You question my fact checking. Now I did spend 10-15 minutes looking up and doing some quick math and came to 2 and 1/6 out of 15. You did MORE work into it and found that it was more like 2 and 2/6 out of 15. The difference isnt worth my time spent looking it up, my point was made to everyone but YOU. I never complained about McC in this thread, read the title. My speculation is supported by documented history, what supports yours? This isnt a p*ssin contest.
Your speculation isn't supported by documented history. In fact, my 5 minutes of looking doubled the number of games that you had. Again, more spin on your part.
BTW, you DID complain about the CB pick from Thurday. Here is what you said:
jeffbiologist said:
But I have every reason to complain about that CB pick
DOH. Feel pretty stupid, now don't you.
Um, no. My post was to make a point, not to pass a 100% Mr. Dabruinz test. I'd say I was more than 95% correct(that is an A in any school) and I made my point. Facts like Thomas starting that many games we as Patsfans can attest dont make him a STARTER. I dont consider this LYING, I consider that statistic as kept by the NFL completely misleading. Lets leave it for readers to decide if they want to include Thomas' 13/96 to my original 2 and 1/6. Hardly any desperation there pal. Misleading statistic like you scoring at your family reunion...it shouldnt count...
Your quote was your typical spewing garbage in an attack on the Pats management. You weren't more than 95% correct. In fact, you only accounted for 50% of the games mentioned. 50% is failure. Since being called out on it, you've done nothing but SPIN and try and salvage some sort of credibility. First, you discount 2 of the players. Then you ignore 50% of the remaining games. Then you hold it against players who were injured during their first year (McKenzie and Tate). Real great work there.
Um, no again. This is me providing a albeit semi-accurate statistic for those who are asking if we picked up 4-5 starters so far. If you want to post the ACTUAL statistics and put your name on the post I will take mine off and you can make my point for me. Until then, its YOU thats B*tching. I am a scientist BTW that is paid for by your tax dollars(if you pay em) so THANK YOU! I work hard and dont have that extra hour to get that last ~13~games started by our long snapper. Which makes me wonder, if we kick off isnt the kickoff team the real "starters"?? I mean if you want to be to the letter of the law you should write the NFL and have it changed. It really doesnt bother me, my point was made a long time ago.
Semi-Accurate? You are only providing a small fraction of the information. And in doing so, you are trying to make yourself look smart while taking shots at the Patriots management. The actual information is easily found on NFL.COM.
NFL.com - Official Site of the National Football League
No, the starters are the ones who are on the field for the first offensive and defensive series of the game. The Special Teams players are not considered starters. Again, more drivel from you.
If you are an example of the type of scientists that the US Government pays for, it's no wonder that they have to pull drugs like Baycol off the market. Because you are horrible.
I'd say the point of me knowing enough about this team to have doubled for BB without missing a pick in round 2 yesterday doesnt impress you? Funny, it impresses me and I actually did it. I'm sure it impresses others here that will give my statistics needed credence accordingly. That is not speculation or conjecture. Again, not talking about McC in this thread, please read the title.
*ROFLMAO* You think you are as smart as Belichick. All because you GUESSED. It's pretty amazing that your guesses went up barely an hour before the draft started.
Well Mr. Dabruinz, you seem to make alot out of a little, and I was trying to make a little out of a little. Who is right is an opinion but if you ever got an A in school you would know that you dont have to score 100%. All you do is take away from what could be an interesting discussion. If you want to apply for the FACT CHECKER position at patsfans.com it might pay better than the drive thru. Your sabatage of my posts makes you look like an infant, but go ahead and call me names again, call me a liar if it makes you feel happy. You have a president, a parent, a friend and a spouse and you know what they have in common besides being ugly? They all lie to you. Go correct them!
It would have been an interesting conversation if you had actually bothered to check your facts ahead of time instead of providing a garbage premise that was easily proven to be wrong and incomplete.
If proving facts so that a true picture can be viewed is "sabotaging your posts" then it would seem you need to do a better job prior to actually posting. It doesn't make me look like anything but someone who actually checked the facts.
As for your infantile attempts to belittle me, I've had 3 year olds do a better job than you.
Why don't you do everyone a favor and disappear like you always do. The Board would be better off for it.
