BatteringRambo said:You are temporarily suspended from ROD. :smile:
![]()
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
wrstdude joining the club:
Thanks. I needed that. :rofl:
wrstdude said:Somebody slap me for getting into a debate w/ the idiots on Ram's Talk about QB elevation...
:loco:
Welcome to the pleasuredome, wrstdude! :ww:wrstdude said:What can you say about Ram's Talk that hasn't already been said about Afghanistan?
Saw the link in ---X---'s sig.
X said:Welcome to the pleasuredome, wrstdude! :ww:wrstdude said:What can you say about Ram's Talk that hasn't already been said about Afghanistan?
Saw the link in ---X---'s sig.
Ram Stalk has its advantages. When you feel like smacking the shyte out of some numbnuts, that's the place to go. When you want to have rational discussion with legitimate debate, then you can always pop open a cold one and pull up a chair here. For the record, you're absolutely right about the elevation thing (IMO), because I've tried to quantify (or qualify) it many times and I found too many instances where great QBs looked like garbage when they had to play behind and around backups who were playing due to injured starters.
So I CAN quantify that it's a myth.
That, and they're selective in their reasoning. They'll use media quotes that appear to back their opinions on Bradford, but totally ignore media quotes, reports, videos, pressers, that debunk their theories. It's an endless circle of frustration with those cats, because they're only in it to win it. They don't care one iota if Bradford fails (or succeeds). They're only in it to stir up the shit and if Bradford fails, then all the better. That's a bad fan, in my opinion. There are plenty of dudes here who want to see Bradford live up to his status, but not a single one of them is saying he's garbage or hopes he fails. We all only want one thing. Success.wrstdude said:X said:Welcome to the pleasuredome, wrstdude! :ww:wrstdude said:What can you say about Ram's Talk that hasn't already been said about Afghanistan?
Saw the link in ---X---'s sig.
Ram Stalk has its advantages. When you feel like smacking the shyte out of some numbnuts, that's the place to go. When you want to have rational discussion with legitimate debate, then you can always pop open a cold one and pull up a chair here. For the record, you're absolutely right about the elevation thing (IMO), because I've tried to quantify (or qualify) it many times and I found too many instances where great QBs looked like garbage when they had to play behind and around backups who were playing due to injured starters.
So I CAN quantify that it's a myth.
Agreed. Old Lawrence is one logical fallacy after another. Making appeals to authority won't win any arguments. Where they really get caught is when they try to use team wins. Then they move the goalposts to playoffs. It's avoids any real logic or reasoning.
Similar situation happened this summer. I got into a debate w/ an old baseball coach who kept telling his hitters to hit the ball on the ground and telling his pitchers to get ground balls. It's an old axiom that isn't challenged as it's been around as long as the game. My question to him, which made him balk, is how can the goal of the pitcher and the hitter be the same? He didn't have much of an answer.
People refuse to abandon old belief systems.
V3 said:Welcome aboard. Just look at my sig and you'll understand why I left that place as well.