The Sanctioned FA 4PM Tracker Thread (merged)

[BradyBranch39]

After losing out on Nelson, Jets look to Atogwe | ProFootballTalk

This works too.

 

[ivanvamp]

I never argued the schedule, that was you.

Holy cow Andy. Please. This is ridiculous. In my first post to you on this topic (#806), I gave as one of the reasons why we should think that the 49ers are "for real", and I quote, "They still play in a weak division."

You replied in post #807, in direct response to that statement I quoted, "That they do, but their out of division schedule will be difficult this year."

So it was *YOU* that brought up the schedule. You. Not me. You. I then replied in post #808, "In 2012 they play the AFCE and NFCN. In 2011 they played the AFCN and the NFCE. In 2011 the AFCN produced three playoff teams. Hard to argue that the AFCE is better than that. It's probably a slightly tougher schedule on paper, but you never know how that will work out."

And in post #809, you replied, "We will see how that plays out. I was simply responding to your claim that the division they play in makes them more likely to do well by poiinting out the nondivision schedule looks tough.
You also missed on the fact they play the #1 teams in the 2 other NFC divisions, and last year they were 3rd or 4th (dont remember which)"

Andy, I mentioned that they play in a weak division. You then brought up the schedule. I never said anything about schedule.

Holy crap.

And before you reply with something like, "Why would you bring up their weak division if not to point out that they will have some easy wins", let me pre-empt that by saying that in reality what I was thinking was that whatever their record ends up being, they play in a weak division which will give them a better chance (even with a less-than-stellar record) to make the playoffs. I wasn't thinking so much of their schedule. But obviously you were. So that's on you.

My point is very simple. They may very well have significantly overachieved last year. So the starting point of 13-3 may be flawed.
Am I not allowed to want them to have 2 winning seasons in a row before saying they are a legitimate contender? Do I really have to accept that a guy wo caught 39 passes last year and a guy who caught 6 in the last 8 games of 2010 then retired are a substantial upgrade to a rotation of players who dealt with injuries?

I am saying I am not convinced based on 1 year that they are as good as that record showed. It happens. You seem intent on not allowing me to have that opinion.

Of course you can have your opinion. Who ever said otherwise? I thought we were having a conversation and sharing our opinions. I guess when you do that it's okay, but when I do it I'm somehow infringing upon your right to hold your own opinion.

Okaaaaaay.....

 

[Rich<3TheWoodhead]

Holy cow Andy. Please. This is ridiculous. In my first post to you on this topic (#806), I gave as one of the reasons why we should think that the 49ers are "for real", and I quote, "They still play in a weak division."

You replied in post #807, in direct response to that statement I quoted, "That they do, but their out of division schedule will be difficult this year."

So it was *YOU* that brought up the schedule. You. Not me. You. I then replied in post #808, "In 2012 they play the AFCE and NFCN. In 2011 they played the AFCN and the NFCE. In 2011 the AFCN produced three playoff teams. Hard to argue that the AFCE is better than that. It's probably a slightly tougher schedule on paper, but you never know how that will work out."

And in post #809, you replied, "We will see how that plays out. I was simply responding to your claim that the division they play in makes them more likely to do well by poiinting out the nondivision schedule looks tough.
You also missed on the fact they play the #1 teams in the 2 other NFC divisions, and last year they were 3rd or 4th (dont remember which)"

Andy, I mentioned that they play in a weak division. You then brought up the schedule. I never said anything about schedule.

Holy crap.

And before you reply with something like, "Why would you bring up their weak division if not to point out that they will have some easy wins", let me pre-empt that by saying that in reality what I was thinking was that whatever their record ends up being, they play in a weak division which will give them a better chance (even with a less-than-stellar record) to make the playoffs. I wasn't thinking so much of their schedule. But obviously you were. So that's on you.



Of course you can have your opinion. Who ever said otherwise? I thought we were having a conversation and sharing our opinions. I guess when you do that it's okay, but when I do it I'm somehow infringing upon your right to hold your own opinion.

Okaaaaaay.....

