Open Letter *from* Josh Gordon
-
cbbacker said:
Say what you want, but Watkins had a very solid year as the no.1 wideout and as a rookie.
I agree he had a solid year. He is what I thought he was. Still a good trade for us.
So you would really take an athletic failure at corner, over an athletic success at receiver right now? I mean you seriously would?
Where did you get that? I never said he was an "athletic failure". That is actually the opposite of what I said. I said was obviously athletically gifted but had a lost year. That is apparently due to maturity issues.
You seem to not be following what I am saying. I am not saying that Gilbert is bad, and Watkins will be/is great. I am just correcting the wrong thinking here on who won this trade. Currently the Bills have. That might change; I don't know. But there is no mistaking, they won this trade so far.
I am following along just fine, Chief. I am disagreeing.
And by the way, you just called Gilbert an "athletic failure" ... sounds to me like you did say he is bad.
I am confused, what exactly are you expecting from a top 5 wideout? You make it sound like he should be Calvin Johnson? I mean lets look at some of the top wr taken. I hate to use stats to wake people up, but I guess it's what I have to do:
2013 no.8 Tavon Austin, who's rookie year was better?
2012 No. 5 Justin Blackmon, Who's rookie year was better?
2011 No. 4 Aj Green 65rec. 1057yds, 7 tds
2011 no. 6 Julio Jones 54rec. 949 yards, 8tds.
2010 no rookies of mention in the top 15
2009 no. 7 Darius heyward-bey, who had better rookie year?
2009 no.10 michael Crabtree, who had better rookie year?
2008 no wr of mention in the top 15
2007 no. 2 Calvin Johnson, 48 rec, 756 yards, 4 tds. Well Watkins beat him at least for the Rookie Year.
2007 no. 10 Ted Ginn Jr. Who had the better rookie year?
2006 no wr in top 15
2005 no. 3 Braylon Edwards, who had the better rookie year?
2005 no. 7 Troy Williamson, who had the better year?
2005 no. 10 mike Williams, who had the better year?
2004 no. 3 Larry fitzgerald 58 rec, 746yds and 8 tds. I still give the edge to Watkins, but we can call it a push.
2004 no. 7 Roy Williams Still losing
2004 no. 9 Reggie Williams. Still Losing
Yes, I can tell you are confused. In my OPINION, Watkins is not going to have a career worthy of a Top Five pick, he is going to be more of a mid-first round value in my mind ... solid, but not a game-breaking talent.
What you just did there was add fuel to my fire. You named a bunch of guys who were Top Ten picks (Not Top 5) and most of them were misses, not hits, showing the difficulty with nailing a pick by choosing a receiver that high.
Green, Jones, Johnson and Fitzgerald are all hits. All top five picks. In my OPINION Watkins will be a notch below that guy. He's not going to have a HOF type career like Johnson or Fitz, or be as strong as a weapon as Green or Jones, in my opinion. Your opinion differs. That's allowed.
Again, first year, he caught 50% of the balls thrown to him and scored 6 TDs. That doesn't tell us much, he could go your way to superstardom, or he could go my way to solid career. Either way, it doesn't make your opinion of the trade some kind of definite thing.
So I THINK Watkins is a mid-first type guy and I KNOW we have mid-first round pick this year that we got in that trade. And I FEEL that with some maturity, Gilbert can be a shut down corner. So taking all of this into account, It is my OPINION that we are indeed, NOT losing that trade.
Do you want me to continue? So other then 2 arguably 3 guys, he had a better rookie year then all of them in the last what 10-11 years? I will take that. The sad part is, it isn't even my point. I don't care how he did. The only reason it matters is because we need to see what we do with the picks we got this year. Then we can tell if it's been a good trade.
I have one more question, If you feel that Watkins is a mid FIRST round pick ( I am glad you cleared that up) then what was Gilbert worth? A fourth round? Maybe a 5th? What criteria are you using to judge Watkins as a mid rounder, but Gilbert as a better guy? I don't drink kool-aid. I want the Browns to be good, and I want people to see what's real, and not what isn't. I really am curious by what you judge Watkins by, because Gilbert could actually be one of the worst ever corners taken in the top 15. At least Watkins beats most WR taken in those picks. Now that doesn't mean he will be bad, but he definitely isn't a Charles Woodson.
