SITE MENU
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.The word "best" wasn't even used once in that entire transcript.
I don't this it is a snap judgment.
To me, it is a considered judgment, as in, "Borges in the past has framed quotes to put BB in the worst possible light, and now we have him quoting BB in a way that none of us expected BB to speak, so I am guessing that this is more of the same old stuff Borges has been known for."
Why is that silly?
I prefer not to make silly snap judgments like "Borges took those comments in the worst possible frame he could find" if I can find the actual text instead.
It's a snap judgment made without having all the facts. Denying that is just as silly as making such a snap judgment in the first place.
Right...but he did say that Burgess is "probably as good as we've had as a run player and a pass rusher."
This doesn't need interpretation. Burgess, in Belichick's eyes, is as good as Vrabel, McGinest and Colvin ever was for us.
Bill's quote above could have been intended either this way :
probably as good as we've had, since I've been here, as a run player and a pass rusher
or this way :
probably as good as we've had, this year, as a run player and a pass rusher
This first definitely sounds stupid. The second more reasonable, though debatable.
The quote didn't change and neither did the context around it.
All I said is that Borges chose to put the quote in the worst possible frame he could.
I didn't say Borges was wrong. I said it was the worst frame he could find.
I could easily understand that from reading the quote alone.
You couldn't?
There were no snap judgments in ANYTHING I wrote. I simply said, in the range of possible interpretations, Borges picked the one that would make Belichick come out looking silly.
You couldn't understand that?
What you wrote was all about a snap judgment. Your denying that is absurd.
Q: How has Derrick Burgess been coming along?
BB: Derrick has done a good job for us all year. He really has. He's been productive both in the passing game and in the running game. I think overall his run play has been good. He's a very consistent player. There are some players that rush the passer and they kind of rush the passer on every play and that's great on the passes, but then sometimes that can hurt you in the running game. Derrick really plays consistently on everything and he's done an excellent job in the running game for us – probably as good as we've had as a run player and a pass rusher. When they run the ball, he does a good job. When they throw the ball, he's competitive on the pass rush. I think sometimes guys lean a little more towards one than the other, but I'd say overall his play has been consistent on a down-after-down basis at a position that everybody kind of focuses on the passing part of it. But he's been in there on a lot of running plays and he's done a good job on the draws, the screens, the sub runs. He's made a number of plays for us on that. I think he's had – right from the beginning, going all the way back to the Buffalo game – he's had a good, solid year.
Are you certain that Belichick is talking about more than this season?
Right...but he did say that Burgess is "probably as good as we've had as a run player and a pass rusher."
This doesn't need interpretation. Burgess, in Belichick's eyes, is as good as Vrabel, McGinest and Colvin ever was for us.
Right...but he did say that Burgess is "probably as good as we've had as a run player and a pass rusher."
This doesn't need interpretation. Burgess, in Belichick's eyes, is as good as Vrabel, McGinest and Colvin ever was for us.
What specifically?
Be specific.
You never are.
Quite frankly, 99% of the time I have no clue what you're going on about.
Right...but he did say that Burgess is "probably as good as we've had as a run player and a pass rusher."
This doesn't need interpretation. Burgess, in Belichick's eyes, is as good as Vrabel, McGinest and Colvin ever was for us.
Right...but he did say that Burgess is "probably as good as we've had as a run player and a pass rusher."
This doesn't need interpretation. Burgess, in Belichick's eyes, is as good as Vrabel, McGinest and Colvin ever was for us.
Your interpretation assumes facts not in evidence.
What?
My interpretation is based on what BB says.
Nowhere in the interview did Belichick say that he was comparing Burgess to the personnel this year.
This doesn't need interpretation. Burgess, in Belichick's eyes, is as good as Vrabel, McGinest and Colvin ever was for us.