WR Malcolm Mitchell on Injured Reserve

[Kontradiction]

You just like making things up as you go, lol. Your antics crack me up, though I have seen them before. I'm sure there are more than a few here who could tell some war stories about your crazyness.

Let's do it this way. You pick one of your silly points and I'll shred it up for you. There are just too many to go through them all.

If you don't want to pick, I will.

Respond to the last post, for starters. I gave you an entire post to "shred".

 

[BabeParilli]

Respond to the last post, for starters. I gave you an entire post to "shred".

I really was looking for one of your absurd points to shred from the last post. But okay, I'll shred them all.

 

[Kontradiction]

I really was looking for one of your absurd points to shred from the last post. But okay, I'll shred them all.

LMAO I'm looking forward to it.

 

[BabeParilli]

Why not? Mitchell was splitting time between corner and receiver in college. At Kent State, Edelman had a lot of practice running in space in the offense they played which is why the Pats converted him to wideout. The really aren't all that different. The angry tenor of your post is noted here, though. Again, I suspect that's because you're beginning to become aware that your argument is weak and isn't making a whole lot of sense on any level.

You're seriously trying to portray a guy who played QB in college as about the same thing as a guy who played WR in college for 4 years and caught 174 balls. You don't see the insanity in that I suspect, or rather he dishonesty. I guess you just feel if you say something ridiculous enough times eventually somebody sensible might buy it, and the liars will greedily gobble it up.

Sure you are. You know you went a bit too far in the JAG designation. You just don't want to outright admit it. That's why you're tossing out one logical fallacy after another (several straw men, moving the goal posts, and now some ad hominem being sprinkled in) in a flailing effort to convince yourself that you were actually correct in your OP.

And now you are supposing you are qualified to state what I am thinking while you proffer BS about logical arguments that have no basis whatsoever, but hey, throw out the accusation, it makes you sound smart. The atheists use that tired tactic all the time when they can't press their point. It's pure smoke.

You've literally gotten your ass handed to you by everyone that has responded to you.

^ Delusional and dishonest. Nobody handed me anything, much less you trying to say because MM and Branch had similar rookie years that somehow that means MM is for real. Talk about a logical fallacy.

Brissette had a similar rookie year to Brady. I guess by how you recon things he will be the next GOAT. LOL

Sure. Branch was the Super Bowl MVP. There is no "card" to "play". That is something that actually happened.

Sure, but Branch was equally deserving. His stat line: 11 rec., 12 targets, 133 yards. Against the 2004 Eagles defense. Those aren't JAG numbers. Further, that you're trying to make Branch a JAG is even more hilarious than you arguing Mitchell is a JAG. That's a ****-your-pants level of hilarity.

It's a card to play when huge numbers of people don't think he deserved it. Six other guys have equaled or bettered his number (3 of them Patriots) in the SB and they didn't get MVP. And even using Branch's career achievements to bolster MM is dumb. What one guy does as a rookie does not indicate what another guy will go on to achieve.

Branch without Brady caught 190 balls for 15 TDs. The numbers dip as you expect them to when he's not playing with the GOAT (and is instead playing with Hasselbeck on the back nine of his career), but those aren't Just Another Guy numbers. As a matter of fact, Branch was doubled quite a bit in those days and still turned in those numbers while dealing with a number of injuries.

Now you're going to try to start an argument about how good Branch was, talk about moving the goalposts. You've gone to another stadium.

Branch was okay. He's 118th all-time on receptions playing in the passing era. He never made a pro-bowl. He averaged 47 catches a year over 11 seasons. That's an okay second receiver, nothing more. He did manage to hang on for 11 years, thanks again to Brady though. He basically got Seattle to go for a sucker deal and did little there, then came back where BB knew Brady could squeeze a little more out of him since he always squeezes a lot out of the crap BB gives him to work with.

He managed to start in 63% of the games he could have over the 11 years. Not too impressive. He should name his kid Tom.

Then of course there was his holdout that put the team in a bad position.

 

[Kontradiction]

You're seriously trying to portray a guy who played QB in college as about the same thing as a guy who played WR in college for 4 years and caught 174 balls.

No. I'm saying that Mitchell had anything but a set position in college and was moved back and forth. He was considered raw when drafted and still went on to catch four balls for TDs and was responsible for some very big catches in the biggest game on the planet, in the hardest offense in the league to master, in a 25 point deficit, as a rookie. But yes, the two are comparable since Mitchell's rookie season was being compared to that of Branch's and Edelman's.