Ivan don't worry about Sandy er Andy. His job is to stir up arguments and constantly pit himself against everyone else's responses. He does it in every thread.

 

[Ring 6]

Holy cow Andy. Please. This is ridiculous. In my first post to you on this topic (#806), I gave as one of the reasons why we should think that the 49ers are "for real", and I quote, "They still play in a weak division."

You replied in post #807, in direct response to that statement I quoted, "That they do, but their out of division schedule will be difficult this year."

So it was *YOU* that brought up the schedule. You. Not me. You.

No, you brought up the division schedule. I responded that the out of division schedule is difficult. Thats all. If you wish to eliminate the entire topic from the discussion, feel free, it never had anything at all to do with what I was saying. I was simply responding out of courtesy.

I then replied in post #808, "In 2012 they play the AFCE and NFCN. In 2011 they played the AFCN and the NFCE. In 2011 the AFCN produced three playoff teams. Hard to argue that the AFCE is better than that. It's probably a slightly tougher schedule on paper, but you never know how that will work out."

And in post #809, you replied, "We will see how that plays out. I was simply responding to your claim that the division they play in makes them more likely to do well by poiinting out the nondivision schedule looks tough.
You also missed on the fact they play the #1 teams in the 2 other NFC divisions, and last year they were 3rd or 4th (dont remember which)"

See how I even say we will see how it plays out? As in, who knows, it isn't important.

Andy, I mentioned that they play in a weak division. You then brought up the schedule. I never said anything about schedule.

Holy crap.

OK, I guess I was wrong to assume that the reason you mentioned the division they were in was because they play 6 games against those teams, meaning they have a better chance of winning against that part of their schedule? Lets just say you were giving me an inconsequential reminder, and I misunderstood. Will that allow us to move on from numerous parapraphs about something that never had anything to do with the point I made that you want to argue to death?

And before you reply with something like, "Why would you bring up their weak division if not to point out that they will have some easy wins", let me pre-empt that by saying that in reality what I was thinking was that whatever their record ends up being, they play in a weak division which will give them a better chance (even with a less-than-stellar record) to make the playoffs. I wasn't thinking so much of their schedule. But obviously you were. So that's on you.

See above. Can we stop now?

Of course you can have your opinion. Who ever said otherwise? I thought we were having a conversation and sharing our opinions.

How is there a sharing of opinions that I want to wait until after they are successful for more than 1 year before I consider them an elite contender?
You seem to want to argue me out of that opinion.

I guess when you do that it's okay, but when I do it I'm somehow infringing upon your right to hold your own opinion.

Okaaaaaay.....

If I have ever heard someone say they wanted to wait for more infornation to appear before making a decision, and I browbeat them with reasons that they should change that position, pleasae point it out to me and I will find that poster and apologize.
I just don't understand how there is a debate over me not accepting one year as proof the team is that caliber. Once again, you can make any arguments you wish about any part of the team, and I still am uncomfortable concluding it is not a one year wonder situation, and its really impossible to get past that until year 2 happens.

 

[Ring 6]

Ivan don't worry about Sandy er Andy. His job is to stir up arguments and constantly pit himself against everyone else's responses. He does it in every thread.

Your obsession is kind of creepy

 

[ivanvamp]

If I have ever heard someone say they wanted to wait for more infornation to appear before making a decision, and I browbeat them with reasons that they should change that position, pleasae point it out to me and I will find that poster and apologize.

Andy, even a cursory glance at threads you're involved with shows that other people post their opinions of things and you respond by posting contrary opinions. On a host of issues. And you carry many discussions on for a long time, continuing to counter other peoples' opinions. It's the exact same thing we're doing here. You do it all the time, which is TOTALLY FINE, because that's what these forums are for.

But when it happens to you, you can't complain.

 

[OhExaulted1]

I'm not sold on that kid.

I actually liked him alot coming out. He's got a gun and can make plays with his feet. I wouldn't be so quick to close the book on him.

 

[patsinthesnow]

I'm not sold on that kid.

