Columnist: T.O.'s star has "drastically fallen"

[apple strudel]

There's really not much in here to support your claims regarding TO, only personal opinion strudel.

The cream's gone bad and the pastry has crumbled

Says the TO backer ( I assume). All he has in his wake are a bunch of teams that are glad he's gone and no rings.

 

[ausbacker]

Says the TO backer ( I assume). All he has in his wake are a bunch of teams that are glad he's gone and no rings.

I'm not a TO backer at all. I believe he's easily been one of the best wide outs to play the game and despite his hysterics and polarizing personality, of which he brings many problems unto himself, he is unfairly maligned and targeted by media pundits as an easy target.

TO is the personification of tall poppy syndrome.

 

[apple strudel]

I'm not a TO backer at all. I am a TO backer.

Sounds like a TO backer to me.

TO is the personification of tall poppy syndrome.

Frankly, I disagree. It's not his talents that people have an issue with. It's that his personality flaws actually detract from football success. The NFL and all the trappings of the sport love and adore talent, and praise it to no end, so long as it does not interfere with winning. Once it does, it is a detriment. That detriment is TO.

 

[Kontradiction]

Fine, you want me to drive this into the ground? Your wish is my command...

He's not a clutch player. He doesn't play to win, he plays to get attention. Ergo, his play IS a problem.

Ah, he doesn't play to win huh? What does he play for? The leisurely Sunday nature that football provides? Surely it isn't money either. The guy has already made plenty of it and has proven that he can make it in ways other than football. Hmm. Maybe he just likes getting hit by 6'4" 215 pound linebackers that run a 4.4 40 yard dash and hit like mack trucks? Doubt it. That pretty much covers every other reason of why he'd still be playing well into his late 30's. So yes, I'd say that he plays to win. I believe I've already covered his stats but let me cover something else. Super Bowl 39. The guy had broken his leg a few weeks earlier but had managed to torch us for over 100 yards on some key catches. If his quarterback has better stamina and doesn't manage to choke under pressure, the Eagles win that game (partly in thanks to HIS performance) and our Patriots are never a dynasty. But yeah, he wasn't playing to win that game. He was just out there for the hell of it.

Lulz. Disagree with != misunderstand. But OK.

Uh... what? Maybe not using internet geek protocol would have been a more effective stance. I guess I'm just a "n00b" though.

Where did anybody blame TO exclusively for his team's losses in this thread?

You did...

And total lack of clutchness. And significant wins. He's just not a winner.

Translated that you basically blame him for big time losses and neglect to accept that his other teammates have choked or unperformed in games as well.

But he's been a part of a lot of teams' downward spirals, meaning he's more of a liability than an asset. I.e., a loser.

The fact that you keep trying to deflect back to his ego just shows me that you know you're going up Sh!t's Creek without a paddle in this argument. Let me remind you again that the original debate (the debate that you started, no less) was about the guy's on-field value. Every stat in this thread and the games used to highlight why the guy's on-field presence and ability is undeniably good is going against you. But yeah, just keep repeating the same thing over and over again and hope it sticks.

Best low leverage stats whore WRs of his generation.

The stats show that he's been one of the two best wide receivers of this generation. I'm sure you can guess who the other one is (who also had an attitude problem before he came here). Leave it to you to basically sweep them under the rug as "unimportant" in this argument because it doesn't suite whatever weak point it is that you're trying to make about T.O.'s onfield performance.

 

[BradyFTW!]

We gave them Owens to take away Westbrook and McNabb scrambling. He had almost no impact on the game in spite of his stats. That's good game-planning, and we've seen it plenty of times before.

They were down by 3 points with the ball at the two minute warning. They very nearly won that game, and if you think that Owens putting up SB MVP-caliber numbers wasn't a large part of the reason why, then you're delusional.

At no point in this thread have you offered anything even resembling a coherent argument for why you feel the way that you do: just purposefully vague talking points. Your 'points' are about on par with the ******s that counter every discussion about the Pats with "lol Belicheat needs new cameras!!1~". Pretty much what I'd expect from a lot of people on this forum, but you're usually better than that.

The funny thing is, I think that pretty much everyone on this thread has outright said that they don't like Owens. I'm not a fan of the guy at all, and the sooner he's out of the league the better, IMO. He's a net negative because, as talented as he is on the field, he's even more of a deadweight off the field. Yet you can't even accept that self-evidently obvious fact, to the point that you have a bunch of people who don't even like the guy calling you out on it. For any rational person, that should be a pretty enormous red flag that says that you need to reconsider things.

 

[apple strudel]

You did...

And total lack of clutchness. And significant wins. He's just not a winner.

Translated that you basically blame him for big time losses and neglect to accept that his other teammates have choked or unperformed in games as well.

