Brandon Tate's future as a PATRIOT

[ausbacker]

You're the one who brought him into the conversation. I'm the one who tore your BS argument apart. As for your opinion of me, it's as worthless as your pathetic reading comprehension.

Nobody forced you to comment on Mike Wallace given you want to talk about Brandon Tate's future with the Patriots.... then go on to not have a discussion on Brandon Tate's future with the Patriots.

According to any unbiased person who has even a modicum of understanding about all the different facets of what goes into making a draft board. Hell, I proved that you lied about the NFL Combine Blurb. Yet, you ignore it. That's typical of someone whose opinion is worthless.

Sure you did and I agree your opinion is generally worthless.

*sigh* You're right. You don't have to. But not doing so only reinforces my standpoint AND proves that your schtick about "All the draft blurbs" supporting the idea that Wallace was a Project WR and Tate was only a Project ST is false. And it's not according to just me. As I said. Any UNBIASED person. Clearly you are biased.

If you'd bothered to pull your head out of your arse you'd realize I'm an unabashed Patriots homer of sorts. I root for every single Patriots player to become the best in that position of all time.

And yes, it's just your opinion. You have no ground to say what is or isn't false based on your interpretation of presented materials.

Oh, and sorry to burst your bubble. But there are plenty of people on this board who have different opinions than my own who I don't consider wrong. Instead of making stuff up, why don't you just stick to facts. Oh wait. If you did that, you'd have to admit you were wrong about the NFL Combine Blurb and you were wrong about the NFLDraftScout.com quotes.

If your definition of making stuff up is referencing journalist quotes from many and varied sources then making up my own mind as to what I think then so be it. I sure hope you don't do the same.

Clearly you don't know how to conduct "in-depth research" because, if you did, you wouldn't have to make up lies about what sites say. Particularly when the sites themselves contradict you. As did the NFL Combine blurb.

No, but I'm sure you do because you're super awesome.

Instead of trying to read into what is said, you should stick to the actual words and you should consider the source. When you decide to put your own words into it and directly misquote a site, you should expect to get taken to task. Especially when you make such decisive statements about something you have really no knowledge of. (Such as your claim that the scout should be fired).

I wish I had 1/10th of your knowledge. That would allow me to pretend I knew more than everyone else where really, all I do is pretend my opinion is fact and tell everyone who doesn't agree with me that they're wrong.

So on and so forth blah blah blah.

 

[DaBruinz]

Based upon your comments in this thread it appears you do not grasp any version of English.
Feel free Mr Professor to point out what glaring grammatical errors in my post cause your inability to comprehend, and I will explain it to you slowly.
Or, just go F yourself.

The only one that I saw was this:

Your rates him somewhere from round 4 on.

The "Your rates" doesn't make sense unless you meant "Yours rates"

The only other issue is one sentence, I believe, would be considered a "run-on" sentence:

The mention of his ADDITIONAL st skills is a positive, and you are using that as a negative that implies because he can return kicks that diminishes his WR play, which is not said anywhere, except by you.

The difference is that "grammatically speaking" you should have ended your sentence after "positive" and started a new one. Then ended your second sentence after " WR Play" and started a 3rd.

Beyond that, you didn't make anything up or misquote one of the sites.. And what you wrote still made sense.

 

[ausbacker]

Based upon your comments in this thread it appears you do not grasp any version of English.
Feel free Mr Professor to point out what glaring grammatical errors in my post cause your inability to comprehend, and I will explain it to you slowly.
Or, just go F yourself.

Doesn't take much to send you into a little tail spin does it my Pedigree chum?

I'm guessing you and DaBruinz will start a little rub my back I'll rub yours James Harrison-Commish love fest now.

Probably time to get back to the initial point of the thread - Brandon Tate's future as a Patriots player.

 

[Ring 6]

Doesn't take much to send you into a little tail spin does it my Pedigree chum?

You seem to be the one that went into a tail spin. I simply responded to a guy acting like a jerk. Feel free to choose whichever option you wish. Or just grow up.

I'm guessing you and DaBruinz will start a little rub my back I'll rub yours James Harrison-Commish love fest now.

