Who will win the division?

[Tiger Teeth]

(08-09-2015, 09:06 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Do you normally get pumped when people talk about guys busting?

That's personal.

[Bmoreblitz]

(08-09-2015, 08:44 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: But he was the biggest piece of the whole line because of his role in a 3-4.  

My fault........  they cut Canty and he was considering retirement after being injury plagued last season and only played in 11 games........  he's not exactly a world beater.  At 32 (33 by season's end), you might have been better off if he wasn't on the team.

See above about the nose tackle.

And third best pass rusher doesn't sound too important until you see that he had 7.5 sacks, which isn't something to take lightly.  

Dumervil, who had 17 sacks, has tendinitis, which has been limiting his training camp, and he's 31, so those things effect him more.

Suggs, who had 12, will be 33 a month into the season.

You really think they can keep producing that much at those ages and without Ngata?  

Damn.....1st he wrongly says they lost Canty in his DLine argument. Then he gets called out for and says they're better without him.

Like I tell my Soldiers:
Ignorance is NEVER an excuse for stupidity.

[BmorePat87]

(08-09-2015, 10:06 PM)Bmoreblitz Wrote: Damn.....1st he wrongly says they lost Canty in his DLine argument. Then he gets called out for and says they're better without him.

Like I tell my Soldiers:
Ignorance is NEVER an excuse for stupidity.

It's like saying wide receiver is the easiest position to transition to from college and then say it is the hardest. 

[BFritz21]

(08-09-2015, 08:54 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: This is how brad argues:

1. He makes a HUGE overstatement

2. Someone points out that it was a huge overstatement and not true

3. He then argues a far lesser point and suggests that it makes his overstatement true.

This is where Pat's argument is flawed, as they often are:

In the runs I pointed out, which were the 60 yard runs, would he have gotten caught if he had to run 20 yards farther?  

No, you can't make that argument for all touchdown runs because defenses would be playing differently from closer yardage (say the 50 and in).

So, 60 when it was 80 wasn't a HUGE overstatement at all and was just a technicality when talking about his running/big play ability.

Here's how Pat argues:

1.  Find one minor incorrect piece of information.

2.  Act like it's the smoking gun to kill the entire opposition to his argument.

3.  Repeat the living shit out of it.

(08-09-2015, 10:06 PM)Bmoreblitz Wrote: Damn.....1st he wrongly says they lost Canty in his DLine argument. Then he gets called out for and says they're better without him.

Like I tell my Soldiers:
Ignorance is NEVER an excuse for stupidity.

So you can't counter to any point I made, just draw attention off of my points by posting like my post was stupid.

[BmorePat87]

(08-09-2015, 11:17 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: This is where Pat's argument is flawed, as they often are:

I'm going to stop you right here. You said we lost our "entire D line". I pointed out how we lost two players, one of which was the best at his position and one who was the 3rd best.

You then replied that we lost a 3rd guy too. I corrected you and told you he was still on the team.


If we're keeping score, that's 2 Patrick, 0 Brad. Exactly how am I the flawed one?


You then tried to suggest that we'd be better off without Canty despite previously saying that losing him was one of the reasons we were on the decline (don't get your my little pony panties in a bunch, we know you didn't use those exact words).

That's a 3rd flawed argument on your part. Not looking good for ol' Brad.

(08-09-2015, 11:17 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: So you can't counter to any point I made, just draw attention off of my points by posting like my post was stupid.

LOL, he countered your argument that showing how you just contradicted (or countered) yourself in the span of two post. You can't argue he is a loss and then suggest we're better off without him. 

[BmorePat87]

And are you seriously trying to explain again how when you say "80 yards" you really mean "60 yards"? I already told you that all you had to say was "OK, i was using a hyperbole, the point I am getting at was that he has the big play ability to break off pretty big runs". That's cool man, I get what you're saying.


Nope... instead you did the typical Brad bullshit where you couldn't swallow your pride and you tried to suggest I was ridiculous for pointing out that he only ever did what you suggested once. You also got really butt hurt when I quoted you as saying that Hill had a 60 yard run because it was really a 65 yard run. LOL, you said 60, not me. I was just quoting you.

[Tiger Teeth]

Looks like we got the same 'ol Brad back. Can't even smack talk without getting all riled up.

P.S. It really hurts when I have to smack a fellow Bengal fan. Brad, stop.

[Se ky bengal]

Uh oh

[Tiger Teeth]

(08-09-2015, 09:06 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Do you normally get pumped when people talk about guys busting?

BTW - You're pushing for a lawsuit pal.

[BFritz21]

(08-09-2015, 11:54 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: I'm going to stop you right here. You said we lost our "entire D line". I pointed out how we lost two players, one of which was the best at his position and one who was the 3rd best.

You then replied that we lost a 3rd guy too. I corrected you and told you he was still on the team.


If we're keeping score, that's 2 Patrick, 0 Brad. Exactly how am I the flawed one?


You then tried to suggest that we'd be better off without Canty despite previously saying that losing him was one of the reasons we were on the decline (don't get your my little pony panties in a bunch, we know you didn't use those exact words).

That's a 3rd flawed argument on your part. Not looking good for ol' Brad.




LOL, he countered your argument that showing how you just contradicted (or countered) yourself in the span of two post. You can't argue he is a loss and then suggest we're better off without him. 

 First two, I was wrong with, but you somehow act like ridiculing me for being wrong about it means that your team won't be worse because of it.

That's what's funny, because then other people jump in on it and it makes you feel validated.

I didn't even look into Canty when I made the first comment, but, after looking at it further, I realized that you'd be better off without him.  

Remember how you said I claimed victory and then ended every response to a post of mine with "I claim victory" for like a month?  Explain to me how you're not claiming victory there.