I only had to read 1 of your points - I didn't bother with the rest - to understand it's a silly game at this point. I said exclusively. I suggest you consult a dictionary. Your translation is worse than awful. Seriously. I mean, what do you hope to accomplish by just pulling things out of your ass?

 

[apple strudel]

At no point in this thread have you offered anything even resembling a coherent argument for why you feel the way that you do: just purposefully vague talking points.

How does one quantify clutch?

Your 'points' are about on par with the ******s that counter every discussion about the Pats with "lol Belicheat needs new cameras!!1~". Pretty much what I'd expect from a lot of people on this forum, but you're usually better than that.

Oh great, paint with the brush you think everybody will agree with. Sweet maneuver. Tell me again why Parcell's wouldn't even talk to the guy?

The funny thing is, I think that pretty much everyone on this thread has outright said that they don't like Owens.

It's not about "like" or "dislike". It's about whether he makes teams better or worse.

I'm not a fan of the guy at all, and the sooner he's out of the league the better, IMO. He's a net negative because, as talented as he is on the field, he's even more of a deadweight off the field.

Frankly, I don't care about him off the field. He hasn't killed anybody, so that's a plus.

Yet you can't even accept that self-evidently obvious fact, to the point that you have a bunch of people who don't even like the guy calling you out on it.

Um, I'm pretty sure at this point you're not getting what I'm saying.

For any rational person, that should be a pretty enormous red flag that says that you need to reconsider things.

Fallacy: Appeal to Popularity

Rational? Really? You have got to be kidding!

 

[BradyFTW!]

How does one quantify clutch?



Oh great, paint with the brush you think everybody will agree with. Sweet maneuver. Tell me again why Parcell's wouldn't even talk to the guy?



It's not about "like" or "dislike". It's about whether he makes teams better or worse.



Frankly, I don't care about him off the field. He hasn't killed anybody, so that's a plus.



Um, I'm pretty sure at this point you're not getting what I'm saying.



Fallacy: Appeal to Popularity

Rational? Really? You have got to be kidding!

Yup, this is pointless. Clearly you've forgotten the original point that you were trying to argue. Anyways, since your method of 'debate' seems to be lashing out at everyone who has the nerve to disagree with you, welcome to ignore. Don't both replying, won't see it- no desire to read crazy rantings.

 

[ausbacker]

Sounds like a TO backer to me.

Frankly, I disagree. It's not his talents that people have an issue with. It's that his personality flaws actually detract from football success. The NFL and all the trappings of the sport love and adore talent, and praise it to no end, so long as it does not interfere with winning. Once it does, it is a detriment. That detriment is TO.

Hang on hang on hang on. Now you don't have an issue with TO's talents, yet in earlier posts you've denigrated his footballing ability and career? Seems to me like that's a concession and a lost argument right there.

To be honest, your rationale has become pretty embarrassing and I don't even know why I'm defending TO, considering I think he's been a marvelous football talent with personality defects.

 

[apple strudel]

Hang on hang on hang on. Now you don't have an issue with TO's talents, yet in earlier posts you've denigrated his footballing ability and career?

It's great how a complaint about his inability to succeed in pressure situations becomes in the eyes of the observer an attack on every single football ability. That's on you, not me.

Seems to me like that's a concession and a lost argument right there.

Seems to me like a lot of people like to put words into people's mouths. If you've followed along, I've never said he is without talent or some skills, but rather that he's more a liability than an asset.

To be honest, your rationale has become pretty embarrassing

I'm not embarrased by the fact that people so far have been inventing my argument rather than reading what I've said.

and I don't even know why I'm defending TO, considering I think he's been a marvelous football talent with personality defects.

It looks like in certain ways we ... agree.

 

[apple strudel]

Clearly you've forgotten the original point that you were trying to argue.

That 1) TO's not clutch on the field, 2) his megalomania is part of that, 3) he's an undisciplined football player, and 4) he's more a liability than an asset on the field? I haven't forgotten it. Maybe you have.

Anyways, since your method of 'debate' seems to be lashing out at everyone who has the nerve to disagree with you,

I've disagreed, but I haven't lashed out. But OK. Frankly, I've been pretty consistent. Lots of projecting going on here.

welcome to ignore. Don't both replying,

Consider it for posterity.

won't see it- no desire to read crazy rantings.

Blame the other guy when you don't understand. Awesome!

 

[apple strudel]

They were down by 3 points with the ball at the two minute warning. They very nearly won that game, and if you think that Owens putting up SB MVP-caliber numbers wasn't a large part of the reason why, then you're delusional.

By the way, very few of his catches in that game made any difference. It was the quietest big game I may have ever seen. There's a reason for that - we gave him the underneath stuff but took away most (I'll italicize it in the hopes that people won't misread - again) of the deep ball.