First of all, you are saying about Watkins that only 2, arguably 3 guys have had better rookie years than Watkins in the last 10-11 year. Actually two guys, arguably 3 guys had better rookie years than Watkins THIS year.
Watkins 128 Targets, 65 rec, 982 yds, 6 TDs
Evans 122 Targets 68 rec, 1,051 12 TDs
Benjamin 145 targets 73 rec, 1,008, 9 TDs
Beckham 130 Target, 91 rec 1,305 12 TDs
OK, not arguably, they did.
Beckham missed the first four games by the way, and he would be the first WR out of the box in a redraft. In fact, not only would Watkins not be the #4 pick overall, he might be the 4th WR taken.
As for Gilbert, ya, I still think he's a first round talent, the odds are that he comes around mentally.
I can't make this any simpler for you: I would still take Gilbert and a first over Watkins on his own.
It's OK to feel differently. But don't TELL us that is written in stone.
Not to be rude ...
Zombo
Zombo said:
I agree he had a solid year. He is what I thought he was. Still a good trade for us.
Where did you get that? I never said he was an "athletic failure". That is actually the opposite of what I said. I said was obviously athletically gifted but had a lost year. That is apparently due to maturity issues.
I am the one who said failure, because he was. You said athletically gifted. That gives us and athletically superior failure. If you want to argue that he lost his job, and was a detriment to our secondary, that's up to you, but he is clearly a failure currently. I am speaking only with what we see. I am not stupid, I know that Watkins could come out next year, heat the 2nd year slump, and with no Orton could be downright horrible. I am only speaking of the sample size we currently have.
Yes, I can tell you are confused. In my OPINION, Watkins is not going to have a career worthy of a Top Five pick, he is going to be more of a mid-first round value in my mind ... solid, but not a game-breaking talent.
If you truly believe Watkins doesn't have game breaking talent, then neither does Gilbert. What criteria are you using? About 100% of the "people in the know" all agreed that Watkins had game breaking talent. Why do you feel differently? This is my issue, you say your opinion, and you are entitled to it, but you say nothing as to why you feel that way. If you are going to disagree with virtually every expert out there; you should at least explain why.
What you just did there was add fuel to my fire. You named a bunch of guys who were Top Ten picks (Not Top 5) and most of them were misses, not hits, showing the difficulty with nailing a pick by choosing a receiver that high.
Green, Jones, Johnson and Fitzgerald are all hits. All top five picks. In my OPINION Watkins will be a notch below that guy. He's not going to have a HOF type career like Johnson or Fitz, or be as strong as a weapon as Green or Jones, in my opinion. Your opinion differs. That's allowed.
Should i be surprised you missed the entire point of me listing those players? I was ONLY showing how his rookie year is on par, or close to current ELITE receivers nothing more. That is why it's hard to debate with you. You took it as "it's hard to land a top 5 player who does good", The point was to show how top 5 AND top 15 players that are rookies generally perform in their rookie year. Understand now? The point was to judge by stats where Watkins falls into that place. I can name numerous round 2 and later receivers who are better then Watkins. That isn't my point. My point is for you to look at players around his draft position and how they did compared to him.
The second point I tried to make was this, what is your criteria to show why you feel Gilbert and the #19 pick is better then Watkins? My question was Gilbert was a complete bust, and you also get the #19 pick. You assume that any team routinely lands stars on their picks, I know they do not. So I will take the guy who as a rookie did better then most, while facing the top defender, and coverages designed to remove him, over a guy who coudln't cover anyone, and a mid-late 1st round pick.
Again, first year, he caught 50% of the balls thrown to him and scored 6 TDs. That doesn't tell us much, he could go your way to superstardom, or he could go my way to solid career. Either way, it doesn't make your opinion of the trade some kind of definite thing.
Everyone who knows that stat doesn't factor into balls that are difficult catches, or misfires. You can likely assume that as many 10%-15% are qb misfires, or batted passes by the defender. As for 50%
Demaryius Thomas 60%
Julio Jones 61%
Jordy Nelson 64%
Andre Johnson 57%
Antonio Brown 70%
Alshon Jeffery 58%
Kelvin Benjamin 50%
Mike Evans 55%
Is it possible or likely that the younger the receiver the more likely they have a lower %? These are the top guys in the league, and they are only a bit ahead. What is 10% maybe 20 receptions over the whole year amounting to what 1.3 receptions per game? See how that stat is extremely relative? It's good to know how often they catch but it isn't always telling the whole story. As far as I see Watkins is a bit less than par with some of the best in the league, or atleast in the same circle as other young players. I just don't see why you are hanging your hat on 1 stat.