A comparison to be made =/= saying the two are the same. That you're attempting to state that and make that my supposed "argument" is a straw man. I suggest you research what a straw man actually is before accusing me of not knowing it.

You don't see the insanity in that I suspect, or rather he dishonesty. I guess you just feel if you say something ridiculous enough times eventually somebody sensible might buy it, and the liars will greedily gobble it up.

What does this even mean? Branch and Edelman are widely considered the best receiver selections in the Belichick era and Mitchell outperformed the both of them in his rookie season. Please point out where the dishonesty is in the last sentence.

And now you are supposing you are qualified to state what I am thinking while you proffer BS about logical arguments that have no basis whatsoever, but hey, throw out the accusation, it makes you sound smart.

No qualifications needed. It's plainly obvious that you're not even confident in your own original assertion that Mitchell is Just Another Guy anymore. Like I stated, a laundry list of logical fallacies followed by obvious anger when things aren't going your way makes that readily apparent to anyone still reading.

The atheists use that tired tactic all the time when they can't press their point. It's pure smoke.

Exhibit C in you really going off the rails here.

^ Delusional and dishonest. Nobody handed me anything, much less you trying to say because MM and Branch had similar rookie years that somehow that means MM is for real. Talk about a logical fallacy.

Ah, so now Branch ISN'T a JAG? Because you seem to be inferring here that Branch was for real, Mitchell isn't, I'm making a false equivalence by comparing the two.

Brissette had a similar rookie year to Brady. I guess by how you recon things he will be the next GOAT. LOL

Surely you must see how ridiculous this is without me even having to dive into it any further, correct?

It's a card to play when huge numbers of people don't think he deserved it. Six other guys have equaled or bettered his number (3 of them Patriots) in the SB and they didn't get MVP. And even using Branch's career achievements to bolster MM is dumb. What one guy does as a rookie does not indicate what another guy will go on to achieve.

1. You're losing track of your arguments in this thread again. For one, you've now claimed that Branch has career "achievements" and went on to achieve something. Earlier you claimed he was a JAG. Which is it?

2. While it doesn't guarantee what Mitchell will achieve, that doesn't change the fact that he still mastered the hardest offense in the NFL to master and had gained Brady's trust in crunch time in the biggest game of the season... as a rookie. In the Erhardt-Perkins. But I would take a random guess that you're not really much aware of what that offense is and what goes into just mastering Brady's trust alone in that offense. That explains pretty much everything because, if you had been, you wouldn't have made this ridiculous assertion that you don't even believe anymore in the first place.

Now you're going to try to start an argument about how good Branch was, talk about moving the goalposts. You've gone to another stadium.

Actually, you just did that for me. Make up your mind. Was Branch an otherwise quality pro with "achievements" (your words), or was he a JAG (also your words)?

Branch was okay. He's 118th all-time on receptions playing in the passing era. He never made a pro-bowl.

Thanks for confirming to everyone that you only have a cursory knowledge of the game. The Pro Bowl is voted on by other players. It isn't a confirmation of how good a player is or isn't. It's merely a popularity contest in the same vein that getting voted homecoming king is.

He averaged 47 catches a year over 11 seasons. That's an okay second receiver, nothing more.

Aaaaaand you just completely destroyed your own argument. Congrats on hanging yourself. A 47 catch per year average as a WR2 over an 11 year career isn't a JAG. A JAG is a guy that gets cut after a couple of seasons and washes out after that. It's an acronym for either "Just A Guy" or "Just Another Guy". What you just described does not fit the definition. And Mitchell's career trajectory, with health, is projected to surpass that. Again, your definition of a JAG is absolutely god awful. What a strange street corner to die on.

He did manage to hang on for 11 years, thanks again to Brady though. He basically got Seattle to go for a sucker deal and did little there, then came back where BB knew Brady could squeeze a little more out of him since he always squeezes a lot out of the crap BB gives him to work with.

He managed to start in 63% of the games he could have over the 11 years. Not too impressive. He should name his kid Tom.

And that was related to injuries. When he was healthy, he was a viable WR2/3 and produced. In Seattle, he was used as anywhere from a WR1 to a WR2 as a split end and drew double teams frequently in his first few years there. That's not a JAG, either.

Then of course there was his holdout that put the team in a bad position.

The team should have paid them. If they had, you could make a very good argument that Brady would already have 6 Lombardi trophies vs. 5.

