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!

     

Anderson wasn't good enough for Carolina


Jmac

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Mr. Scot said:

Nah. You've lowered yourself on your own, dude. I'm sure you wanna blame me, but I haven't forced you into anything. Maybe you should take responsibility for your own behavior instead.

And quick tip: Nothing is less convincing that you're a "longstanding, respected poster" than calling yourself one.

Why, because you say so? The truth is the truth. You obviously can't handle the truth. That's ultimately your problem. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I actually like top dawg as a huddle contributor. We've had some heated disagreements over the years, and I could easily jump in and pile on him like a number of huddlers would do if it were me in a back and forth with someone else, but I don't think he deserves all that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, top dawg said:

Why, because you say so? The truth is the truth. You obviously can't handle the truth. That's ultimately your problem. 

If you say so, Colonel Jessup.

I've said many times the least effective way to convince me you're good, smart, respected, whatever is to tell me you are. If you're really all that, you shouldn't have to say so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ace_Aladdin said:

It’s better to ignore him. P.S. he has to feel superior to feel good but it doesn’t change the fact that his football IQ is that of an average  huddlers. Dude acts like he was a GM in the NFL.

 

You may be right about ignoring him, but conversing with him is like a perverse pleasure of mine. 

I don't mind him having an opinion, but I do find it highly annoying for him to act like his is the only one that's rational, to the point of insults and indirect innuendo about a person's intelligence. People who continually call names and insult people on the Internet must do it in order to feel superior. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, top dawg said:

You may be right about ignoring him, but conversing with him is like a perverse pleasure of mine. 

I don't mind him having an opinion, but I do find it highly annoying for him to act like his is the only one that's rational, to the point of insults and indirect innuendo about a person's intelligence. People who continually call names and insult people on the Internet must do it in order to feel superior. 

You mean names like "Gettlegod" and "Gettledouche"? :thinking:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, TheRed said:

I actually like top dawg as a huddle contributor. We've had some heated disagreements over the years, and I could easily jump in and pile on him like a number of huddlers would do if it were me in a back and forth with someone else, but I don't think he deserves all that.

Yes we have. You've had me seeing Red a couple of times! LOL 

You know I'll never pile on you, Red.  That's not my style, and I'm pretty sure it's not yours. We say what we need to say to each other, and try to address each others' points, and don't put words into each others' mouths and refuse to acknowledge what each other explicitly says. We're honest in disagreement. That's the way it should be.

But, we do agree on a lot of things also...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, TheRed said:

Well here's the thing. One head coach is in the NFC Championship, the other guided his team to the cellar of his division. That first head coach is also expertly utilizing a running back the second head coach kicked to the curb like a hot potato.

Maybe you should quit while you're behind here.

Did the Championship one have his QB get seriously injured during the year, lose both his starting tackles before the season started and not have the personnel to run his scheme in the secondary? Seems to the Rams have gone out of their way to load that team with the players needed to make a run now.  Hell I could win 6 or 7 games with their personnel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

You mean names like "Gettlegod" and "Gettledouche"? :thinking:

I came up with Gettlegod as a way to paint a mental picture that represents your unhealthy obsession with him. And, I only use it when conversing with you. You're so emotional about him, it's damn near comical. I'm not directly (or indirectly most likely, because he likely doesn't read the Huddle) calling him out of his name. For you to try and equate that with calling someone a moron (for example) just means that you have a severe lack of understanding or inability to distinguish between nuances of communication. Or, you're simply disingenuous. Your thought processes seem simplistic in nature, so maybe you can't understand it.

You keep bringing up " Gettledouche" in reference to me---I guess to try and win some argument---but I've never used that term. It's not my style to refer to GMs, coaches and players in a decidedly juvenile manner. Anyone that's been paying attention knows that I don't do that. If I have something to say about someone in an NFL organization. I call their name. Sorry, Gettledouche, Scam and any other such foolishness doesn't do it for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, top dawg said:

I came up with Gettlegod as a way to paint a mental picture that represents your unhealthy obsession with him. And, I only use it when conversing with you. You're so emotional about him, it's damn near comical. I'm not directly (or indirectly most likely, because he likely doesn't read the Huddle) calling him out of his name. For you to try and equate that with calling someone a moron (for example) just means that you have a severe lack of understanding or inability to distinguish between nuances of communication. Or, you're simply disingenuous. Your thought processes seem simplistic in nature, so maybe you can't understand it.

You keep bringing up " Gettledouche" in reference to me---I guess to try and win some argument---but I've never used that term. It's not my style to refer to GMs, coaches and players in a decidedly juvenile manner. Anyone that's been paying attention knows that I don't do that. If I have something to say about someone in an NFL organization. I call their name. Sorry, Gettledouche, Scam and any other such foolishness doesn't do it for me.

