| Welcome to Raceski. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| Rudd to Drive #88 | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jan 6 2007, 05:06 PM (188 Views) | |
| bdog2924 | Jan 6 2007, 05:06 PM Post #1 |
![]()
Go Gordon and Sorenson!
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Sources close to Robert Yates Racing told ESPN.com Wednesday that Ricky Rudd's Snickers Ford will carry the #88 in 2007. An announcement is expected as soon as this weekend, one source said. Since the mid-December announcement that Rudd would return to Nextel Cup Series racing following a year layoff, considerable speculation has centered on what number his RYR Ford would carry. Team officials were undecided and a bit evasive during a conference call following the announcement, leading many to speculate the number would switch to# 28 -- the number carried by Yates' first-ever Cup Series entry from its inception through 2003, when the car was switched to #38. Asked his preference, Rudd said he'd take the #28, which he drove for Yates from 2000-2002, posting three wins and 34 top-five finishes. But he'll get the #88, a decision made based on a 2002 agreement between RYR and Texaco/Havoline, sources said. The agreement, sources said, was that RYR could keep the #28 when Texaco left for Chip Ganassi Racing [#42 Dodge], but that Yates would wait several years to run the number. Yates and Masterfoods -- Snickers' parent company -- wanted to run the #28, but couldn't reach the required agreement with Texaco to do so, sources said. |
![]() |
|
| HuskyMan20 | Jan 6 2007, 05:58 PM Post #2 |
![]()
Don't bullshit a bullshitter!
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
:woot: GO RICKY!!! Was hoping he'd drive the 28
|
![]() |
|
| JetBlack3 | Jan 6 2007, 06:01 PM Post #3 |
![]()
I am the tag team champions
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
88 is more fittin with how much that thing got tore up this season....no point in Ricky damagin the 28s legacy anymore |
![]() |
|
| Orangesmoke20 | Jan 6 2007, 07:31 PM Post #4 |
|
Too hot to handle.. too cold to hold... ohhhhhh yeahhhhh!!!
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
wtf why would texaco have a say in it the number is property of ryr |
![]() |
|
| JetBlack3 | Jan 6 2007, 08:00 PM Post #5 |
![]()
I am the tag team champions
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Must be a non use clause in their split contract |
![]() |
|
| KK3869 | Jan 6 2007, 09:33 PM Post #6 |
![]()
Just your simple Cameron
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
pfff, bull crap. |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Jan 6 2007, 09:38 PM Post #7 |
|
Deleted User
|
Texaco and Yates agreed that Yates could keep the 28 as long as he didn't use it for several years. |
|
|
| grey__fox | Jan 8 2007, 01:16 PM Post #8 |
![]()
Yep. It's me.
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
It's been several years though....WTF? Anywho...GO RICKY |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Jan 8 2007, 01:24 PM Post #9 |
|
Deleted User
|
Four years isn't exactly several. |
|
|
| grey__fox | Jan 8 2007, 02:32 PM Post #10 |
![]()
Yep. It's me.
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
...but it's enough. |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Jan 8 2007, 02:54 PM Post #11 |
|
Deleted User
|
Obviously it isn't or the 28 would be on the car. Get a clue. |
|
|
| grey__fox | Jan 9 2007, 02:19 AM Post #12 |
![]()
Yep. It's me.
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Thank you, Mr. Politically Correct. |
![]() |
|
| Orangesmoke20 | Jan 9 2007, 10:02 AM Post #13 |
|
Too hot to handle.. too cold to hold... ohhhhhh yeahhhhh!!!
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
what the fuck does PC have to do with this? |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Jan 9 2007, 10:58 AM Post #14 |
|
Deleted User
|
He's an idiot. |
|
|
| grey__fox | Jan 9 2007, 11:34 AM Post #15 |
![]()
Yep. It's me.
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
No, you're the idiot for constantly lashing out at me for every comment I make just because it isn't good enough for you, or make sense to you. And for your information... Advertisement Top Web Results for "several" -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [Origin: 1375–1425; late ME < AF < ML séparālis, equiv. to L sépar separate + -ālis -al1] Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006. American Heritage Dictionary - Cite This Source sev·er·al (sěv'ər-əl, sěv'rəl) Pronunciation Key adj. Being of a number more than two or three but not many: several miles away. Single; distinct: "Pshaw! said I, with an air of carelessness, three several times" (Laurence Sterne). Respectively different; various: They parted and went their several ways. See Synonyms at distinct. Law Relating separately to each party of a bond or note. pron. (used with a pl. verb) An indefinite but small number; some or a few: Several of the workers went home sick. [Middle English, separate, from Anglo-Norman, from Medieval Latin sēparālis, sēperālis, from Latin sēpar, from sēparāre, to separate; see separate.] sev'er·al·ly adv. Translation: Get a clue. |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Jan 9 2007, 12:06 PM Post #16 |
|
Deleted User
|
Everyone's definition of several is different. The definition we're talking about is the definition given to it by Texaco. In this case, four years isn't several. Get a clue. |
|
|
| grey__fox | Jan 9 2007, 01:18 PM Post #17 |
![]()
Yep. It's me.
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
...which is why I questioned Texaco's "definition" in the first place. How many years does it have to be? Get a clue. And get off my back. |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Jan 9 2007, 01:21 PM Post #18 |
|
Deleted User
|
You're an idiot. If you want to make a big deal out of how much or how little several is then buy a freakin race team. |
|
|
| grey__fox | Jan 9 2007, 01:24 PM Post #19 |
![]()
Yep. It's me.
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Did I strike a chord with somebody? Boo hoo. It wasn't a big deal until YOU made it a big deal, idiot. |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Jan 9 2007, 01:38 PM Post #20 |
|
Deleted User
|
You're the one whining about Snickers not letting them use it. |
|
|
| Frvrth247 | Jan 9 2007, 01:54 PM Post #21 |
![]()
3X Raceski Cup Champion
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Who cares what number he has. All that matters is, he is back. |
![]() |
|
| grey__fox | Jan 9 2007, 01:55 PM Post #22 |
![]()
Yep. It's me.
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Don't you mean Texaco? :rolleyes: |
![]() |
|
| Orangesmoke20 | Jan 9 2007, 02:11 PM Post #23 |
|
Too hot to handle.. too cold to hold... ohhhhhh yeahhhhh!!!
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
no the big deal is obvioisly being created by you i dont see aaron takeing the time to fine an internet deffinition of the word several when any and every idiot already know what it means |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Jan 9 2007, 02:18 PM Post #24 |
|
Deleted User
|
You know what I mean bonehead. |
|
|
| luigistarted06 | Jan 9 2007, 05:15 PM Post #25 |
![]()
I like it in and around my mouth.
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
28 woulda' been best but at least he's back |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · NASCAR Discussion · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2






![]](http://z6.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)