What your feelings were hurt because someone else commented on one of my posts? Are you a little paranoid?

 

[Ring 6]

Probably time to get back to the initial point of the thread - Brandon Tate's future as a Patriots player.

You are the one turning it into a sideshow

 

[ausbacker]

You seem to be the one that went into a tail spin. I simply responded to a guy acting like a jerk. Feel free to choose whichever option you wish. Or just grow up.

Nope, takes a fair bit for me to start dropping F Bombs on someone in the virtual world.

What your feelings were hurt because someone else commented on one of my posts? Are you a little paranoid?

Not in the slightest. Everyone is welcomed to their opinion.

 

[ausbacker]

You are the one turning it into a sideshow

I must have missed the conversation I was having with myself about Mike Wallace opposed to Brandon Tate then.

There's on thing which I am sure we are all in agreement on; the hope that Brandon Tate amounts to something as a wide receiver. I'd definitely love to be proven wrong on that.

 

[DaBruinz]

Nobody forced you to comment on Mike Wallace given you want to talk about Brandon Tate's future with the Patriots.... then go on to not discussion Brandon Tate's future with the Patriots

Friggin Hypocrite. You rant on Andy about "Hillbilly Talk" then do the exact same thing??

Sure you did and I agree your opinion is generally worthless.

There goes the reading comprehension again.

Here it is again. No where in the NFL Combine Blurb does it mention Brandon Tate's route running ability.

NFL Events: Combine Player Profiles - Brandon Tate

Yet, you claimed :

One described as primarily a return specialist before somewhat of a break out senior season with raw route running ability then injured

The part in BOLD is the part that you attributed to the NFL Combine Blurb that was not there. That is where you are wrong.

That's not opinion. That's FACT.

If you'd bothered to pull your head out of your arse you'd realize I'm an unabashed Patriots homer of sorts. I root for every single Patriots player to become the best in that position of all time.

The only person with their head up their arse in this thread is you. You are the one making stuff up and claiming a scout should be fired for making a comparison that you had no idea whether or not it was made.

And yes, it's just your opinion. You have no ground to say what is or isn't false based on your interpretation of presented materials.

*sigh* You are the one who said:

It just seems more obvious from all the draft profiling that Wallace seemed more like a WR project where Tate seemed more like a ST then WR project.

The one set of quotes from NFLDraftScout.com proves that "all the draft profiling" did not, in fact, portray Wallace as WR Project and Tate more like a ST than a WR project. In fact, the quotes I provided showed them to be nearly identical. Except that Tate has vision to get his yardage and Wallace out-runs people.

If your definition of making stuff up is referencing journalist quotes from many and varied sources then making up my own mind as to what I think then so be it. I sure hope you don't do the same.

My definition of you making stuff up is you attributing quotes to sites that did not say what you claimed they did. You claimed that the NFL Combine Blurb said that Tate was a raw route runner. They mentioned nothing about his route running. So for you to make the claim that, based on only those blurbs, that Wallace was the better candidate is BS. Pure and simple.

I wish I had 1/10th of your knowledge. That would allow me to pretend I knew more than everyone else where really, all I do is pretend my opinion is fact and tell everyone who doesn't agree with me that they're wrong.

I don't pretend to know more than everyone else. Nor do I pretend that my opinion is fact. I use facts to support my opinion instead of just being stupid and saying stuff that can't be supported or that can easily be proven wrong. And, when I am wrong, I admit to it. You should try it sometime. It's really enlightening.

 

[ausbacker]

You're still going DaBruinz? Last word or enjoy flogging horses that much?

More than happy to admit I am wrong when it's applicable.

 

[DaBruinz]

Doesn't take much to send you into a little tail spin does it my Pedigree chum?

I'm guessing you and DaBruinz will start a little rub my back I'll rub yours James Harrison-Commish love fest now.

Probably time to get back to the initial point of the thread - Brandon Tate's future as a Patriots player.

Let us know when you actually take your head out of your arse and put up that opinion instead of lamenting about Mike Wallace, making BS claims about the scout that suggested Tate, or attributing things to sites that they didn't actually say..

 

[DaBruinz]

You're still going DaBruinz? Last word or enjoy flogging horses that much?

