So, if i'd search for some of your posts from last year about gholston and farve and opened a new thread quoting those posts, calling you out for being totally wrong, you would basically be ok with that?
Its a horrible argument. Horrible. I really have no idea where he is trying to go with this. One of the worst arguments ever on TGG.
Cool, you just called me a name in a post where you are asking me to point out a post wherein you called me a name. Suggestion: quit while you're only a few laps behind, and stop wasting my time, you're only embarrassing yourself.
And I still haven't done that. Why you continue to talk about comparing Evans to Clowney in direct response to me is puzzling. I shouldn't have to explain why this line of reasoning is ridiculous. A receiver can only control themselves. They cannot control whether the QB throws them the ball or not. We do not know if Clowney was open last night, and you're telling us he was blanketed. He could have been killing those first string CB's for all we know. So telling a dude he's sponsoring a BJ parade isn't an insult. OK dude.
Yes..but you have to agree...this could be one the worst arguments ever. At some point you have to realize that this thread was a horrible idea. If you are a little boy..then its really not calling you a name right?
So arguably the guy said he had no catches when he actually had 2 catches. READ THE POSTS. What's going on with you guys? How do you know he played 10x more plays, where's your proof? Blah Blah Blah. Quit wasting my time. Make a point that means something or move on.
And whats all this talk about a bj parade...what do you mean by that. Your not suggesting....wait a minute...what did you mean by that.
His stat line showed a bunch of zeros. He didn't make any plays. This doesn't bode well... and it inches me a little closer to the theory that he's not going to make much of an impact against the ones. At the end of the season, we can re-open this debate. I'm predicting perhaps a touchdown or two for Clowney, and maybe 200 yards receiving. What's your prediction?
Well i found a pretty juicy quote right here, it doesn't involve Favre or Gholston, but its remarkable anyway: YIKES! Seems like you were a bit off target back then!
No shit the stat line showed zero's. Did you read what I wrote? Inches you closer? You started a new thread to declare yourself correct and request people to apologize after his first few snaps with the 1's. I'd say that's a bit more than inching closer. That's fine. A full season is a much better body of work to judge a player on. My only contention the entire time is that he has earned time with the 1's and he should be higher on the WR depth chart than Brad Smith. Apparently the coach agrees. I have no prediction.
Bollinger is better than Ramsey in my opinion, of course, they both suck. Like I said, I've been wrong before.
Oh yeah, I'm getting my ass kicked by you guys verbally. You're really making me feel like I'm a heel. I never should've pointed out that Clowney didn't do jack last night... boy I'll never disagree with any of you guys ever again.
And thats why you should know that calling out others for being wrong isn't the classiest way to prove your point. Everybody will be wrong at some point, and if we start opening threads to call each other out, we could just quit posting.
Yeah I read what you wrote. You suggested that using stats to gauge a players performance is ridiculous, which is in of itself.... ridiculous: I won't hold my breath bro. Circumstantial evidence points to him not being open, not running good routes, not brushing his teeth before the game -- whatever. 0 stat line, indicates a poor performance indicates this is not a starting caliber wide receiver, indicates time to check waiver wire. What it certainly DOES NOT indicate is that he played well. Stuckey's performance certainly DOES indicate he's the #2 wide receiver. Hell, Allison caught a very "Clowneyesque" TD last night against similar circumstances that Clowney has. Should we start talking about him as a viable WR threat on our team as well? Using your reasoning, I would say yes. I guess in the whacky world of TGG, that kind of statement doesn't make sense anymore. Since you're not willing to make a prediction, I guess that you're just arguing with me for the sake of arguing, not because you think Clowney is actually viable, which is the point I'm trying to make: Clowney is not a viable option at WR for our team.
1) Post a thread showing how egotistical you are. 2) Ignore the topic at hand and insult others. 3) Start a flame war. 4)???? 5) PROFIT!!!
Saying that a reciever, whom the QB DIDN'T throw the ball to, is bad because he has a bunch of zeros in the statistic columns is like saying a Ferrari is as slow as a Hummer because when it's not on it's still... Does that make sense to you? I'm trying to go down example avenue to see if we can make a point out of this thread.
