Open Letter *from* Josh Gordon
-
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.
-
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.
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.
No need, I let it go a while ago. But if you must, just aim for the target on my back. I don't mind=)
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