• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

503 Excellent

About Vee

  • Rank

Previous Fields

  • Favorite Team

Recent Profile Visitors

482 profile views
  1. I get it, I get it. You want to prove an opinion. Look, that's fine, you believe he's not as talented relative to his peers. I understand what you are getting at now. You're basically in a "whos the better president" discussion. I say his position in NFL career records books cements his talent. I cannot agree with you that hard work can move you into the class of peers he is for a career. Perhaps a season or two. We've seen players burst out on to the scene for a season or two, get paid and then fade away. Joe Flacco anyone? I don't believe you can get to career stats that mean something like most all time TD, most receptions, etc. without the talent to back it up. Some people make it look easy (Emmitt Smith), others make it look like they're busting there humps on every play. What you are trying to make claim to cannot be proven because it is based on opinions. Your facts are based on biased opinion and could never hold any water in a scientific study or analysis. In a courtroom they could sway the opinion of a jury, but again, we're talking flawed decisions. The measurements you speak of certainly do not define talent. Its sole purpose is to help forecast a players success in the NFL at a given position. If it were to define talent, then there would be no busts. Why did Mike Mamula fail? He exceeded all of the measurements you claim defines talent. The measurements you claim are not at all connected to whether or not a player can succeed in the NFL. Read the previous posts. There are players that could crush the individual skill tests and still fail the NFL by a wide margin, therefore there is no direct relationship between the combine tests and success in the NFL. Period. That leaves this discussion with nothing more than discussions based on opinions. Trump v Obama. Bush v Clinton. You're having the same discussion. It's ultimately unwinnable because there is no way to scientifically compare the "talent relative to peers discussion". Was TO talented, we can all agree on that. Was Trump and Obama presidents of the US, yes, we can all agree to that. After that, things start to get fuzzy.
  2. Go back to previous posts. The tests he took timing his agility, leaping, and speed only reflect his abilities on agility, leaping and speed, not necessarily how talented an NFL WR he is. It's but a few tools to help predict how his talent and skill will pan out in the NFL. It is by no means anything any rational person could possibly put any stock into after an impressive HOF career is complete. You must drop these statistics because they simply don't mean anything. If they did, then there would be no busts in the NFL. They only provide some potential possible value to forecast results, not the other way around. The quotes must also be dropped, as I said before, people are flawed and they have agendas and biases. Lastly, I asked you if there is any other player you deem not talented relative to their peers in that Top 10 all time TDs, Receptions, etc etc or is TO the singular outlier on all of those lists?
  3. I guess here's your sticking point. The rest of your post is irrelevant. Look, I look at the list TO is on, and after reading these threads, I think it would be even more amazing if he was to join those "peers" and would be the less talented than all of them. You're making him out to be even more amazing than you think. It would be quite the achievement to rank so high, with so many great players, and not meet their "talent" level. Ultimately, you'll never get to an end with this thread because what you want to argue is so inconceivably opinionated and biased, you'll never get to where you want to go. It's like arguing why blue is a better color than red. There are simply no facts to back it up. All you continue to bring are other people's opinions. People are flawed. People have bias. Numbers have no bias. You want to put a spin on a mathematical fact by throwing in some non-sensical differentiator that no one could possibly care about with two exceptions, and two exceptions only: 1. Those people who hate TO 2. Those people who love TO Everyone else is content to let the math speak for itself in regards with how talented he was. You want to use Jeff George stats and Steve Young quotes, go ahead. If you were competing in a science fair, you would receive a failing grade. If you were on a debate team, you would get an A based on your research and on effort, not on whether or not you were right or not because in a good debate, there really is no right answer. If you were in a court case, your case would depend on the flawed judge and jury that is deciding your case. Not a reliable nor conclusive result....ask the Nicole Brown estate. Ultimately there is nothing anyone can say to persuade you to believe something different, and you will not be able to persuade anyone to believe anything different because you are arguing over what color is better, relative to other colors in the same box. There's can be no definitive answer...just opinion. You are not content to argue whether TO is talented, you concede on that point, what you want to know is he as talented as the rest of the people on the impressive lists his records reside on, and that's just an argument for a couple of people at a bar after they've had 5 or 6 beers in them.
  4. If he doesn't blow it up in his final preseason game going 11-11 with 2TDs in his first season with the Eagles, this team might have been under a long contract with him. They were ready to sign on the dotted line when Sam plays lights out and then wanted more money. Thank goodness he upped his asking price that night...
  5. Really? Because it sounds like youre running the Madden playbook here. You're telling me that a QB from another team, another system and other players can roll into a new team, without any training camp or prep and just magically understand how to call plays and make the reads that the system demands? Really? That's amazing. If you think Kaep, or any QB can waltz onto a team 5 weeks in with no camp or training and rattle off a bunch of wins, I will simply disagree with you. You have officially created Kaep into this unbelievably gifted QB who can simply prance on to an NFL team and win games. Thats just simply incredible. With those kinds of talents you'd have thought he could have won more than 4 games in the last two season for the team he DID practice and train with. Could he do a decent job had he been picked up in training camp or the preseason, sure. Way better than Weeden, I'll agree with that, but lets not pretend that there really is a player out there that can come in cold in Week 5 on a new team and make a helluva difference. They're gonna run dumbed down plays, hand the ball off and rely on defense and some luck.
  6. Oh come on now, starting Kaepernick is throwing the season as well. Let's not annoint him as a Tom Brady now. Signing him, at best, wins you, what two more games? He wasn't taking the 9ers to the playoffs, he certainly can't take a new team, with a new offense, with new players, in a new system to the playoffs after already missing the first 5 weeks of the season, all of preseason and all of any training camp. Add to all of that the publicity that would be heaped on the team, and every single decision/conversation made before during and after the game, and who the hell would possibly want to volunteer for that? Seriously. Personal feelings aside. He's not going to come in and rattle off 8 wins in a row on a team he has no familiarity with. Why would you take your franchise and run it through the ringer like that? If he gets sacked 5 times in a game, there'll be speculation that the o-line doesn't want to protect him. Calling a play that runs him out of the pocket...coaches are out to get him. PLaying conservative and having him hand the ball off too much...coaches aren't being fair with him. There would be no way to win with this hand. His best shot at coming back to the NFL is to play and succeed in the CFL. Go win a Grey Cup and the phone will ring.
  7. OK Johnnie Cochran. You win. You are basing your entire argument with opinions of others, as well as your own. Everyone else here is basing it on stats. Since you see things most other people miss, who else wasn't talented on the following Top 10 Lists: 1. Career Receiving Yards 2. Career Receptions 3. Career Receiving Touchdowns 4. Career Touchdowns (any) Everyone stops at #2 at this point and figures, "that's a pretty incredibly talented list of WRs, it sure would be crazy to believe someone could sneak in there without talent". But not you, not TATE's answer to Johnnie Cochran. You want to make a silly statement, ignoring some incredible records, and stake a claim using some people's opinion about the amount of talent TO has. You just can't get to these records without talent. Is he the only Outlier, according to you? Is there any other player, in the Top Ten, that also is missing talent? I mean, I'm using facts, statistical fact to prove my point. You're basing yours on opinions and heresay. I'm pretty sure the glove here fits, so you're not gonna be able to acquit. Is there some receiving career record list he would have been on had he had the talent he was missing?
  8. I don't see that. I see a hand on the shoulder and a ball in the hands of a receiver. As far as I'm concerned, if he goes down, it's by contact.
  9. Really? You cant see #34 with his hand on his shoulder? Looks like his left calf touches the ground.
  10. Look, there are people (flat earthers) who refuse to accept mathematical fact and instead rely on opinions and insights from experts. Billy Sims has spent a ton of his life tracking down every quote and tidbit trying to discredit his career numbers. None of us are going to convince Kyrie Irving that the earth is not flat. None of us are going to convince Billy Sims that the numbers mean a whole lot more than the opinions of experts. People are flawed, people have feelings and can be wrong. Quotes can be misinterpreted. For example, perhaps Steve Young is trying to get John Taylor in the Hall of Fame, who knows? Perhaps he never liked TO and had a tight relationship with John Taylor. Math is great in the sense that it doesn't work that way. The numbers speak for themselves. No one needs to explain the stats posted in Post #3, they stand for themselves. If BillySims wants to spend the rest of his life trying to discredit those numbers then who are we to stop him? Most people would look up the list of all time receiving yards, all time tds (not even limited to just receiving) and think to themselves, "wow, that's a pretty impressive list, that must have been one talented dude to have accumulated those kinds of numbers", but that's not how flat earthers think. I can't explain it, but I know you can't win because they'll skew the logic angles so far out in an attempt to discredit simple math, that the conversations get ridiculously blown out of context. To this I say, good job BillySims! Now can we close the thread?
  11. Yes, that's it. You nailed it. Can you close this thread now?
  12. This is still a thing? I can't believe people waste so much time on one silly subject. I'm going back to the Kaepernick Still No Job thread.
  13. Absolutely, the blue collar Jet fans would LOVE to see Kap on their team. Not a good fit for Kap. I imagine the Jets are already in trouble with ticket sales. Kaps not gonna bring any more fans to Giants Stadium...
  14. Damn if I didn't catch myself rooting for them that year. I loved watching him play. I always confuse Morten and Gary Anderson. Saw Morten (on TV) during the preseason game on Thursday and thought he was the guy that missed the kick that would have sent Randall to the Super Bowl. Only kick he missed all season...