So I THINK Watkins is a mid-first type guy and I KNOW we have mid-first round pick this year that we got in that trade. And I FEEL that with some maturity, Gilbert can be a shut down corner. So taking all of this into account, It is my OPINION that we are indeed, NOT losing that trade.
Again this is on you, this trade so far has clearly been lost. It's unlikely we will draft a guy at 19 that will be as good as Watkins is, and currently Gilbert is nothing more then a warm body because he was arguably the worst first round corner ever. You do get that right, EVER? If you want to keep saying we won for pride sake, go for it, we clearly haven't yet. Maybe next year Watkins will suck, and the 19 guy will be a stud, or at least a contributor. Even as a contributor, we still lose because Watkins was at the very least solid.
First of all, you are saying about Watkins that only 2, arguably 3 guys have had better rookie years than Watkins in the last 10-11 year. Actually two guys, arguably 3 guys had better rookie years than Watkins THIS year.
Watkins 128 Targets, 65 rec, 982 yds, 6 TDs
Evans 122 Targets 68 rec, 1,051 12 TDs
Benjamin 145 targets 73 rec, 1,008, 9 TDs
Beckham 130 Target, 91 rec 1,305 12 TDs
I was pointing out over the last 10-11 years. This draft class for WR has already been proclaimed as the best ever. Do you think that has anything to do with it? I mean I could say the 1983 draft for QB's was the best ever, but you would find a reason to bash them.
OK, not arguably, they did.
Beckham missed the first four games by the way, and he would be the first WR out of the box in a redraft. In fact, not only would Watkins not be the #4 pick overall, he might be the 4th WR taken.
As for Gilbert, ya, I still think he's a first round talent, the odds are that he comes around mentally.
Still haven't explained why you feel he is a first round talent. If it's just because of his athleticism that is arguably the worst reason ever. There have been SO many players who are athletically gifted who SUCK. Andrew Luck only has some athleticisim, he had a good 40, but isn't particularly agile, but he has a great arm, and an even better understanding. Look at RG3, much more athletic, and sucks. What is your reason for putting him into the first round? It can't be athleticism only.
I can't make this any simpler for you: I would still take Gilbert and a first over Watkins on his own.
Your mistake I guess. I don't know what else to say. You can take the athletic failure, and the late teens pick, I will take the solid guy who at the very least could be a solid wide out for his career, that's far more than Gilbert has shown, and you are hanging your hat on hitting on that 19 pick. There is a reason most draft picks fail regardless of the round they are in. If it's so easy to land star players at any pick, why do teams suck? Why are there drafts looked at as the reason? Because it's not that easy.
It's OK to feel differently. But don't TELL us that is written in stone.
Not to be rude ...
Zombo
-
Zombo,
I didn't want to have a super long post, so I am adding this just after my first post.
You can keep being rude tossing in the "Not to be rude" I was being serious. If you want to be and ass, be an ass. If you want to debate football then lets debate football. I have explained why i feel the way I do, I have shown stats, I have shown your 1 stat as subjective, and all you do is just say opinions, and claim them as fact. The only thing i said that is written in stone is the fact we are losing this trade. I never said Watkins was the best ever, or would even be elite. All I said about Gilbert is he was horrible, and he was, I have said several times he may be better next year. I also said it's harder then you think to land a good much less great player at any draft pick. These are all truths, not opinions. You can list all the stats you want, but until you can prove why a CURRETNLY failed corner, and a 19 pick are better then a proven with elite talent (from the experts not me) I will continue to believe we have lost this trade currently, and it is set in stone.
I am open minded unlike most on these boards, show me where I am wrong, and I will gladly admit it. Do not toss a subjective stat, that many rookies, and elite guys suffer from. A stat that has as much to do with the guy throwing him the ball, as it does the guy catching it.
One last thing, the definition of the stat you keep tossing Thanks to Sporting Charts.com (for plagarism reasons)
This measures the percentage of catches a receiver makes versus how many balls were thrown in his direction. In order for a pass to count as a target for a given receiver, it must be obvious to the scorekeepers that the quarterback is throwing to the receiver. This statistic is calculated by dividing the total number of catches made by the total number of targets for a given receiver.
