DMN: Safety Roy Williams wants Dallas Cowboys to act today

[DaBoys4Life]

Link, please.

Come on, someone has to be able to support something they've claimed.

Why should they be able to do that.....

 

[Boom]

Adam, I've called you on this over and over. The issue isn't about simple right vs. wrong dichotomies. It is about the questions you choose to focus on. You target extreme comments that reflect hyperbole and then chop them down. Good for you, you are great at beating up on straw men. You aren't technically "wrong" because you are so very careful to pick and choose the questions that you choose to address and the information you choose to present.

The fact of the matter is that you now choose to only address questions with clear right/wrong answers rather than the more interesting questions that do not have such clear answers. I've continued to call you out on those issues and you continue to ignore that.

I think some believe that him refuting straw men implies intent to prove the greatness of Roy Williams. Maybe Adam just doesn't like hyperbole.

 

[AbeBeta]

How many times are you going to completely miss the point? Seriously.

Good god Adam -- why do you think everyone accuses you of deflection?

Here's what it is your main problem Adam, you think you define what the point being argued is. You keep going back to the "i'm not wrong" issue yet totally ignore the real issue about the types of questions being asked.

You miss the point by a mile and just want to deflect by claiming that others do.

What are you talking about? As far as I can tell, I've answered every single question you have asked me.

On the other hand, I can't get a single one of my questions answered from some people, nor can I get a single, specific example of anything anyone in this thread has claimed about me. Not a single one.

Frankly if you want to claim that I haven't given examples then you are just plain ignorant. Your entire legendary Myth thread was about shooting down straw men. I've given examples of this in other threads several times and I know that you know that. Stop playing so damn ignorant.

 

[Rampage]

Link, please.

Come on, someone has to be able to support something they've claimed.

I've claimed he hasn't made a play since the dolphins game that was already wrapped up of the 2007 season. I think week 4.

 

[AdamJT13]

I've claimed he hasn't made a play since the dolphins game that was already wrapped up of the 2007 season. I think week 4.

I meant something that I'm "wrong" about.

 

[BAT]

Not when the best of the worst cant be effective anymore (at least in our system).

I think that people are forgetting what an incredible coverage liability he was in 2007. If he was effective at the LOS, that would have been one thing, but he really didn't seem comfortable there either.

LOL. I agree that Roy is not the same as he was in his first few seasons, but to state that he is so ineffective that he is no longer useful is ridiculous.


People just love to exaggerate. Roy's 2007 season was poor, by his standards, but he was still one of the better safeties in the league. Was he the best, clearly not. But when he was lined up next to Hamlin, Hamlin had his BEST year ever. Hamlin not only got big money, but went to the pro bowl. Hamlin w/out Roy looked like a shadow of his 2007 self. Hamlin played WORSE than Roy has EVER played. And I am confident that Wade (especially since he started calling the D) would have been able to hide Roy's deficiencies at least as effectively as he did Keith Davis (who's coverage ability is much worse than Roy's).

 

[AdamJT13]

******* Adam -- why do you think everyone accuses you of deflection?

Here's what it is your main problem Adam, think you define what the point being argued is. You keep going back to the "i'm not wrong" issue yet totally ignore the real issue about the types of questions being asked.

You miss the point by a mile and just want to deflect by claiming that others do.

Frankly if you want to claim that I haven't given examples then you are just plain ignorant. Your entire legendary Myth thread was about shooting down straw men. I've given examples of this in other threads several times and I know that you know that. Stop playing so **** ignorant.

For the umpteenth time, that is NOT what that thread was about. No matter how many times you say it, that's never going to be true.

That thread was, is and always will be about the propensity of the anti-Roy crowd to make false and exaggerated statements instead of looking at the actual facts and making a rational evaluation. Other than a few factual inaccuracies reported in the media, it wasn't about proving those false statements wrong, because (almost) everyone knows they're wrong.

So again I'll ask -- cite ONE specific example of something I was wrong about. Just one.

Please?

 

[AdamJT13]

LOL. I agree that Roy is not the same as he was in his first few seasons, but to state that he is so ineffective that he is no longer useful is ridiculous.