He's a knockoff version of RGIII, and a project, agreed, just pointed it out.

 

[Rich<3TheWoodhead]

Andy, even a cursory glance at threads you're involved with shows that other people post their opinions of things and you respond by posting contrary opinions. On a host of issues. And you carry many discussions on for a long time, continuing to counter other peoples' opinions. It's the exact same thing we're doing here. You do it all the time, which is TOTALLY FINE, because that's what these forums are for.

But when it happens to you, you can't complain.

Very well said. Glad I am not the only one who has seen this on these boards.

 

[Ring 6]

Andy, even a cursory glance at threads you're involved with shows that other people post their opinions of things and you respond by posting contrary opinions. On a host of issues. And you carry many discussions on for a long time, continuing to counter other peoples' opinions. It's the exact same thing we're doing here. You do it all the time, which is TOTALLY FINE, because that's what these forums are for.

But when it happens to you, you can't complain.

There is a large difference here.
I said that I am not ready to judge the team until I see if last year was a fluke.
You proceeded ti argue with me about what you think about the team.
Regardless of any discussion of whether they improved or declined or whether you think last year proves Harbaugh is a great coach, my position is that I need to see year 2 before I can judge the realness of year 1.
We could talk for 3 hours about each player and it isn't going to change that.

Its like me saying after watching Solder as a rookie, I am encouraged but I want to see him full time before I am convinced he is going to be a good LT, and you debating everything he did as a rookie. It just isn't relevant.

That is my point when I say you seem to not want me to be allowed to have my opinion. My opinion is we need to see more. But you are trying to have an argument about what we already saw.

 

[ATippett56]

Be the leader of a young, talented secondary and have a chance to be on a historic team.

OR.

Be a fahkin Jet.

Landrys choice.

Or follow the money!

Best Regards,

Mario Williams

 

[ivanvamp]

There is a large difference here.
I said that I am not ready to judge the team until I see if last year was a fluke.
You proceeded ti argue with me about what you think about the team.
Regardless of any discussion of whether they improved or declined or whether you think last year proves Harbaugh is a great coach, my position is that I need to see year 2 before I can judge the realness of year 1.
We could talk for 3 hours about each player and it isn't going to change that.

Its like me saying after watching Solder as a rookie, I am encouraged but I want to see him full time before I am convinced he is going to be a good LT, and you debating everything he did as a rookie. It just isn't relevant.

Andy, you're making things worse. You offered your opinion about the 49ers. I offered a different opinion, and you didn't like it. There is no tangible difference between this difference of opinion and most other differences of opinion in patsfans.com (or any other newsgroup). You initiate a LOT of contrary opinions and you don't have any problem inserting yourself into discussions to tell others why they're wrong (even if you don't use those exact words). Yet somehow you want to suggest that what I'm doing here is different in kind (not degree) from what you spend a large chunk of time here doing yourself.

That you don't see this is troubling...it reveals a serious lack of self-awareness. Either that or you're being deliberately obtuse (I just saw Shawshank Redemption). Or something. But whatever it is, it's not good.

That is my point when I say you seem to not want me to be allowed to have my opinion.

False. You are welcome to your opinion. I've said this repeatedly. Unless you consider someone having a contrary opinion to mean that you're not "being allowed" to have your own. Which, given how often you offer a contrary opinion to someone else around here, I know you don't believe.

My opinion is we need to see more. But you are trying to have an argument about what we already saw.

Good grief, Andy. I gave you some good reasons why I think they'll be really good *NEXT* year. For example: in *MY* opinion (you're welcome to yours), they've improved significantly at WR. And that was essentially their one main weak spot. This is a statement about the 49ers *moving forward*, not about the 49ers that we "already saw". Get it? (dear God, I hope so)

 

[Rich<3TheWoodhead]

Andy, you're making things worse. You offered your opinion about the 49ers. I offered a different opinion, and you didn't like it. There is no tangible difference between this difference of opinion and most other differences of opinion in patsfans.com (or any other newsgroup). You initiate a LOT of contrary opinions and you don't have any problem inserting yourself into discussions to tell others why they're wrong (even if you don't use those exact words). Yet somehow you want to suggest that what I'm doing here is different in kind (not degree) from what you spend a large chunk of time here doing yourself.