Notice it says in his direction, it doesn't say within his reach, or passes dropped vs. caught. It says in his direction. That stat is useful, but not when it's the only one you have to back you up.
-
Well, cd, I don't give a frick what you think, you can take your stats and shove them.
I don't care a damn about watkins, and looking back and whining and bitching, and trying to stir stuff up.
Gilbert has a ton of upside, and in our division we will need him next year. And we were hoping Gordon had a great year, but he was an idiot.
But you are being an ass. Second guessing is for the birds. It's baloney. You are full of baloney. The bills don't play
in the Browns' division, and we don't know who the qb is going to be.
HINT: Last year's draft is OVER. We are already coming up on the 2015 draft. Last year it was 2014.
-
Well, cd, I don't give a frick what you think, you can take your stats and shove them.
I don't care a damn about watkins, and looking back and whining and bitching, and trying to stir stuff up.
Gilbert has a ton of upside, and in our division we will need him next year. And we were hoping Gordon had a great year, but he was an idiot.
But you are being an ass. Second guessing is for the birds. It's baloney. You are full of baloney. The bills don't play
in the Browns' division, and we don't know who the qb is going to be.
HINT: Last year's draft is OVER. We are already coming up on the 2015 draft. Last year it was 2014.
Well, cd, I don't give a frick what you think, you can take your stats and shove them.
I don't care a damn about watkins, and looking back and whining and bitching, and trying to stir stuff up.
Gilbert has a ton of upside, and in our division we will need him next year. And we were hoping Gordon had a great year, but he was an idiot.
But you are being an ass. Second guessing is for the birds. It's baloney. You are full of baloney. The bills don't play
in the Browns' division, and we don't know who the qb is going to be.
HINT: Last year's draft is OVER. We are already coming up on the 2015 draft. Last year it was 2014.
Cry much? You want a tissue? Really I don't care what you think either. The simple mind cannot debate, all it can do is toss insults and whine. Grats you win!!
Btw it's Cb not cd. and I am not second guessing the draft. Show me where I am. If you need me to read the posts to you let me know; because, I know you won't find it. All I did was share an opinion on a topic someone else started. Feel free to get butt hurt if you must, but I wasn't being an ass. I have as much right to post an opinion as you, so why don't you stay out of this topic, and let the people who are here to talk; TALK!!
Have a nice day.
-
Zombo,
I didn't want to have a super long post, so I am adding this just after my first post.
You can keep being rude tossing in the "Not to be rude" I was being serious. If you want to be and ass, be an ass. If you want to debate football then lets debate football. I have explained why i feel the way I do, I have shown stats, I have shown your 1 stat as subjective, and all you do is just say opinions, and claim them as fact. The only thing i said that is written in stone is the fact we are losing this trade. I never said Watkins was the best ever, or would even be elite. All I said about Gilbert is he was horrible, and he was, I have said several times he may be better next year. I also said it's harder then you think to land a good much less great player at any draft pick. These are all truths, not opinions. You can list all the stats you want, but until you can prove why a CURRETNLY failed corner, and a 19 pick are better then a proven with elite talent (from the experts not me) I will continue to believe we have lost this trade currently, and it is set in stone.
I am open minded unlike most on these boards, show me where I am wrong, and I will gladly admit it. Do not toss a subjective stat, that many rookies, and elite guys suffer from. A stat that has as much to do with the guy throwing him the ball, as it does the guy catching it.
One last thing, the definition of the stat you keep tossing Thanks to Sporting Charts.com (for plagarism reasons)
This measures the percentage of catches a receiver makes versus how many balls were thrown in his direction. In order for a pass to count as a target for a given receiver, it must be obvious to the scorekeepers that the quarterback is throwing to the receiver. This statistic is calculated by dividing the total number of catches made by the total number of targets for a given receiver.
Notice it says in his direction, it doesn't say within his reach, or passes dropped vs. caught. It says in his direction. That stat is useful, but not when it's the only one you have to back you up.
cbbacker said:
, and all you do is just say opinions, and claim them as fact.
No I clearly ... CLEARLY ... In all Caps yet, said I am stating this as OPINION. If you missed this you are not going to get anything at all. The only thing left is for me to make little drawings, and I don't have time for that, I just need a smarter audience (I'm referring to you).