That's another reason why you're a joke.  Can't even engage in a simple debate.

(08-09-2015, 11:58 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: And are you seriously trying to explain again how when you say "80 yards" you really mean "60 yards"? I already told you that all you had to say was "OK, i was using a hyperbole, the point I am getting at was that he has the big play ability to break off pretty big runs". That's cool man, I get what you're saying.


Nope... instead you did the typical Brad bullshit where you couldn't swallow your pride and you tried to suggest I was ridiculous for pointing out that he only ever did what you suggested once. You also got really butt hurt when I quoted you as saying that Hill had a 60 yard run because it was really a 65 yard run. LOL, you said 60, not me. I was just quoting you.

lol.

Again, you continue to ignore the entire point and just go back to the fine print.

Ok, I was using a hyperbole, and yet you continue to use the 15 or 20 extra yards as some solidified proof that he can't break off big runs.

(08-10-2015, 12:06 AM)Tiger Teeth Wrote: Looks like we got the same 'ol Brad back.  Can't even smack talk without getting all riled up.

P.S.  It really hurts when I have to smack a fellow Bengal fan.  Brad, stop.

lol

How was that riled up?  That was completely calm and debating.

You're just looking for an excuse to hate. 

Carry on.

[BmorePat87]

(08-10-2015, 04:21 AM)BFritz21 Wrote:  First two, I was wrong with, but you somehow act like ridiculing me for being wrong about it means that your team won't be worse because of it.

That's what's funny, because then other people jump in on it and it makes you feel validated.

I didn't even look into Canty when I made the first comment, but, after looking at it further, I realized that you'd be better off without him.  

Remember how you said I claimed victory and then ended every response to a post of mine with "I claim victory" for like a month?  Explain to me how you're not claiming victory there.

That's another reason why you're a joke.  Can't even engage in a simple debate.

lol.

Again, you continue to ignore the entire point and just go back to the fine print.

Ok, I was using a hyperbole, and yet you continue to use the 15 or 20 extra yards as some solidified proof that he can't break off big runs.

We've seen this one before, folks. Just keep digging in, Brad. I've never met anyone who was so stubborn that they repeated something incorrect until someone told them they were right. Until now.

[Tiger Teeth]

(08-10-2015, 04:21 AM)BFritz21 Wrote: That's another reason why you're a joke.  Can't even engage in a simple debate.

Quit being a joke Pat.  Sheesh!  

[BmorePat87]

(08-10-2015, 09:32 AM)Tiger Teeth Wrote: Quit being a joke Pat.  Sheesh!  

I can't argue with his logic. He said something incorrect, so I told him he was incorrect. Obviously that means I am a joke who cannot engage in a simple debate. 

[Bmoreblitz]

(08-10-2015, 09:24 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote:

We've seen this one before, folks. Just keep digging in, Brad. I've never met anyone who was so stubborn that they repeated something incorrect until someone told them they were right. Until now.

See you keep owning Brad this is why no one takes you seriously. You are a joke. How dare you state facts.....How dare you!

[BFritz21]

(08-10-2015, 09:24 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote:

We've seen this one before, folks. Just keep digging in, Brad. I've never met anyone who was so stubborn that they repeated something incorrect until someone told them they were right. Until now.

ha.

Like I said, you can't engage in a simple debate and explain how that "was wrong" because you feel like if you keep posting things like this people will just keep acting like you're right, which they will.

Even if you want to argue that I'm missing the point on the last part of my post, why would you ignore the top part?

[BFritz21]

(08-10-2015, 12:16 PM)Bmoreblitz Wrote: See you keep owning Brad this is why no one takes you seriously. You are a joke. How dare you state facts.....How dare you!

How was that owning me?

[djs7685]

[Bmoreblitz]

(08-10-2015, 12:28 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: ha.

Like I said, you can't engage in a simple debate and explain how that "was wrong" because you feel like if you keep posting things like this people will just keep acting like you're right, which they will.

Even if you want to argue that I'm missing the point on the last part of my post, why would you ignore the top part?

This is the smack forum and Perhaps people would engage once you stop posting wrong information.
It's a complete waste of time to discuss random baffling instead of facts. It's ok for everyone to have their opinion.  But some of the things you post seem like trolling. So how can anyone think you are serious.
Pat already answered your statements.

[djs7685]

HA! You Ravens dweebs are a bunch of losers.

You really think your team is going to be good this year after Ray Rice beat up a bunch of women? What about losing Joe Flacco to free agency? You dumbasses won't know what to do when our 3rd string CB shuts down Torry Holt and our LB that won't end up playing a snap this season runs up and smacks your head coach in the face on the sideline.

Then what, BITCHES?!?

[BmorePat87]

(08-10-2015, 12:28 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: Like I said, you can't engage in a simple debate and explain how that "was wrong"

You: You lost your entire D LINE!

Me: No, just Ngata and our 3rd best pass rusher.


You: Canty too!

Me: Nope, he's still on the team. 




I believe I explained how you were wrong both times. If you want me to explain how you are wrong about them aging and regressing, I can't because it hasn't happened. Suggs and Dum were quite the pair last season, one of the best pairs in the league, so any suggestion that they are on the decline is just your own speculation based solely on age and nothing else. I can just say "They were really good last season and no one expects them to nosedive in talent over one offseason".

It's like how you said the Steelers were on the decline because they were aging. They won the division last season, so I guess your speculation based solely on age isn't always the best. 

(08-10-2015, 12:28 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: why would you ignore the top part?

I had already addressed it. As I just stated above, your speculation that really good players will be awful because they are one year older isn't some grand argument. You have a history of doing this and a history of being really wrong about this. What exactly am I suppose to say more when you make baseless speculations?