That you don't see this is troubling...it reveals a serious lack of self-awareness. Either that or you're being deliberately obtuse (I just saw Shawshank Redemption). Or something. But whatever it is, it's not good.



False. You are welcome to your opinion. I've said this repeatedly. Unless you consider someone having a contrary opinion to mean that you're not "being allowed" to have your own. Which, given how often you offer a contrary opinion to someone else around here, I know you don't believe.



Good grief, Andy. I gave you some good reasons why I think they'll be really good *NEXT* year. For example: in *MY* opinion (you're welcome to yours), they've improved significantly at WR. And that was essentially their one main weak spot. This is a statement about the 49ers *moving forward*, not about the 49ers that we "already saw". Get it? (dear God, I hope so)

Ivan well said again. However I must advise you against wasting your energy on typing responses to Andy Johnson. I went through 2 full threads with him doing nothing but writing opposing responses for the heck of it and when proved wrong just continues to be blind and stubborn. I see he is doing the same with you. In addition * he must ALWAYS have the LAST WORD* he won't stop until his point / argument is posted after yours. He needs that to make himself feel better.

 

[ivanvamp]

Ivan well said again. However I must advise you against wasting your energy on typing responses to Andy Johnson. I went through 2 full threads with him doing nothing but writing opposing responses for the heck of it and when proved wrong just continues to be blind and stubborn. I see he is doing the same with you. In addition * he must ALWAYS have the LAST WORD* he won't stop until his point / argument is posted after yours. He needs that to make himself feel better.

Two things. First, I don't mind him having the last word. I generally allow people to get the last word in. Like in this case, I'm going to let him have the last word with his very next post. I think it's pretty clear from any objective observer that he's making very little sense at this point, which satisfies my darker nature.

Second, it reminds me of this: Monty Python - Argument Clinic - YouTube

 

[Rich<3TheWoodhead]

Two things. First, I don't mind him having the last word. I generally allow people to get the last word in. Like in this case, I'm going to let him have the last word with his very next post. I think it's pretty clear from any objective observer that he's making very little sense at this point, which satisfies my darker nature.

Second, it reminds me of this: Monty Python - Argument Clinic - YouTube

Hahaha hit the nail on the head!!

 

[dex13]

That is my point when I say you seem to not want me to be allowed to have my opinion.

your opinion is to belittle anyone who doesn't agree with you. Is there an active thread on this forum where you haven't called a poster a name as your response to something you disagree with?

 

[Ring 6]

your opinion is to belittle anyone who doesn't agree with you. Is there an active thread on this forum where you haven't called a poster a name as your response to something you disagree with?

I don't think you can find one where I called anyone a name. I don't do that unless provoked.

 

[Ring 6]

Andy, you're making things worse.

Well aparently you are choosing not to listen to what I am saying.

You offered your opinion about the 49ers. I offered a different opinion, and you didn't like it.

Not really. I said from the start I won't believe they are for real until they do it again.
You responded to me. I answered each of your comments with comments of my own.
At no point was I arguing over your opinion of the 49ers, and I tried real hard to make that clear. If you want to pretend that I am saying one thing but secretly meaning another, I don't know what to say to that.

There is no tangible difference between this difference of opinion and most other differences of opinion in patsfans.com (or any other newsgroup).

But that is just the point, there is.
I am not debating how good the 49ers are. I said that at the beginning.
I am not comfortable that last year wasn't a fluke but I don't want to dismiss it.
You responded with some comments about the 49ers, and I gave my thoughts. None of those topics were really that big a deal to me.
I don't see much difference at WR. If you do, thats fine.
I think the jury is out on Harbaugh still. If you do not thats fine, my position is I want to see more. There isn't really anything you can say that I would agree or disagree with that would make me change that I want to see more before passing judgment.