Still awaiting the "shredding" with all of that wisdom you have, Babe.

 

[BabeParilli]

No. I'm saying that Mitchell had anything but a set position in college and was moved back and forth. He was considered raw when drafted and still went on to catch four balls for TDs and was responsible for some very big catches in the biggest game on the planet, in the hardest offense in the league to master, in a 25 point deficit, as a rookie. But yes, the two are comparable since Mitchell's rookie season was being compared to that of Branch's and Edelman's.

A comparison to be made =/= saying the two are the same. That you're attempting to state that and make that my supposed "argument" is a straw man. I suggest you research what a straw man actually is before accusing me of not knowing it.



What does this even mean? Branch and Edelman are widely considered the best receiver selections in the Belichick era and Mitchell outperformed the both of them in his rookie season. Please point out where the dishonesty is in the last sentence.



No qualifications needed. It's plainly obvious that you're not even confident in your own original assertion that Mitchell is Just Another Guy anymore. Like I stated, a laundry list of logical fallacies followed by obvious anger when things aren't going your way makes that readily apparent to anyone still reading.



Exhibit C in you really going off the rails here.



Ah, so now Branch ISN'T a JAG? Because you seem to be inferring here that Branch was for real, Mitchell isn't, I'm making a false equivalence by comparing the two.



Surely you must see how ridiculous this is without me even having to dive into it any further, correct?




1. You're losing track of your arguments in this thread again. For one, you've now claimed that Branch has career "achievements" and went on to achieve something. Earlier you claimed he was a JAG. Which is it?

2. While it doesn't guarantee what Mitchell will achieve, that doesn't change the fact that he still mastered the hardest offense in the NFL to master and had gained Brady's trust in crunch time in the biggest game of the season... as a rookie. In the Erhardt-Perkins. But I would take a random guess that you're not really much aware of what that offense is and what goes into just mastering Brady's trust alone in that offense. That explains pretty much everything because, if you had been, you wouldn't have made this ridiculous assertion that you don't even believe anymore in the first place.



Actually, you just did that for me. Make up your mind. Was Branch an otherwise quality pro with "achievements" (your words), or was he a JAG (also your words)?



Thanks for confirming to everyone that you only have a cursory knowledge of the game. The Pro Bowl is voted on by other players. It isn't a confirmation of how good a player is or isn't. It's merely a popularity contest in the same vein that getting voted homecoming king is.



Aaaaaand you just completely destroyed your own argument. Congrats on hanging yourself. A 47 catch per year average as a WR2 over an 11 year career isn't a JAG. A JAG is a guy that gets cut after a couple of seasons and washes out after that. It's an acronym for either "Just A Guy" or "Just Another Guy". What you just described does not fit the definition. And Mitchell's career trajectory, with health, is projected to surpass that. Again, your definition of a JAG is absolutely god awful. What a strange street corner to die on.



And that was related to injuries. When he was healthy, he was a viable WR2/3 and produced. In Seattle, he was used as anywhere from a WR1 to a WR2 as a split end and drew double teams frequently in his first few years there. That's not a JAG, either.



The team should have paid them. If they had, you could make a very good argument that Brady would already have 6 Lombardi trophies vs. 5.

Still awaiting the "shredding" with all of that wisdom you have, Babe.

You have been well shredded despite your self-delusion to the contrary.


You have made two points of argument that I am only repeating. I didn't make your argument into anything other than what it was.

You note that MM's rookie year was comparable to Branch and Edelman. In this you are somehow magically deducing that because he is comparable in that rookie year he will go on to achieve similar results to them. There is no valid reason to believe that whatsoever. Both DB and JE were not that special as rookies. Neither was MM.

You also compare a college QB to a college WR. It doesn't matter if MM played some DB or not. He was a receiver. JE wasn't. THERE IS NO COMPARISON (yet that doesn't stop you as part of your "handing me my ass", lol, pathetic.).

Somehow in your disheveled mind you see me as strawmanning what you have claimed. Bizarre. I'm stating your claims as you made them.

I know what a strawman is, and I didn't strawman anything; you're the one who should research it.


You ask what is the dishonesty? How about trying to compare a college QB to a college WR in order to desperately try to make a point? How about assuming what somebody does in their rookie year in necessarily indicative of what they may do in the future because somebody else did better in their future?

JAG is a relative term. In the big picture of the NFL, DB was pretty JAGgy. He certainly was JAGgy as a rookie.

Here, this might give you some insight as to what the NFL considers to be a JAG.

Titans Label Justin Hunter 'JAG' for 'Just Another Guy' After He Ran Wrong Route



Face reality. What have you really provided here other than comparing a college WR to a college QB along with supposing that similar rookie years somehow mean a similar future (and cherry picked examples at that.).

There is no substance.

You've provided a lot of nothing to the argument other than lots of "oh boy you got your ass handed to you" and "wow, you made a strawman". It's all smoke, mirrors and ********. It's a whole lot of nothing. It's sleazy.

Now you'll start harping on the "he said Branch was a JAG" angle. Try to discredit the opponent when you really don't have a legit argument, right.

The facts are MM will not start 75% of the games he could have since he was drafted. The facts are that he caught 32 balls last year. You like rookie comparisons to make a point? Here's one: Hart Lee Dykes had a better rookie year than MM, LMAO.


(And hey, I don't get "mad" over football talk. Saying that is a stupid, dishonest and sleazy tactic. It's what people who can't argue with facts use to try to pretend they are winning.)

 

[Kontradiction]

You have been well shredded despite your self-delusion to the contrary.


You have made two points of argument that I am only repeating. I didn't make your argument into anything other than what it was.

You note that MM's rookie year was comparable to Branch and Edelman. In this you are somehow magically deducing that because he is comparable in that rookie year he will go on to achieve similar results to them. There is no valid reason to believe that whatsoever. Both DB and JE were not that special as rookies. Neither was MM.

You also compare a college QB to a college WR. It doesn't matter if MM played some DB or not. He was a receiver. JE wasn't. THERE IS NO COMPARISON (yet that doesn't stop you as part of your "handing me my ass", lol, pathetic.).

Somehow in your disheveled mind you see me as strawmanning what you have claimed. Bizarre. I'm stating your claims as you made them.

I know what a strawman is, and I didn't strawman anything; you're the one who should research it.


You ask what is the dishonesty? How about trying to compare a college QB to a college WR in order to desperately try to make a point? How about assuming what somebody does in their rookie year in necessarily indicative of what they may do in the future because somebody else did better in their future?

JAG is a relative term. In the big picture of the NFL, DB was pretty JAGgy. He certainly was JAGgy as a rookie.

Here, this might give you some insight as to what the NFL considers to be a JAG.

Titans Label Justin Hunter 'JAG' for 'Just Another Guy' After He Ran Wrong Route



Face reality. What have you really provided here other than comparing a college WR to a college QB along with supposing that similar rookie years somehow mean a similar future (and cherry picked examples at that.).

There is no substance.

You've provided a lot of nothing to the argument other than lots of "oh boy you got your ass handed to you" and "wow, you made a strawman". It's all smoke, mirrors and ********. It's a whole lot of nothing. It's sleazy.

Now you'll start harping on the "he said Branch was a JAG" angle. Try to discredit the opponent when you really don't have a legit argument, right.

The facts are MM will not start 75% of the games he could have since he was drafted. The facts are that he caught 32 balls last year. You like rookie comparisons to make a point? Here's one: Hart Lee Dykes had a better rookie year than MM, LMAO.


(And hey, I don't get "mad" over football talk. Saying that is a stupid, dishonest and sleazy tactic. It's what people who can't argue with facts use to try to pretend they are winning.)

Let me cut the through the word salad first: do you or do you not believe that Deion Branch is just a guy?

 

[BabeParilli]

Let me cut the through the word salad first: do you or do you not believe that Deion Branch is just a guy?

Great idea. Let's do away with your blizzard of ********, calling me angry, noting how I'm getting my ass handed to me, crying about phantom strawmen, lamenting non-existent logical fallacies, noting how I'm being laughed out of the thread, accusing me of not understanding Erhardt-Perkins, how I'm proven wrong by your ******** and am now digging in, how my mental faculties are not all there and some nonsense about my age. I'm sure I've left some ******** out since you seem to have an unlimited supply.

And let's not deflect by going for the discredit tactic by talking about Branch being a JAG or not. I have no interest in debating the subjective term JAG. For this purpose we can call a JAG somebody who is backup material rather than any sort of standout player. If your sole problem with this is my referring to him as a JAG, then we have no argument. You can exist in your happy little world considering a JAG whatever you like without interference from me.

If you wish to proceed in the debate, let's just have you give a concise list of the facts you think make your case that MM is not a JAG, then I'll give mine.