 

[ausbacker]

Because it overlooks or ignores all the absolutely horrible things about him as a football player and as a teammate. It's a deflection.

Hmmm.

Sure he gets easy yards, but he ****s all over his QB, gets run from every team he's on, drops the ball way too much on 3rd down

Provide me with some statistics to support this argument, especially the 3rd down drops. Then could you also provide me with a analysis of how this compares to other receivers in the NFL and where TO ranks comparatively.

Guy's a douche and he's so damned worried about looking good on the big screen he can't even' look the ball into his hands before turning his head upfield.

Come on... seriously.

It's amazing that you blame his teams for failing the ultimate team cancer and not the other way around. But whatever.

Whilst he may be problematic, I wouldn't think it's symptomatic.

He's not a clutch player. He doesn't play to win, he plays to get attention. Ergo, his play IS a problem.

That's just blatantly a stupid thing to say. Not one person would play any sport to lose, unless you're involved with Russian tennis or Indian Cricket.

Best low leverage stats whore WRs of his generation.

I really don't know what to say to this given his considerable statistical accomplishments

We gave them Owens to take away Westbrook and McNabb scrambling. He had almost no impact on the game in spite of his stats. That's good game-planning, and we've seen it plenty of times before.

This is perhaps the most baffling comment for me. If the Eagles had pulled off the miraculous, he wins the MVP hands down.

It's great how a complaint about his inability to succeed in pressure situations becomes in the eyes of the observer an attack on every single football ability. That's on you, not me.

Pot and kettle scenario this one.

Seems to me like a lot of people like to put words into people's mouths. If you've followed along, I've never said he is without talent or some skills, but rather that he's more a liability than an asset.

Some of your earlier posts tend to belittle his achievements.

I'm not embarrased by the fact that people so far have been inventing my argument rather than reading what I've said.

I've been scratching my head with this comment considering the glaringly obvious that my screen has been showing me, with referenced quotes and all.

It looks like in certain ways we ... agree.

Probably, but not to the same extent.

 

[apple strudel]

That's just blatantly a stupid thing to say. Not one person would play any sport to lose, unless you're involved with Russian tennis or Indian Cricket.

Now did I say he plays to lose? No, I said he doesn't play to win. As in he just plays and doesn't mind the outcome. Except when he loses he blames the other guy.

Now where is the problem in this thread again? Oh right.

 

[apple strudel]

Pot and kettle scenario this one.

How in the world? This extrapolation just doesn't make any sense. Please explain.

 

[ausbacker]

Now did I say he plays to lose? No, I said he doesn't play to win. As in he just plays and doesn't mind the outcome. Except when he loses he blames the other guy.

Now where is the problem in this thread again? Oh right.

Explain to me then, if you don't play to win, what exactly do you play for then?
There's only ever 3 options available to you.

 

[apple strudel]

Explain to me then, if you don't play to win, what exactly do you play for then?

TO plays for himself and the attention. And possibly money. Certainly not for his team. And certainly not to win. If he genuinely wanted to win why would he cultivate a reputation of ****ting on his quarterback knowing that the next quarterback throwing him the ball would know that the guy was going to **** on him? Team counts for more than the individual in football, and TO, being the consummate loser, never bothered to learn that lesson.

The only QB TO hasn't **** on is Edwards. Yet. That's 3/4. What if Tom Brady **** on his O line all the time? With a guy like that at QB we'd have never won a super bowl.

 

[apple strudel]

Oh, and here's TO tied for the league lead in drops.

washingtonpost.com

I'm looking for career rankings but it's surprisingly hard to find. NFL.com doesn't seem to track drops (I wonder why).

 

[apple strudel]

And he was tied for 3rd in 2008! What a clutch player! I wish it would be easier to track drop rate, which would be pretty telling as well.

1t Dallas Clark Ind 12
1t Braylon Edwards Cle 12
3t Reggie Bush NO 10
3t Devery Henderson NO 10
3t Santana Moss Was 10
3t Terrell Owens Dal 10

 

[Kontradiction]

I only had to read 1 of your points - I didn't bother with the rest - to understand it's a silly game at this point. I said exclusively. I suggest you consult a dictionary. Your translation is worse than awful. Seriously. I mean, what do you hope to accomplish by just pulling things out of your ass?

Ya know, you could have just said "I quit". It would have taken up a lot less of your time. Tell me, are you ready to admit that football is a team sport, and the TEAM wins and loses? Are you ready to admit that T.O. did all he could in the biggest game of his life to help his TEAM win and was let down by all of the other components on his TEAM? Are you ready to admit that, statistically, T.O. has been one of the best two WRs of this generation and top ten material all time?

For God's sake, man, you're getting destroyed in this thread. Perhaps it's back to the Political forum for you after this...