We have now evolved into me saying I don't want to argue with you, because my feelings on the 49ers are that I need to see more, and the points that were raised were not that important to me.
Are you really calling me out for saying I find no value in having a discussion that has no chance of changing my mind?

You initiate a LOT of contrary opinions and you don't have any problem inserting yourself into discussions to tell others why they're wrong (even if you don't use those exact words).

That is correct. I see no value in posting "I agree". The value of the board, IMO, is an exchange of differing opinions. So when I respond to a post it is most likely in disagreement. I don't have a lot of interest in typing posts about agreement.
Further, I usually join a discussion when I feel strongly, so I believe I have a strong argument and facts to support it.

Yet somehow you want to suggest that what I'm doing here is different in kind (not degree) from what you spend a large chunk of time here doing yourself.

Again, I see a stark difference. I have no problem that you don't see it, which is why I have gone out of my way to explain. It seems though that your position is you see what I say and assume I am saying one thing and meaning another. I am not.
I just see nothing debatable here.

That you don't see this is troubling...it reveals a serious lack of self-awareness. Either that or you're being deliberately obtuse (I just saw Shawshank Redemption). Or something. But whatever it is, it's not good.

Maybe you should read back. I just did. I commented that I wanted to see another year before I believe they are for real. You wrote back reasons you think they will be good. I responded and we exchanged a couple of posts, then I said this

Remember we are coming from the starting point of me saying I don't believe 1 good season proves they have 'arrived' as an elite team.
Longshots like Moss all of a sudden being better than the guy who flunked out of the league 2 years ago don't really answer to that. Whether Harbaugh is a great is still to proven in the most generous of analysis. Whether a defense stays excellent after 1 excellent year is no guarantee, and the entire discussion about the schedule was you adding it, not me.

I'm not sure what you have added that would be a good argument that they are a proven elite team after 1 good season.
It seems you are creating an argument where once doesn't exist.
To me it seems clear I am saying none of these issues really impact my 'need to see more' approach, whether I agree or not.
You continued to argue the points. I continued to explain that my opinion is I want to see more.
This is why I said you seem to not want me to be allowed to have my opinion.
Seemingly all of this was somehow lost in translation.

I have no issue with any of your opinions but once again, the starting point is I want to see them do it again before I believe. Rehashing facts about them is akin to ignoring my opinion, isn't it?

False. You are welcome to your opinion. I've said this repeatedly. Unless you consider someone having a contrary opinion to mean that you're not "being allowed" to have your own. Which, given how often you offer a contrary opinion to someone else around here, I know you don't believe.

Again, my opinion is I want to see more. By insisting on debating how good they are, you dismiss that opinion. In other words, my opinion, as I have stated, is I want to see this year before I can be convinced.
It would seem by arguing the merits of the team, you are dismissing that viewpoint.
Is your argument that I shouldn't be allowed to take that stance?

Good grief, Andy. I gave you some good reasons why I think they'll be really good *NEXT* year. For example: in *MY* opinion (you're welcome to yours), they've improved significantly at WR. And that was essentially their one main weak spot. This is a statement about the 49ers *moving forward*, not about the 49ers that we "already saw". Get it? (dear God, I hope so)

And my opinion is that discussing those points is not useful to me because I a hard time judging whether they are real or a fluke.
Perhaps I wasn't clear.
My comment that you responded in contradiction to was that I need to wait and see if 2011 was a fluke.
Therefore, I stepped out of an argument, one part of it being WRs, because it wasn't pertinent to the point I initially made.
If you want to change the topic to the 49ers offseason moves that is something else, and isn't really the conversation I was starting.

 

[Ring 6]

Ivan well said again. However I must advise you against wasting your energy on typing responses to Andy Johnson. I went through 2 full threads with him doing nothing but writing opposing responses for the heck of it and when proved wrong just continues to be blind and stubborn. I see he is doing the same with you. In addition * he must ALWAYS have the LAST WORD* he won't stop until his point / argument is posted after yours. He needs that to make himself feel better.