Nah.

In this thread, you've resorted to calling names, then said that name calling was a sign of weakness.

You've resorted to childish phrases like "cry baby cry" while touting your own intelligence and maturity.

And to top it all off, after saying you weren't going to talk to me on this topic oh, you've done little else.

Yeesh :eyeroll: 

I'd add the fact that a one-sentence response from me elicits a wall of text from you tells me this is a lot more important to you than it is to me.

I haven't had to use any "tactics" to get you to lower yourself. You've done that on your own. All I've had to do is sit back and watch. But frankly, I'm bored with it at this point.

Doesn't mean that much to me, but since you do so desperately want to have the last word here, feel free to take it. Naturally, you can try to say this is me surrendering, but given that I've predicted you would say that, just like I predicted other things you've said (and yet incredulously watched you say them anyway) that'd make you look pretty foolish.

But hey, that's your right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Nah.

In this thread, you've resorted to calling names, then said that name calling was a sign of weakness.

You've resorted to childish phrases like "cry baby cry" while touting your own intelligence and maturity.

And to top it all off, after saying you weren't going to talk to me on this topic oh, you've done little else.

Yeesh :eyeroll: 

I'd add the fact that a one-sentence response from me elicits a wall of text from you tells me this is a lot more important to you than it is to me.

I haven't had to use any "tactics" to get you to lower yourself. You've done that on your own. All I've had to do is sit back and watch. But frankly, I'm bored with it at this point.

Doesn't mean that much to me, but since you do so desperately want to have the last word here, feel free to take it. Naturally, you can try to say this is me surrendering, but given that I've predicted you would say that, just like I predicted other things you've said (and yet incredulously watched you say them anyway) that'd make you look pretty foolish.

But hey, that's your right.

A wall of text? No, a specific, thoughtful response. I already told you that I've lowered myself down to your level. Did you miss that? Don't understand it? I'm responding with your personal insults with insults. 

People know that with me, as long as they give me respect (even in disagreement), they get it in return. People know that disagreeing with you, especially on Gettleman and Rivera, will illicit all manner of disrespect, and innuendo about their mental faculties. 

So don't get it twisted. Over the years I've let it be known on this place that if you respect me, I will respect you. If you get down in the gutter, I can get down in the gutter too. For example, when Batman insulted my sister, I called him a  "Bitch motherfuger." I am not a turn-the-other-cheek kinda guy. You know, I'm funny like that. 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Sure it does, maybe not every position and not every draft.  You have to admit the hit rate goes down the further in the draft you get.  Would you more readily find a generational talent at the #2 pick or #19 pick?  High picks are considered "busts" if they doesn't pan out, whereas guys drafted later don't have that level of scrutiny upon them.  Different expectation levels.  If Styles does indeed go #2, I already listed the rarefied air that he would be in.  Maybe he doesn't set the League on fire, but my gut feeling is he does.  Again, you don't take an off-ball LB #2 if he is just a 'really good' player.
    • To illustrate my point, I watched (and commented on the Huddle) that Rozeboom would often wait a full second (or close to it) before taking his first step.  I assume that he probably had issues with false steps, a faulty practice that can take an ILB out of the gap completely.  Watch Luke and you see a step with the snap, and rarely was it a false step.  Rozeboom may have had 100 tackles (speculating) but initial contact was 2-3 yards on the defensive side of the ball.  Luke's 100 tackles were made 1-2 yards from the LOS.  Over the course of a year, Luke was much more productive (more fumbles, fewer long gainers, more OL penalties, fewer first downs, etc) that Rozeboom, but on the stat sheet, they both had 100 tackles.  In fact, Rozeboom's inefficiency kept him on the field more (more first downs, fewer OL penalties, turnovers, and punts) so he should have MORE tackles.   I would like to see stats that break down those things.   For example again, Josh Norman was slow--4.68 or so at CB.  However, his anticipation speed was incredible.  He made as many plays as a 4.4 CB.  I had one coach (college--later became the head coach at WCU) tell me that slower players have to use their brains more to still be around.  Elite athletes can just get by on their physical superiority.  He added, "Rarely does a football player run full speed.  Most of the time, they are not, so the 40 time is misleading stat.  Smart players overcome shortcomings--when the elite athlete becomes average (slows with age, advances in level of competition) they struggle against smarter (football IQ) competition.  
    • Obviously tongue in cheek hyperbole. But we do not need a first round RB to compete for a championship. We need intelligent roster building. That to me is the complete opposite of intelligent roster building because it is a prime resource at a devalued plug and play position when we have needs across the defense.
×
×
  • Create New...