Re: Rule Under Review after Manning, Polian Complain
You're lying. If you have to resort to blatent lies to assert your case, that proves how bankrupt your statements are. I consistently maintained in that thread that Brady leaving was within the realm of possibility, steadfastly giving an estimate of 25% to 33%.
The funny thing is that you can't seem to understand this. There is no 33% chance of Brady leaving. That's faulty logic. You either think there was a chance he was leaving or you think there was no chance that he was leaving. You took the former and then defended with the sort of anger that you've been defending your faulty logic in this thread.
Apparently to your undeveloped mind
Didn't I tell you to try to make your insults a little bit better? :yawn2: Try harder.
33% means I "vehemently" said it would happen.
This is absolutely delicious. You accuse me of having an undeveloped mind and then show that my point completely sailed over your head. Try reading my posts again.
I told you I would gladly answer your questions just as soon as you show us where I said Brady was going to San Francisco. But I will make a second offer: I will gladly answer your questions if you admit you were once again lying and misrepresenting my positions.
Sure...
Patriots better do something and they better do something soon - and stop using the CBA as a bullcrap excuse. Any impartial observer viewing the situation (and not drinking the kool-aid) sees a quarterback who has already got one foot out the door.
Yeah I know there's no team in LA but there are an awful lot of NFL cities much close to LA than Foxboro.
You also went on to make logical leaps that Brady and Gisele consider California their base. You made the 33% prediction (which, again, is faulty logic), tried to make a point that Gisele will ultimately have say in whether or not he moves out there, and then you said this...
Last I checked, there were other teams in California than Oakland. And just about every team in the NFL is closer to LA than Boston.
So let's take a look at that. Yes, there are other teams outside of Oakland. One of them has a very rich and very good franchise quarterback already. That would be San Diego. The other is San Francisco. Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't those the only three teams in California? Or did the NFL suddenly decide to consult with Wolfpack and put teams in Anaheim and L.A.
Game... set... match. Now, pretty please, with sugar on top, answer the question.
You obviously didn't watch the Saints game because they were doing a lot of complaining about it too.
Complaining on the field to the refs and complaining to the media are two different things. Once again, produce the soundbyte or the story, or stop going on about it and admit that your point is asinine.
I don't necessarily think they should throw the rule out entirely, just that it needs some tweaking. Although I wouldn't lose any sleep if they did decide it was too disruptive to keep.
Then what the hell are you aggressively defending in this thread? Are you just bored or is this some way that you release massive amounts of sexual frustration? If you're going to tweak the rule, then provide the way that you would tweak the rule. Give me a new placement for the official that you think would work.
BTW here's a clue for you since you obviously are not a big football fan:
Yeah, your insults still suck. But you have a point. I'm not a football fan. I just have almost 13,000 posts on board dedicated to the New England Patriots in which I actually participate in the active football conversation instead of *****ing and moaning about politics.
The umpire was in the defensive backfield for about what? 75 years? So feel free to stop acting like getting him out of there at this point in time is a matter of life and death.
First off, where did I say it was a matter of life and death? Provide evidence, please. Secondly, the length of time that the umpire was lining up in the defensive backfield is absolutely irrelevant. For perspective, opposing DB's were allowed to harass wide receivers down the field for an even bigger length of time until Polian's vagina began bleeding. What happened then? Colts opponents didn't complain to the media about the length of time in which WR's were harassed by DB's. They ADJUSTED. Something that all well coached professional football teams should be able to do.
This from the king of weasels. I don't htink you've answered a single question I've asked you in this thread.
Another fallacy. Looking back, the only question you asked me was about Brady. I just provided sound evidence on that. Now I'm waiting for you to tell me which other teams have complained to the media about the new rule as well as explain to me why many other teams are able to execute a hurry up offense without drawing flags.
Fact is all you've done is desperately try to change the subject to Tom Brady, and then deliberately lied about statements I made something like 6 weeks ago. But it's nice to see I am so far in your head that you carry your anger at me around with you.
You're inside my head only because I'm trying to figure out how someone can be so inept. Otherwise, don't flatter yourself. In fact, it's clearly the other way around. If you notice, I haven't leveled one personal insult at you. Why? Because I realize that I'm fully capable of hammering you with superior logic alone. It's almost too easy, as a matter of fact. On the other hand, it's rather obvious that I'm deep into your head.
I'm waiting for my challenges to be answered. I have a feeling they won't be though. Instead, I'll look forward to your denial.