You do realize that every time I was 'doing nothing but writing opposing responses for the heck of it' you were doing the same, or else I couldn't keep writing responses.
That 'when proved wrong just continues to be blind and stubborn.' is a joke,
Finally, the most ironic of all

In addition * he must ALWAYS have the LAST WORD* he won't stop until his point / argument is posted after yours. He needs that to make himself feel better

Think about that comment. If that is a terrible criticism of me, what does it say about you? If I had to work so hard to get the last word, apparently you were working just as hard.

 

[BTTA]

I for one am sick of having to scroll through your lawyer-like arguments. It stops the dialogue, obliterates learning, and deletes all fun from the posts.

I'd wager I'm not alone.

Well aparently you are choosing not to listen to what I am saying.


Not really. I said from the start I won't believe they are for real until they do it again.
You responded to me. I answered each of your comments with comments of my own.
At no point was I arguing over your opinion of the 49ers, and I tried real hard to make that clear. If you want to pretend that I am saying one thing but secretly meaning another, I don't know what to say to that.


But that is just the point, there is.
I am not debating how good the 49ers are. I said that at the beginning.
I am not comfortable that last year wasn't a fluke but I don't want to dismiss it.
You responded with some comments about the 49ers, and I gave my thoughts. None of those topics were really that big a deal to me.
I don't see much difference at WR. If you do, thats fine.
I think the jury is out on Harbaugh still. If you do not thats fine, my position is I want to see more. There isn't really anything you can say that I would agree or disagree with that would make me change that I want to see more before passing judgment.

We have now evolved into me saying I don't want to argue with you, because my feelings on the 49ers are that I need to see more, and the points that were raised were not that important to me.
Are you really calling me out for saying I find no value in having a discussion that has no chance of changing my mind?




That is correct. I see no value in posting "I agree". The value of the board, IMO, is an exchange of differing opinions. So when I respond to a post it is most likely in disagreement. I don't have a lot of interest in typing posts about agreement.
Further, I usually join a discussion when I feel strongly, so I believe I have a strong argument and facts to support it.



Again, I see a stark difference. I have no problem that you don't see it, which is why I have gone out of my way to explain. It seems though that your position is you see what I say and assume I am saying one thing and meaning another. I am not.
I just see nothing debatable here.






Maybe you should read back. I just did. I commented that I wanted to see another year before I believe they are for real. You wrote back reasons you think they will be good. I responded and we exchanged a couple of posts, then I said this

Remember we are coming from the starting point of me saying I don't believe 1 good season proves they have 'arrived' as an elite team.
Longshots like Moss all of a sudden being better than the guy who flunked out of the league 2 years ago don't really answer to that. Whether Harbaugh is a great is still to proven in the most generous of analysis. Whether a defense stays excellent after 1 excellent year is no guarantee, and the entire discussion about the schedule was you adding it, not me.

I'm not sure what you have added that would be a good argument that they are a proven elite team after 1 good season.
It seems you are creating an argument where once doesn't exist.
To me it seems clear I am saying none of these issues really impact my 'need to see more' approach, whether I agree or not.
You continued to argue the points. I continued to explain that my opinion is I want to see more.
This is why I said you seem to not want me to be allowed to have my opinion.
Seemingly all of this was somehow lost in translation.

I have no issue with any of your opinions but once again, the starting point is I want to see them do it again before I believe. Rehashing facts about them is akin to ignoring my opinion, isn't it?


Again, my opinion is I want to see more. By insisting on debating how good they are, you dismiss that opinion. In other words, my opinion, as I have stated, is I want to see this year before I can be convinced.
It would seem by arguing the merits of the team, you are dismissing that viewpoint.
Is your argument that I shouldn't be allowed to take that stance?




And my opinion is that discussing those points is not useful to me because I a hard time judging whether they are real or a fluke.
Perhaps I wasn't clear.
My comment that you responded in contradiction to was that I need to wait and see if 2011 was a fluke.
Therefore, I stepped out of an argument, one part of it being WRs, because it wasn't pertinent to the point I initially made.
If you want to change the topic to the 49ers offseason moves that is something else, and isn't really the conversation I was starting.