Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Would you guys rather have a rookie over the guy that literally owned the Panthers


signVick

Recommended Posts

Michael Vick literally owned the Panthers?

If you don't know how to properly use a word, just don't use it. The improper use of "literally" is such a pet peeve of mine.

I opened this thread thinking that someone was proposing that Jerry Richardson could play QB better than any rookie we could

draft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, not to be the grammar hammer here, but the title of this thread is ridiculous. I'll cut you a little slack since you've only posted here ten times and because I think you're probably a trolling Falcons fan, but LITERALLY means you are NOT using the word as an emphasization tool. If Vick LITERALLY owned the Panthers - per your thread title - then he would have possession of the majority of the shares of the organization. So, Vick did not literally own the Panthers, he FIGURATIVELY owned the Panthers. But like I said, I'm pretty sure your a Falcons fans, so I'll cut you some slack because I have a pretty clear understanding of the overall education of Falcons fans.

Oh, and the thread title is a question, so you should probably use a question mark at the end of it.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, not to be the grammar hammer here, but the title of this thread is ridiculous. I'll cut you a little slack since you've only posted here ten times and because I think you're probably a trolling Falcons fan, but LITERALLY means you are NOT using the word as an emphasization tool.

It's one thing to use a word improperly -- it's quite another thing to just make a word up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...