One last thing, the definition of the stat you keep tossing
Back up, Chachi, I am fully aware that it is a "loose" stat ... which is why I never used it without it's obvious companion "production" stats: Receptions, yards and TDs.
The "targets" were there only as a compliment so some assmunch like yourself wouldn't pull it out to counter my production stats.
So you can go ahead and read it like this: "Beckham, Evans and Benjamin all caught more passes, for more yards and more TDs than Watkins. in addition, Benjamin and Evans caught a much higher percentage of passes targeted toward them. But take that last stat with a grain of salt because there are a lot of outside influences on that stat that the WR can't control." Feel better? (sorry, I thought everybody knew that but you are no mensa candidate are you?)
Feel free to take targets away, but it doesn't help Watkins any ... he was still less productive than theses three receivers drafted after him in every single way.
Zombo
-
cbbacker said:
, and all you do is just say opinions, and claim them as fact.
No I clearly ... CLEARLY ... In all Caps yet, said I am stating this as OPINION. If you missed this you are not going to get anything at all. The only thing left is for me to make little drawings, and I don't have time for that, I just need a smarter audience (I'm referring to you).
One last thing, the definition of the stat you keep tossing
Back up, Chachi, I am fully aware that it is a "loose" stat ... which is why I never used it without it's obvious companion "production" stats: Receptions, yards and TDs.
The "targets" were there only as a compliment so some assmunch like yourself wouldn't pull it out to counter my production stats.
So you can go ahead and read it like this: "Beckham, Evans and Benjamin all caught more passes, for more yards and more TDs than Watkins. in addition, Benjamin and Evans caught a much higher percentage of passes targeted toward them. But take that last stat with a grain of salt because there are a lot of outside influences on that stat that the WR can't control." Feel better? (sorry, I thought everybody knew that but you are no mensa candidate are you?)
Feel free to take targets away, but it doesn't help Watkins any ... he was still less productive than theses three receivers drafted after him in every single way.
Zombo
Zombo said:
No I clearly ... CLEARLY ... In all Caps yet, said I am stating this as OPINION. If you missed this you are not going to get anything at all. The only thing left is for me to make little drawings, and I don't have time for that, I just need a smarter audience (I'm referring to you).
Back up, Chachi, I am fully aware that it is a "loose" stat ... which is why I never used it without it's obvious companion "production" stats: Receptions, yards and TDs.
The "targets" were there only as a compliment so some assmunch like yourself wouldn't pull it out to counter my production stats.
So you can go ahead and read it like this: "Beckham, Evans and Benjamin all caught more passes, for more yards and more TDs than Watkins. in addition, Benjamin and Evans caught a much higher percentage of passes targeted toward them. But take that last stat with a grain of salt because there are a lot of outside influences on that stat that the WR can't control." Feel better? (sorry, I thought everybody knew that but you are no mensa candidate are you?)
Feel free to take targets away, but it doesn't help Watkins any ... he was still less productive than theses three receivers drafted after him in every single way.
Zombo
Thank you for proving me right and dodging my questions. I bet you were really good at dodgeball. Everything you just said is moot, because it doesn't matter what they did, what the guys i posted did, the only question you were supposed to answer was "if we are winning this draft" and if you truly felt we did, to show reasons, and back them up with real evidence/proof. You must not have gone to college, because you clearly do not know how to write an opinion because you are forgetting all your reasons.I assume you cannot form coherent sentences which means you don't have a clue.
I will help you. When writing an opinion, you open with your "opening/Thesis Statement (many other names), then you give us an overview of what you believe, and use the body to speak on the individual points SUPPORTING your thesis, and then you follow it up with a conclusion re-affirming what you said earlier, and providing any other basis for your thoughts.
Now I understand you have trouble understanding clearly, and it can be difficult when it comes to answering single answers. but all I wanted this whole time, and have asked you several times was for you to explain your overview of why you believe we are winning the draft, and SUPPORT those reasons. All you have done is said " we are winning and you are wrong QQ" and tossed some insults. Are you devoid of intelligence? Are you unable to accurately support your position? You can be a douche all you want, seriously, you are so far, but you HAVEN'T PROVIDED ANYTHING TO SUPPORT YOU other then a 1 sentence opinion.
I am just going to assume you cannot formulate your thoughts, and are unable to provide anything to support yourself meaning you don't know. Thank you for your time, and have a wonderful day. I am sure we will cross paths again, me far above, and you riding the short bus just yelling at the top of your lungs " YOUR WRONG BECAUSE I SAID SO"!!!
