is right on the nose. Do it before your ass wrecks another Lazy Boy. – Roth Towers

CHFF: So you’ve seen our furniture?

I suggest that you make an adjustment to the way your power rankings are computed. If you’re going to reward teams for quality wins, then you should also penalize teams for non-quality losses (losses to teams with below .500 records). I don’t like the word non-quality though, so I suggest that these kinds of losses be called "odious" losses. However, there are a bunch of synonyms from which to choose, here are some:

abominable, amiss, atrocious, awful, bad news*, beastly, blah*, bottom out, bummer*, careless, cheap, cheesy*, crappy*, cruddy*, crummy*, defective, deficient, diddly*, dissatisfactory, downer*, dreadful, erroneous, fallacious, faulty, garbage, god-awful, gross*, grungy*, icky*, imperfect, inadequate, incorrect, inferior, junky*, lousy*, not good, off, poor, raunchy*, rough, sad, scuzzy, sleazeball, sleazy, slipshod, stinking, substandard, synthetic, the pits*, unacceptable, unsatisfactory, abhorrent, abject, abominable, bad, base, beggarly, cheap, currish, degenerate, despicable, despisable, detestable, dirty, disgusting, fink, hateful, heel, ignoble, ignominious, inferior, low, low-down*, lowest, mean, odious, outcast, paltry, pitiable, pitiful, poor, rat, sad, scummy*, scurvy*, shabby, shameful, sordid, sorry*, swinish, unworthy, vile, worthless, wretched

I enjoy your site very much. Keep up the good work. – TipRoast

CHFF: For a second there, we thought you were describing us. But apparently you like us. You really, really like us.

You really should not let writers like Kerry Byrne represent you publication if you expect to gain any amount of respect. I guess there is a reason I have never heard of your site. Kerry is a complete idiot. His article is unsupported by any facts of credit and is a disgrace to professional journalism. Keep it up please, so I never have to worry about him or anyone else affiliated with this site getting a job with a respectable publication. – John Alford

CHFF: Ahh, our fans. That's more like it.

Jesus Christ, post an address next time. my eyes hurt. good stuff though.