Russsell is better than Quinn | Page 7 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Russsell is better than Quinn

Status
Not open for further replies.
ckparrothead said:
Also kind of ridiculous and hypocritical in light of the "But Notre Dame was ranked in the top 5!" argument.
Click to expand...

As usual, CK has to quote Boomer and give him moral support. I never said anything about Notre Dame being in the top 5, so you must have me confused with some other poster.
 
Stitches said:
I think he forgot to point out that the Penn State team that got drubbed was in the top 20 when they played ND, but went on to lose 3 games over the course of the season, and only finish in the top 25 in one poll.
Click to expand...

I was debating Boomer's post. I don't see why he and I can't go back and forth without CK quoting him, and you quoting CK, etc. You guys just look like the FinHeaven bandwagon who go around double and triple teaming people in threads.

Anyways, Penn St. was ranked in the 20s when they played ND and finished the season ranked in the 20s. That's why I didn't contest that game. What are you getting at here?
 
Crowder52 said:
As usual, CK has to quote Boomer and give him moral support. I never said anything about Notre Dame being in the top 5, so you must have me confused with some other poster.
Click to expand...

I didn't realize that pointing out hypocrisy was giving "moral support" or whatever, but people on the losing side of arguments will say the darnedest things.
 
ckparrothead said:
I didn't realize that pointing out hypocrisy was giving "moral support" or whatever, but people on the losing side of arguments will say the darnedest things.
Click to expand...

Again, I never said anything about Notre Dame being in the top 5 as evidence of their talent. I saw other people did though. What does that have to do with what I said to Boomer, and why did you bring it up when it was so irrelevant?

edit: and I was debating on whether or not those rankings Boomer gave those teams were legitimate. About half of them finished the season with losing records. This was my point...wins and losses are facts, I don't see how I'm "losing the argument"
 
terrible illogical thread. it's funny to see guys with 10 posts argue with CK. DERFFFF DUHHH HE DIDNT BEAT USC SO UHHH LETS NOT DRAFT HIM.
 
Yea I have more most respect for ck and boomer here hard to even argue with them as they know what hey are talking about.
 
Crowder52 said:
Again, I never said anything about Notre Dame being in the top 5 as evidence of their talent. I saw other people did though. What does that have to do with what I said to Boomer, and why did you bring it up when it was so irrelevant?

edit: and I was debating on whether or not those rankings Boomer gave those teams were legitimate. About half of them finished the season with losing records. This was my point...wins and losses are facts, I don't see how I'm "losing the argument"
Click to expand...

If it looked like I was speaking directly to you or lumping you in with others, I apologize. However, I did quote Boomer, and therefore I was speaking to him, not you. I was merely pointing out the contradiction between your argument and the arguments that ND was a top 5 pick. That doesn't mean I felt that you contradicted yourself personally.

You have a valid point inasmuch as some of the teams with high rankings when they played ND ended up not so high by year's end. On the other hand, Boomer has a point that that does not necessarily mean that the teams were mistakenly ranked that high at the time, it just means that by the end they were not the same team as they were considered to be back when they played ND, and part of the reason being ND's beating them, as well as other myriad reasons.

You brought up the right point, it just wasn't a winning point.
 
Crowder52 said:
I was debating Boomer's post. I don't see why he and I can't go back and forth without CK quoting him, and you quoting CK, etc. You guys just look like the FinHeaven bandwagon who go around double and triple teaming people in threads.

Anyways, Penn St. was ranked in the 20s when they played ND and finished the season ranked in the 20s. That's why I didn't contest that game. What are you getting at here?
Click to expand...

I was merely getting at that Penn State was as talented a team as ND, yet was ranked in the 20s. I was just trying to say that the reason ND was ranked top 10 and Penn State wasn't, was because of who they had at Quarterback. Brady Quinn, singularly, made that team that much better in the rankings, and overall.
 
ckparrothead said:
If it looked like I was speaking directly to you or lumping you in with others, I apologize. However, I did quote Boomer, and therefore I was speaking to him, not you. I was merely pointing out the contradiction between your argument and the arguments that ND was a top 5 pick. That doesn't mean I felt that you contradicted yourself personally.