-
cbbacker said:
, and all you do is just say opinions, and claim them as fact.
No I clearly ... CLEARLY ... In all Caps yet, said I am stating this as OPINION. If you missed this you are not going to get anything at all. The only thing left is for me to make little drawings, and I don't have time for that, I just need a smarter audience (I'm referring to you).
One last thing, the definition of the stat you keep tossing
Back up, Chachi, I am fully aware that it is a "loose" stat ... which is why I never used it without it's obvious companion "production" stats: Receptions, yards and TDs.
The "targets" were there only as a compliment so some assmunch like yourself wouldn't pull it out to counter my production stats.
So you can go ahead and read it like this: "Beckham, Evans and Benjamin all caught more passes, for more yards and more TDs than Watkins. in addition, Benjamin and Evans caught a much higher percentage of passes targeted toward them. But take that last stat with a grain of salt because there are a lot of outside influences on that stat that the WR can't control." Feel better? (sorry, I thought everybody knew that but you are no mensa candidate are you?)
Feel free to take targets away, but it doesn't help Watkins any ... he was still less productive than theses three receivers drafted after him in every single way.
Zombo
Zombo said:
No I clearly ... CLEARLY ... In all Caps yet, said I am stating this as OPINION. If you missed this you are not going to get anything at all. The only thing left is for me to make little drawings, and I don't have time for that, I just need a smarter audience (I'm referring to you).
Just so you know, saying we won the trade means you are not stating an opinion, you are claiming it as a fact. Just like I am claiming it as fact that we have currently lost it. Do you understand what a fact is? Might want to Google fact. I can if you wish.
-
Zombo said:
No I clearly ... CLEARLY ... In all Caps yet, said I am stating this as OPINION. If you missed this you are not going to get anything at all. The only thing left is for me to make little drawings, and I don't have time for that, I just need a smarter audience (I'm referring to you).
Back up, Chachi, I am fully aware that it is a "loose" stat ... which is why I never used it without it's obvious companion "production" stats: Receptions, yards and TDs.
The "targets" were there only as a compliment so some assmunch like yourself wouldn't pull it out to counter my production stats.
So you can go ahead and read it like this: "Beckham, Evans and Benjamin all caught more passes, for more yards and more TDs than Watkins. in addition, Benjamin and Evans caught a much higher percentage of passes targeted toward them. But take that last stat with a grain of salt because there are a lot of outside influences on that stat that the WR can't control." Feel better? (sorry, I thought everybody knew that but you are no mensa candidate are you?)
Feel free to take targets away, but it doesn't help Watkins any ... he was still less productive than theses three receivers drafted after him in every single way.
Zombo
Thank you for proving me right and dodging my questions. I bet you were really good at dodgeball. Everything you just said is moot, because it doesn't matter what they did, what the guys i posted did, the only question you were supposed to answer was "if we are winning this draft" and if you truly felt we did, to show reasons, and back them up with real evidence/proof. You must not have gone to college, because you clearly do not know how to write an opinion because you are forgetting all your reasons.I assume you cannot form coherent sentences which means you don't have a clue.
I will help you. When writing an opinion, you open with your "opening/Thesis Statement (many other names), then you give us an overview of what you believe, and use the body to speak on the individual points SUPPORTING your thesis, and then you follow it up with a conclusion re-affirming what you said earlier, and providing any other basis for your thoughts.
Now I understand you have trouble understanding clearly, and it can be difficult when it comes to answering single answers. but all I wanted this whole time, and have asked you several times was for you to explain your overview of why you believe we are winning the draft, and SUPPORT those reasons. All you have done is said " we are winning and you are wrong QQ" and tossed some insults. Are you devoid of intelligence? Are you unable to accurately support your position? You can be a douche all you want, seriously, you are so far, but you HAVEN'T PROVIDED ANYTHING TO SUPPORT YOU other then a 1 sentence opinion.
I am just going to assume you cannot formulate your thoughts, and are unable to provide anything to support yourself meaning you don't know. Thank you for your time, and have a wonderful day. I am sure we will cross paths again, me far above, and you riding the short bus just yelling at the top of your lungs " YOUR WRONG BECAUSE I SAID SO"!!!
cbbacker said:
Thank you for proving me right and dodging my questions. I bet you were really good at dodgeball. Everything you just said is moot, because it doesn't matter what they did, what the guys i posted did, the only question you were supposed to answer was "if we are winning this draft". I assume you cannot form coherent sentences which means you don't have a clue. Thank you Zombo, i love winning, now hopefully the Browns will follow.
