2017 Training Camp - Day 14 (8/16/17) [2nd Joint Practice with the Texans]

[long distance]

Despite AD unable to provide her with some footage . our Doc is optimistic as well..



____
now i can safely say this joint was a success..

 

[Ring 6]

If you read between the lines..you know very well he was saying Cannon wasn't the in the greatest shape without flat out coming out and saying it. Just by saying not that he was in bad, but is better now is saying he wasn't in the best shape previously.

Also, nice cherry picking of Scars ending comment. Purposefully left out the part about not using his arms to his advantage. Again, I'd say that's technique.

These are connections that a 1st grader can easily make.

Sorry, I don't read between lines to conclude someone says something that is the opposite of what they say.

 

[Love The Drake]

Despite AD unable to provide her with some footage . our Doc is optimistic as well..



____
now i can safely say this joint was a success..

Keep the news coming .

 

[Ring 6]

BTW: You seeing 5% when everyone else sees closer to 90% is classic Andy. Patsboy didn't make anything up and it's easy to see how he interpreted that into what he said.

So you think that is 90% Bill Belichick SAYING that Cannon was out of shape and played with a lack of technique.

Its very "Andy" because I deal with the facts. OMG here is a positive comment about his conditioning, that must be 90% proof he felt negatively. Give me a break.
If 'everyone' takes things to not mean what they say, then I am happy to be in disagreement with 'everyone'.

 

[Ring 6]

Are you still stuck on player vs player? hahahaha

Too funny.

When you are talking about which player is more replaceable, yeah, its about the actual players.

 

[ViperGTS]

Sorry, I don't read between lines to conclude someone says something that is the opposite of what they say.

It's called context. And people are all over him today skipping the Jets when talking about Crennel. Why did he do it..what did he mean?

It's basic context.

 

[Deus Irae]

It's called context. And people are all over him today skipping the Jets when talking about Crennel. Why did he do it..what did he mean?

It's basic context.

No, it's a ridiculously poor attempt at the reading of context, which is not the same thing.

 

[AtomicDawg]

Some interviews here from Levan Reid with
Hogan and Develin.

 

[ViperGTS]

No, it's a ridiculously poor attempt at the reading of context, which is not the same thing.

Uh huh. So Scar mentioning Cannon not using his length to his advantage isn't in reference to technique? And Bill saying he is in better shape isn't an inference that he wasn't in the best shape before?

If it isn't...

 

[Tony2046]

So you think that is 90% Bill Belichick SAYING that Cannon was out of shape and played with a lack of technique.

Its very "Andy" because I deal with the facts. OMG here is a positive comment about his conditioning, that must be 90% proof he felt negatively. Give me a break.
If 'everyone' takes things to not mean what they say, then I am happy to be in disagreement with 'everyone'.

Nope. I'm saying I can see how Patsboy posted what he did. "Clearly" he didn't make it up.

Does everything set you off?

 

[Tony2046]

When you are talking about which player is more replaceable, yeah, its about the actual players.

Then you've missed the whole point.

I'm sure that could have been an interesting discussion but as usual it has turned into some kind of Andygeddon end of the world BS.

 

[luuked]

Nope. I'm saying I can see how Patsboy posted what he did. "Clearly" he didn't make it up.

Does everything set you off?

Just do what a quite a few people have started doing and put him on the ignore list for a few weeks. The quality of life on this forum increases substantially.

 

[Ring 6]

Nope. I'm saying I can see how Patsboy posted what he did. "Clearly" he didn't make it up.

Does everything set you off?

Not sure what you mean by set off.
The guy made an incorrect statement and I called him out on it.

Just to be clear. What I called him out on was him saying BELICHICK MADE THOSE COMMFNTS. We all know he wouldn't. It's lazy posting.

Now as far as the 90% comment if BB said Cannon was a fat slob who couldn't Rex h his toes or run 10 yards that would only be 50%. (Of course he actually said Cannon had never been in bad shape)
There is still a big zero in the column if belichick saying Cannon "played with lack of technique".

 

[Ring 6]

Then you've missed the whole point.

I'm sure that could have been an interesting discussion but as usual it has turned into some kind of Andygeddon end of the world BS.

Right because I've made like 3 posts saying I disagree. Wow. What a nightmare.

 

[Jackson 2]

What? You don't think I can get him to agree on something?

Who the hell is "him?"

 

[Ring 6]

Sure that's fair but I can see how Patsboy interpreted that into what he posted. IOW, he wasn't making things up which is what was implied.

He said Belichick said he was out of shape and played with a lack of technique.

Unless belichick actually said those things of course he is making things up.
No one said he purposefully lied but that his comments are incorrect. If you think you might remember something and don't take care to communicate it properly you are literally making it up.

If he said he things cannon's technique was sloppy while Dante was gone and he could have been in better shape that is an opinion to discuss.
Saying BB said something he didn't is making up that BB publicly said what the posters opinion is.
If you can't see the difference I don't know what to say.

 

[Danger Zone]

Strange to say but very accurate. Gronk and Cooks are the top 2 knockout artists on the offense

White, DLew, Jules, DA and MM are the jabs and body shots.

Hogan is the kick in the balls.

Might be the most poignant thing you've ever said here

(compliment, not a dig)

 

[Deus Irae]

Uh huh. So Scar mentioning Cannon not using his length to his advantage isn't in reference to technique? And Bill saying he is in better shape isn't an inference that he wasn't in the best shape before?

If it isn't...

Best shape of career means best shape of career, not that the year before was Godawful.

There's a difference between "context" and "pure speculation". You seem to be confused about the two.

 

[long distance]

excuse me for jumping back on topic..



hopefully previous optimism on Rivers stands..

 

[Tony2046]

Not sure what you mean by set off.
The guy made an incorrect statement and I called him out on it.

Just to be clear. What I called him out on was him saying BELICHICK MADE THOSE COMMFNTS. We all know he wouldn't. It's lazy posting.

Now as far as the 90% comment if BB said Cannon was a fat slob who couldn't Rex h his toes or run 10 yards that would only be 50%. (Of course he actually said Cannon had never been in bad shape)
There is still a big zero in the column if belichick saying Cannon "played with lack of technique".

That's a classic Andy in Wonderland's rabbit hole response.

BB didn't make those exact comments rather someone else did and therefor Patsboy's original post of attributing Cannon's improvement to Scar's return is false???

Got it.

Personally I can see how he interpreted, from memory, being in better shape into not being in shape the year before. And I can also see how he interpreted Scar's statement of not using his hands and long arms properly into poor technique. IOW, he didn't make things up as you implied.

But I think you're pissed off because those comments, regardless of how he interpreted them, caught you off guard. You got caught with your pants down Andy and had to desperately spin the argument from who's responsible for Cannon's improvement to whether BB said out of shape or better shape. Nice try btw.

Anyways to answer the question I think Patsboy correct in that Scar had to a lot to do with Cannon's technical improvement, Cannon healed up and worked his ass off, and BB was happy that Cannon showed up in better shape. That was the original discussion, wasn't it?
Hahaha