You have a valid point inasmuch as some of the teams with high rankings when they played ND ended up not so high by year's end. On the other hand, Boomer has a point that that does not necessarily mean that the teams were mistakenly ranked that high at the time, it just means that by the end they were not the same team as they were considered to be back when they played ND, and part of the reason being ND's beating them, as well as other myriad reasons.

You brought up the right point, it just wasn't a winning point.
Click to expand...

And this is a completely legitimate point that Boomer made. Seriously, you and Boomer bring a lot to these forums and I enjoy reading your opinions on a lot of things. What I don't like, however, is when I try to make a counter-point to what Boomer says and he responds with the whole "FLMAO" and then goes on a condescending rant.

My point was coherent, easy to follow, and supported by fact. Yet Boomer comes back and calls it ridiculous and bashes me and laughs at me. Then other people start quoting Boomer's response to me and taking it further. I mean, these are message boards and we are here to debate and have a few laughs. No one is above criticism or critique, and I just don't think you guys have the right attitude in a lot of these threads that I've seen.
 
Crowder52 said:
And this is a completely legitimate point that Boomer made. Seriously, you and Boomer bring a lot to these forums and I enjoy reading your opinions on a lot of things. What I don't like, however, is when I try to make a counter-point to what Boomer says and he responds with the whole "FLMAO" and then goes on a condescending rant.

My point was coherent, easy to follow, and supported by fact. Yet Boomer comes back and calls it ridiculous and bashes me and laughs at me. Then other people start quoting Boomer's response to me and taking it further. I mean, these are message boards and we are here to debate and have a few laughs. No one is above criticism or critique, and I just don't think you guys have the right attitude in a lot of these threads that I've seen.
Click to expand...

We can all be a bit rough at times. Thick skin is a necessity.
 
TotoreMexico said:
Where did I say he was the next P. Manning? There were some stupid people that said P. Manning sucked because he didn't won big games:rolleyes:

Think before you post
Click to expand...

Listen, I don't think anyone ever said that Manning sucked, or have I once said Quinn sucked. My opinion is that Quinn is over-rated. I watched him several times, and to me he just doesn't have the IT factor. Lets say in a game and there's 2 minutes left, and if he were playing against my team I wouldn't be afraid. Does he the physical tools, hell yes. He has prototypical size and strength. Hoever, I've never seen him will his team to victory, and beat a team that he shouldn't. If we draft him I hope I'm wrong about him. :rolleyes2
 
Boomer said:
FLMAO. So you want to skew your ridiculous argument further by claiming that the teams he beat shouldn't have been ranked where they were?

Utter garbage. Doesn't matter how teams finished. He did what he did against the the teams that were ranked where they were at the time. Does Miami's 21-0 beating of the Pats count less because they didn't win the Superbowl?
Click to expand...


All Crowder was saying, and he's right. The majority of those teams sucked they beat. Just because those teams we ranked when they played them is a futile argument. Of the teams Crowder counter pointed how many of them ended up bowl eligable. I wouldn't go around around bragging about beating teams with a losing record. The final record is a much better indicator of what kind of teams they were. :rolleyes2
 
Captain Lou said:
All Crowder was saying, and he's right. The majority of those teams sucked they beat. Just because those teams we ranked when they played them is a futile argument. Of the teams Crowder counter pointed how many of them ended up bowl eligable. I wouldn't go around around bragging about beating teams with a losing record. The final record is a much better indicator of what kind of teams they were. :rolleyes2
Click to expand...

Yawn.
 
i don't know why i'm surprised every year by how many people know absolutely nothing and look at completely ridiculous details involving a player's NFL potential. god. get educated, people.
 
UF Fin Kat said:
i don't know why i'm surprised every year by how many people know absolutely nothing and look at completely ridiculous details involving a player's NFL potential. god. get educated, people.
Click to expand...

You mean like how Mozes is the 2nd best center in the draft simply because he won the Rimington award. :rolleyes2
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom