Oh gee, so now you're telling me what I do and don't think.
When you say something like, "Any impartial observer viewing the situation (and not drinking the kool-aid) sees a quarterback who has already got one foot out the door", I'm going to have trouble believing that you actually think there's a better chance that Brady stays than there isn't. So either you tell me that you changed your mind halfway through this thread and saw the light, or admit that you completely contradicted yourself. Your call.
After taking my "pants in the family" remark 100% literally and bringing it up about a dozen times, even after I retracted it in about 6 different ways, you are now refusing to believe a statement that I did intend to represent my opinion.
Maybe because it was painfully obvious that the "pants in the family" statement wasn't intended to be a joke?
So in otherwords you've decided to pick and choose which of my statements you are going to believe instead of attempting to respond to them logically. Yeah, that's what the world of formal debate calls "epic fail."
I've responded to all of you points logically. Let's count them down, shall we?
1. You pointed out that he owns a $20M mansion in California. I pointed out that he also owns multi-million dollar homes in both NYC and Boston. On top of that, I also pointed out that there are a TON of athletes that own multiple homes in multiple states or countries. That doesn't necessarily mean that they want to live and make their living in those states full time.
2. You said Gisele wears the pants (a point that I absolutely, positively do not believe you meant to be tongue in cheek), I pointed out that there's a difference between discussing your career with your wife (which is what they'll probably do if they're like any normal couple) and letting your wife tell you what to do with your career.
3. You said that moving to California and playing for a California-based team might be best for their children and family, I pointed out that they stay in Boston during the season.
4. You claimed that I'm of the belief that you aren't allowed to post unpopular opinions in the football forum. I countered that I'm a fan of unpopular opinions as long as they have substance behind them, then proceeded to point out what substance is.
5. You said that there are other teams in Califonia other than Oakland, I questioned why Brady would rather play for Singletary than Belichick, then you actually asked me to show you where you said that would be the case. So, wait, you think that San Diego will trade us Rivers for Brady straight up?
6. You said you were speculating and wanted me to do as much. I responded by showing you your first couple of posts and pointed out how they were not speculation and how you've only now backtracked to speculating.
So tell me, Wolfpack, which of your points have I not met head on?
I guess I see how a simple mind would interpret my statements as being my only belief is that he will leave, but I stand by my ratio. If your best/only response is "I don't believe you believe that!" then that's really your problem.
Ah, so now you're in the third stage of your political forum debate tactics handbook. Let me narrow it down...
1. Make assanine statement.
2. When called out on that statement, proceed to backtrack.
3. When backtracking doesn't work, resort to ad hominem.
By the way, that ratio I gave was my 2nd post in this thread (with my first one being the infamous "pants in the family" post). On what planet is standing by a statement you made virtually right off the bat considered "backtracking"?
Really? I beg to differ...
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.
^^ There's your first post in the thread. Maybe you meant your second post?
I think you're remembering things that didn't happen. Brady was locked up with 2 years remaining on his current deal last time, so there was nowhere near the level of conversation we are seeing today.
There's also a pretty big pair of "differences" from last time, namely a wife and child that are both based out west - not to mention a $30 million mansion.
I am being perfectly calm, and I am calmly asserting that there is a chance he may not be here next year. Nothing is written in stone either way, but it's a possibility. That's all I am saying.
^^ Second post. Hmm. Perhaps your third?
Yeah, what a ridiculous thing to worry about whether or not the best quarterback to come down the pike since 1980 is going to be playing for our team next year. Let's all go back to talking about Logan Mankins' contract status and who we should draft in the 5th round!
Actually, the "wears the pants " comment was the fourth post you made. It was actually the fifth post that you made the percentages comment, which seems to directly contradict your first post. So please, don't blame me for taking what you said first as your actual opinion especially when your opion seems to chance in your third, fourth, and fifth posts.