 

[Tony2046]

RIP Babe Parilli

 

[long distance]

Great idea. Let's do away with your blizzard of ********, calling me angry, noting how I'm getting my ass handed to me, crying about phantom strawmen, lamenting non-existent logical fallacies, noting how I'm being laughed out of the thread, accusing me of not understanding Erhardt-Perkins, how I'm proven wrong by your ******** and am now digging in, how my mental faculties are not all there and some nonsense about my age. I'm sure I've left some ******** out since you seem to have an unlimited supply.

And let's not deflect by going for the discredit tactic by talking about Branch being a JAG or not. I have no interest in debating the subjective term JAG. For this purpose we can call a JAG somebody who is backup material rather than any sort of standout player. If your sole problem with this is my referring to him as a JAG, then we have no argument. You can exist in your happy little world considering a JAG whatever you like without interference from me.

If you wish to proceed in the debate, let's just have you give a concise list of the facts you think make your case that MM is not a JAG, then I'll give mine.

Oh, Babe, you don't know how lucky you are you can't use your jaggy tool on yourself..

 

[Kontradiction]

And let's not deflect by going for the discredit tactic by talking about Branch being a JAG or not. I have no interest in debating the subjective term JAG. For this purpose we can call a JAG somebody who is backup material rather than any sort of standout player. If your sole problem with this is my referring to him as a JAG, then we have no argument. You can exist in your happy little world considering a JAG whatever you like without interference from me.

If you wish to proceed in the debate, let's just have you give a concise list of the facts you think make your case that MM is not a JAG, then I'll give mine.

I knew if I gave you enough rope, you would just hang yourself again and I wouldn't have to waste my time dissecting your last post. By your own definition, you should consider neither Branch nor Mitchell a JAG since both have been standout players for the Patriots in their time here - especially in some of the biggest moments in this team's history.

For your own health, you may want to forget that this bad boy even exists and bail out. Even though I enjoy watching someone do mental gymnastics in order to convince themselves that they still believe what they believe, this is not a good look for you. Here, have some of these...

 

[ivanvamp]

What on earth is going on in this thread anyway?

 

[Tony2046]

What on earth is going on in this thread anyway?

A jag poster decided to hijack a thread with a 4 million word argument over a subjective topic that no one really cared about.

Basically a "what's your favorite color" type argument with stats and innuendos.

Oh and kontra decided to play a "chase the laser " game with the little kitty to offset his boredom while riding out hurricane Irma.

 

[BabeParilli]

RIP Babe Parilli

Indeed. The Babe was a great man by all accounts.

 

[BabeParilli]

I knew if I gave you enough rope, you would just hang yourself again and I wouldn't have to waste my time dissecting your last post. By your own definition, you should consider neither Branch nor Mitchell a JAG since both have been standout players for the Patriots in their time here - especially in some of the biggest moments in this team's history.

For your own health, you may want to forget that this bad boy even exists and bail out. Even though I enjoy watching someone do mental gymnastics in order to convince themselves that they still believe what they believe, this is not a good look for you. Here, have some of these...

As I suspected you respond with more ******** instead of presenting your case. Unfortunately MM is nowhere near the player many here believe. Maybe he will turn things around and get back on the field.

 

[Kontradiction]

As I suspected you respond with more ******** instead of presenting your case. Unfortunately MM is nowhere near the player many here believe. Maybe he will turn things around and get back on the field.

I've presented my case many, many times to you. You've yet to refute anything that's been said here. Further, again, by your OWN DEFINITION, neither guy is a JAG. You hung yourself, buddy. I just gave you the rope.

 

[Bruins29]

Someone needs a diaper change I think

 

[ivanvamp]

A jag poster decided to hijack a thread with a 4 million word argument over a subjective topic that no one really cared about.

Basically a "what's your favorite color" type argument with stats and innuendos.

Oh and kontra decided to play a "chase the laser " game with the little kitty to offset his boredom while riding out hurricane Irma.

Ah, I see. Heh.

 

[Oswlek]

I'm breaking down and putting this thread on ignore. Can someone please start a new one if any Mitchell news materializes?

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

I guess it's all about where you draw your JAG line. My line says most of the NFL are JAGs.

Many felt the same way about Dobson, right up until BB booted his ass out of Dodge.

Another Patsfan who didn't watch last season and especially crunch time in the SB.

THREAD IGNORE ON!!!