I thought it was about junc being right or wrong - meh, I haven't seen every post by junc in this thread. He's valid on some points but as you said you have to apply your evaluations to everyone. I think he's getting a bad rap here a little bit - you may of caught in him the act but that doesn't mean junc isn't worthy of being part of a debate or discussion. Both of you guys had valid points in your arguments.
To each his own but I can't respect the opinion of somebody who will call something one way for one player/situation and turn around and call it different for the other just because they have a preconceived perception of the situation instead of letting the facts dictate their opinion. And then have the gall to accuse others of not understanding the game. That's the ridiculous part.
I too am very, very curious to find out who these are. To my recollection, I have never seen Junc win an argument. Not saying that trying to throw shit on Junc - I really mean it. I don't think I have EVER seen Junc win a topic. Not that I think the phrase "winning" is relevant when it comes to sharing thoughts on our favourite team. However, I do have seen him declare himself winning arguements A LOT. One trademark is him degrading others' opinions because "they don't understand the game", which regardless of who's right or not, is sociologically incredibly arrogant and provocative. But making people annoyed at him only seems to make him think he is even more correct, it often even seems to be the fuel or driving factor. Another worrying trait is never questioning if his own believes are correct or not (ie. what differentiates psyocopaths from great minds - who never stop questioning their own reasoning). He simply KNOWS he truth, and those not believing that only makes them look foolish. Speaking of Don Quixote and fighting windmills, I have also seen Junc describe how "everyone are looking at fantasy #s" and "everyone thinks Mark can be blamed for everything" etc... I've always wondered, who are these 'everyone'? I don't know a single poster who thinks that. From a psychological standpoint, this is getting pretty troublesome tbh. And now claims to have "more followers than anyone else"...? Priceless.
Here is the thing I love about junc, and always have. He may not always have a great point, but he always stands up for things that the board tries to gang up on, and he never, ever gives up. Say what you want about his argument tactics, but I have never seen anyone on a football forum force the rest of the forum to do such a great amount of research to try to shut him up. You may not like him, but he has always been a great source of fierce debate on this forum. And he keeps the traffic going, and always has.
I'm not really sure what's to like about that, to be honest. If you want heated debate where people get aggravated towards one another, sure. But I personally rather see sound debates and standpoints where one can learn from one another, where people are willing to have their minds changed. Where people don't let their egos run the debates and are open to adopt others' view on things. You can't have that with someone who refuses to give up on an opinion, even less so if they ridicule people who don't agree with theirs'.
I like Junc, I don't think he likes me though I like Junc's posts much more than Hobbes. I get sucked into arguments easily, and I will say Sanchez sucks is much more pleasant to argue than Tebowmania. Oh boy was that interesting
Everything Mark was billed as was completely wrong -big arm -mobility -calm under pressure I've been going through his scouting reports and they're all a crock of shit
Perfectly thrown ball? He threw it up and Edwards stopped and pushed the CB away and caught the ball. It was a fine throw but perfect is an overstatement. Would you stop mentioning Sanchez's name in the same sentence as Peyton Manning? Sanchez played the Colts defense which was ranked 20th in total D, and 23rd in points allowed. Peyton faced the Steelers D which was ranked 4th in total D and 3rd in points allowed. After the fumble return, Manning led his team 30 yards against a 3rd ranked D for a 46 yard FG attempt. Sanchez led his team 38 yards against a 23rd ranked D for a 32 yard FG attempt. Both were very makable kicks. Sanchez leading his team to 8 more yards against a much much worse defense is supposed to prove what exactly? The thing I love about junc is that he makes me laugh. He is like a member of the Flat Earth Society. Even when proven wrong they refuse to concede.
That throw should have gone to Powell, other than that he did theright thing. Passing on the run to Gates on that angle could've been another pick. Sanchez did something that the haters whine abt, he risked his body for a score in a dumb Pre season game. This is why Junc makes sense. Like I said before, if Sanchez had hurt his ankle like Geno did this board would've killed Sanchez. The bias is sad here. Tell me I'm wrong, if Sanchez tripped and hurt himself the board would've been quiet like they are about Geno.
Problem here: 1. When it is conclusively proven that he is flat out wrong, he takes a different angle [than the one he had earlier] and then claims the others simply don't understand the game. 2. To refute that change in angle would require as much effort and time - by the time you actually do present the refutation, he hops on to yet another angle, dismissing the whole argument yet again. 3. This keeps going on for ever and ever - probably till the end of time. 4. I do not mind it if someone points out that I am wrong - I just ask a clear evidence to it. Once that happens, I concede that I was wrong in the argument, and change the way I think. That is how science is done, for crying out loud. When it comes to debating with junc, IT JUST DOES NOT APPLY ANY MORE. I stopped it once and for all, because I didn't want to keep wasting time on what will evidently be a lost cause sooner or later. 5. I do agree that he is respectable guy, who keeps the discussion civil most of the time - but the way he deals with these arguments is anything but.
Is THAT what you came away with on that clip... .. . .. . . ? I'm not even sure if you're being serious. If you are serious, then I definitely can see why you think Junc makes sense...
If he had any touch whatsoever, he could turn that into a TD. I'm sorry, but saying he did the right thing by not throwing to a WIDE OPEN receiver is just blatant Sanchez apologist bs.
"But we don't know what play was called" Gates' reaction fully shows that the play allowed Gates to have the ball thrown to him. An NFL quarterback makes that throw to Gates. An NFL quarterback is also expected to protect himself from being injured - especially in a pre-season game. I have a hard time admiring Mark for making the wrong decision(s) and putting his body on the line.
Let's just say he throws it to Gates there. Maybe Gates gets hit and gets injured. We just don't know.
If you want him to pass it to somebody then it goes to Powell, let Powell make a defender miss, no risk. If you think throwing to Gates on the run on that angle is easy then that's pure Sanchez hate b.s. Totally ignoring the fact Sanchez not only didn't throw the risky pass, but took on a defender is more hate. Any right handed qb, running full to his left has to set his feet, and you can tell in your pics his feet are no where close to being set. Just lob it? Side arm it? This is not a screen Pass, it's almost 15 yards pass! I understand watching it initially I was upset too, but Sanchez only safe option was Powell, or Run. I think he made the WRONG decision, by running. So much for my Sanchez man crush.
Quiet? They'd be dancing around and singing like a bunch of munchkins. And as far as that non-toss to Gates, you've got to be kidding...
Believe it or not, I like what you said here about Junc. I think it's pretty accurate. On the other hand, what is Junc's (or any of ours, individually) real value to the board? If Junc was suddenly permabanned, I doubt TGG would drastically change; it would just continue on, like the machine that it is, with the rest of the members on here. Take Hobbes' ban, for example; nothing is really different now that he ain't here. And that's one of the things about Junc that I find to be abrasive -- his arrogance. He claims to have "followers" and he claims that people care what he thinks of them. The reality is that, if Junc stopped posting forever, today, the board would continue on with debates and discussion. I definitely agree about how he forces you to research. But what good is the research if he rudely neglects to acknowledge it?