More than happy to admit I am wrong when it's applicable.

Liar. You haven't done so yet.

 

[ausbacker]

In my opinion Let us know when you actually take your head out of your arse and put up that opinion instead of lamenting about Mike Wallace, making BS claims about the scout that suggested Tate, or attributing things to sites that they didn't actually say..

Once you stop complaining I took the liberty of editing your post to reflect it's true nature.

 

[ausbacker]

Liar. You haven't done so yet.

I'll tolerate most things but I won't tolerate being called a liar.

 

[Ring 6]

Nope, takes a fair bit for me to start dropping F Bombs on someone in the virtual world.

But it only takes a comment you don't have a good response to for you to sling personal attacks right?

Once again, please educate me by pointing out which parts of my post were impossible for you to understand.
Otherwise, you are just being an @ss and you know that. I won't ask again, so do what you wish.

Not in the slightest. Everyone is welcomed to their opinion.

Please. You have been crying all over this message board for 2 days about anyone having a different opinion than you.

 

[Ring 6]

I'll tolerate most things but I won't tolerate being called a liar.

You don't have to tolerate it. He called you a liar because you said you have no problem admitting when you were wrong. Just find an example among your 5200 posts, and he is wrong. Otherwise you will have to tolerate it becuase it would be correct, wouldnt it?

 

[ausbacker]

But it only takes a comment you don't have a good response to for you to sling personal attacks right?

I've got more than enough adequate responses for you and DaBruinz but this thread isn't going anywhere so it's pointless to continue in that vain because neither of you have proven you're willing to accept an opinion other than your own.

Once again, please educate me by pointing out which parts of my post were impossible for you to understand.
Otherwise, you are just being an @ss and you know that. I won't ask again, so do what you wish.

Can't be bothered, I've moved on and suggest you do the same.

Please. You have been crying all over this message board for 2 days about anyone having a different opinion than you.

I don't cry, I kick-ass.

On a serious note no. It appears we don't share the same opinion on a many range of issues and that's fine.

 

[ausbacker]

You don't have to tolerate it. He called you a liar because you said you have no problem admitting when you were wrong. Just find an example among your 5200 posts, and he is wrong. Otherwise you will have to tolerate it becuase it would be correct, wouldnt it?

I'll do that right after you provide a post that categorically states you're not a cross dressing female impersonator with a penchant for Big Bird dolls.

This has degenerated to a stupid level and I won't be responding to you or DaBruinz further in this thread.

 

[Ring 6]

I've got more than enough adequate responses for you and DaBruinz but this thread isn't going anywhere so it's pointless to continue in that vain because neither of you have proven you're willing to accept an opinion other than your own.

Which opinion other than your own did you accept?
I love the crybaby approach. You disagree back and forth with someone and cannot understand how they are so stubborn they still disagree with you after you spent so much time disagreeing with them.

Can't be bothered, I've moved on and suggest you do the same.

So you admit it was simply a lame attempt at flaming, that there was no basis for your insulting attack and you were being a complete @ss.
How about you be MAN ENOUGH to stand behind what you say instead of running away from your comments like a wimp?

I don't cry, I kick-ass.

No, you cry, then run away.

On a serious note no. It appears we don't share the same opinion on a many range of issues and that's fine.

Opinons are one thing, personal attacks are childish. Running away from them even worse.
It appears I disagree with your personality and integrity much more than your opinions.

 

[Deus Irae]

In the end, even Robespierre and Saint-Just were not pure enough, and were sent to the guillotine.

 

[Ring 6]

I'll do that right after you provide a post that categorically states you're not a cross dressing female impersonator with a penchant for Big Bird dolls.

This has degenerated to a stupid level and I won't be responding to you or DaBruinz further in this thread.

It has reached a stupid level because of you.

You are the one denying that your statement was a lie, and you can prove it.
I have never made a statement that I am not a cross dressing female impersonator with a penchant for Big Bird dolls, so I have nothing to refute.
You on the other hand, could very easily prove that your comment was accurate. Surely out of 5200 posts you admitted you were wrong once, didnt you?
Otherwise you will be tolerating it.