That's a bitch statement ^
And what I am supposed to answer ... "if we are winning this draft" ... what's that mean? Did we win last year's draft? Are we winning this year's draft? Do you actually win drafts?
I thought the question was "Are we winning the Watkins trade" ... which again, is a very subjective and not totally measurable thing, especially after one year.
But i did answer that. I answered "Yes". How did you miss that? How are you missing my opinions when I am clearly stating them, calling them opinions and even putting it in capital letters.
Is there something wrong with you?
Zombo
-
Zombo said:
No I clearly ... CLEARLY ... In all Caps yet, said I am stating this as OPINION. If you missed this you are not going to get anything at all. The only thing left is for me to make little drawings, and I don't have time for that, I just need a smarter audience (I'm referring to you).
Just so you know, saying we won the trade means you are not stating an opinion, you are claiming it as a fact. Just like I am claiming it as fact that we have currently lost it. Do you understand what a fact is? Might want to Google fact. I can if you wish.
cbbacker said:
Just so you know, saying we won the trade means you are not stating an opinion, you are claiming it as a fact. Just like I am claiming it as fact that we have currently lost it. Do you understand what a fact is? Might want to Google fact. I can if you wish.
Ohhh ... just as i feared. I am arguing with a Retard.
So when I say that, in my opinion, we are winning the trade ... I am claiming that as a fact.
Gotcha.
You are 12, aren't you?
Zombo
-
cbbacker said:
Thank you for proving me right and dodging my questions. I bet you were really good at dodgeball. Everything you just said is moot, because it doesn't matter what they did, what the guys i posted did, the only question you were supposed to answer was "if we are winning this draft". I assume you cannot form coherent sentences which means you don't have a clue. Thank you Zombo, i love winning, now hopefully the Browns will follow.
That's a bitch statement ^
And what I am supposed to answer ... "if we are winning this draft" ... what's that mean? Did we win last year's draft? Are we winning this year's draft? Do you actually win drafts?
I thought the question was "Are we winning the Watkins trade" ... which again, is a very subjective and not totally measurable thing, especially after one year.
But i did answer that. I answered "Yes". How did you miss that? How are you missing my opinions when I am clearly stating them, calling them opinions and even putting it in capital letters.
Is there something wrong with you?
Zombo
Zombo said:
That's a bitch statement ^
Funny how you know that. Says something to me.
And what I am supposed to answer ... "if we are winning this draft" ... what's that mean? Did we win last year's draft? Are we winning this year's draft? Do you actually win drafts?
If you don't believe you win, a draft then why are you arguing? You absolutely win a draft, it's no different that playing BlackJack or the Lottery. It's so much like the lottery that they actually named the NBA first 14 picks the "lottery". Can you win a lottery? Yep.
I thought the question was "Are we winning the Watkins trade" ... which again, is a very subjective and not totally measurable thing, especially after one year.
Again why do you say that? There is what 5 people on this thread claiming we won. You in your own words say we cannot judge, but in the very next breadth say we won the trade. I can copy and paste this where you said it if you wish. I have said several times that we are CURRENTLY losing this trade. I know we cannot say for 100% certain how this trade will turn out, but anyone who thinks we are winning is just lying to themselves. It is ABSOLUTELY measurable after 1 year. We know how Gilbert played, and we know how Watkins played. They have measurable stats and rankings. We ABSOLUTELY can measure this after 1 year. I never said that we hang our hat on that 1 year, but you did.
But i did answer that. I answered "Yes". How did you miss that? How are you missing my opinions when I am clearly stating them, calling them opinions and even putting it in capital letters.
You did state that this is your opinion, but you also say I am wrong. How can you say I am wrong? If you are saying you are right, it's not an opinion it's fact. Opinions are what is believed, not always what is. There is always differing opinions, but once someone proves what they said like I did, it's no longer opinion. You keep saying I am wrong, but refuse to back it up without anything remotely supporting it. You just keep saying " We won the trade" That is not an opinion, you are stating it as fact. I cannot make it any laymens more then that. Do you understand how a sentence is constructed?
Is there something wrong with you?
Zombo
-
cbbacker said:
Just so you know, saying we won the trade means you are not stating an opinion, you are claiming it as a fact. Just like I am claiming it as fact that we have currently lost it. Do you understand what a fact is? Might want to Google fact. I can if you wish.
Ohhh ... just as i feared. I am arguing with a Retard.
So when I say that, in my opinion, we are winning the trade ... I am claiming that as a fact.
Gotcha.
You are 12, aren't you?
Zombo
Zombo said:
Ohhh ... just as i feared. I am arguing with a Retard.
So when I say that, in my opinion, we are winning the trade ... I am claiming that as a fact.
Gotcha.
You are 12, aren't you?
Zombo
LOL you really are stupid. Last time I will try to explain English to you. When you say something like " you are wrong, we won the trade" that may be your opinion, but you are stating it as fact. All i have ever asked for is your reasoning for saying I am wrong, and why you believe what you are saying. it's not my fault you cannot understand that. I fully said that I stated my opinion as fact, but I also backed it up with stats, and beliefs, and just plain common sense. You haven't done any of that, yet continue to tell me I am wrong.
I cannot be wrong until you show me I am wrong. Otherwise, you must at least consider my opinion because you cannot de-bunk what I said, nor can you provide anything to support what you say.
I don't know why I am even continuing. You dodge questions because you cannot answer them, You toss insults because you cannot control your emotions and you are getting upset. Intelligent people love debating, because they understand they always have more to learn. Only immature emotionally people, and those lacking intelligence resort to name calling, insults. I am here to learn, and to educate. I am sorry you cannot keep up. I will find someone more knowledgeable to talk with.
-
Zombo, stop trying.
The kid thinks what he wants to think. Can't stop him from it, even if it is wrong.
-
Zombo, stop trying.
The kid thinks what he wants to think. Can't stop him from it, even if it is wrong.
Zombo, stop trying.
The kid thinks what he wants to think. Can't stop him from it, even if it is wrong.
Ya when, he interprets "This is my opinion, you are free to have yours" as "you are wrong and I am stating that as a fact" ... that's just immaturity. No challenge there, time to move on.
Kid's probably a pimply faced teenager.
Zombo
-
Why are you still trying Zombo? I have accepted that this argument is over. I cannot change your mind, and you refuse to look at what i said, and provided for proof. Your like a child who just won't let it end. I told you 2 posts ago that I was good with this debate with you. You clearly were not interested, and just want to toss insults. That ends the debate. You have spoke your side, which didn't consist of football, and consisted of insults. So why can't you let it be?
You talk about how I am a child, but you are the one with the immaturity of emotions. I didn't have to resort to insults like you. I understand, and tried to end this but yet you continue. If it makes you feel better about yourself, you can keep going I don't mind. I have said my peace. I am sure we will cross on other topics, as that usually happens when people know more or less than other on topics. I am sure when they come, I will speak respectfully as I have been, and you will not, as you have been.
I am good, but my guess is you won't drop it. Lets see if I am right again?
-
-
Zombo said:
Did you hear something, TCPO?
Zombo
Hmm must need back up? Typical bully. And you call me a child.
Class act!! -
no...cdbacker...you are being an ass alright. I'll just put you on "ignore",
because your bitching is worthless, and it seems all you want to do is
online whine.
I called you "cd" because I've heard your real log on was "classless dildo", but
I thought that was very inappropriate, regardless of your gender, if you even have one....
-
Zombo said:
Did you hear something, TCPO?
Zombo
I think it was the wind.
-
no...cdbacker...you are being an ass alright. I'll just put you on "ignore",
because your bitching is worthless, and it seems all you want to do is
online whine.
I called you "cd" because I've heard your real log on was "classless dildo", but
I thought that was very inappropriate, regardless of your gender, if you even have one....
no...cdbacker...you are being an ass alright. I'll just put you on "ignore",
because your bitching is worthless, and it seems all you want to do is
online whine.
I called you "cd" because I've heard your real log on was "classless dildo", but
I thought that was very inappropriate, regardless of your gender, if you even have one....
Please put me on ignore, I don't like whiny bitches either. At least I won't have to listen to cry anymore.
-
I haven't bee paying much attention to this thread because the whole issue about Josh Gordon's letter and his suspension kinda bores me.
But I see that Z has gotten into a snit with a newbie......so perhaps at some point I may try to arbitrate.....or advocate.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login