Start ducking.

 

[TellerMorrow34]

I've got high hopes for this thread to make it to at least 50 pages. I'm hoping.

Like I've said many times I think this is a situation where people are making Roy out to be both better than he ever actually was, in some cases, and worse than he actually ever was in others.

 

[AbeBeta]

For the umpteenth time, that is NOT what that thread was about. No matter how many times you say it, that's never going to be true.

That thread was, is and always will be about the propensity of the anti-Roy crowd to make false and exaggerated statements instead of looking at the actual facts and making a rational evaluation. Other than a few factual inaccuracies reported in the media, it wasn't about proving those false statements wrong, because (almost) everyone knows they're wrong.

So again I'll ask -- cite ONE specific example of something I was wrong about. Just one.

Please?

Adam, read my freaking post. I made very clear that The issue isn't about simple right vs. wrong dichotomies. It is about the questions you choose to focus on. You continue to try to turn the argument into something else and pretend that folks like myself are criticizing you for being wrong, when I am clearly criticizing you for setting up easy questions for yourself to answer correctly. Others quite correctly criticized you for cherry picking as well.

You can play your little semantic games all day if you like but know that all you are doing is avoiding the real issue here.

 

[TellerMorrow34]

Adam, read my freaking post. I made very clear that The issue isn't about simple right vs. wrong dichotomies. It is about the questions you choose to focus on.You continue to try to turn the argument into something else and pretend that folks like myself are criticizing you for being wrong, when I am clearly criticizing you for setting up easy questions for yourself to answer correctly. Others quite correctly criticized you for cherry picking as well.

You can play your little semantic games all day if you like but know that all you are doing is avoiding the real issue here.

Which is?

I'm actually quite curious to find out what the real issue is as well.

 

[AbeBeta]

Which is?

I'm actually quite curious to find out what the real issue is as well.

First paragraph...

 

[BAT]

Start ducking.

LOL, hard to duck scatter shot.

 

[TellerMorrow34]

First paragraph...

Ahhhh....gotcha. I thought this was going to be something more.

 

[AbeBeta]

Ahhhh....gotcha. I thought this was going to be something more.

as opposed to "when was I ever wrong?"

 

[AdamJT13]

Adam, read my freaking post. I made very clear that. The issue isn't about simple right vs. wrong dichotomies. It is about the questions you choose to focus on. You continue to try to turn the argument into something else and pretend that folks like myself are criticizing you for being wrong

Here's what YOU said -- "everyone just takes what you say at work or wherever as correct. That isn't going to fly here. Some of us have some pretty mad skills in those areas as well and are going to call **** on you at times. Accept that and enjoy it rather than getting all semantic and defensive."

Here's what Cowboyz88 said -- "you can't admit you were wrong" ... "Adam still can't admit he's wrong."

Here's what jobberone said -- "It appears you always think you're right and I've never seen you retract, apologize, etc. Even when it eventually became very clear you were absolutely wrong."



And I'm "pretending" that people are saying I'm wrong?

when I am clearly criticizing you for setting up easy questions for yourself to answer correctly. Others quite correctly criticized you for cherry picking as well.

You can play your little semantic games all day if you like but know that all you are doing is avoiding the real issue here.

I told you to ask me any question you want. I'm still waiting.

 

[AbeBeta]

Here's what YOU said -- "everyone just takes what you say at work or wherever as correct. That isn't going to fly here. Some of us have some pretty mad skills in those areas as well and are going to call **** on you at times. Accept that and enjoy it rather than getting all semantic and defensive."

Here's what Cowboyz88 said -- "you can't admit you were wrong" ... "Adam still can't admit he's wrong."

Here's what jobberone said -- "It appears you always think you're right and I've never seen you retract, apologize, etc. Even when it eventually became very clear you were absolutely wrong."



And I'm "pretending" that people are saying I'm wrong?

First, my comment was on your thin skinned responses to posts, not to a particular right/wrong claim you made. The fact remains, whenever challenged by knowledgeable people you often go into a shell of semantics and deflection as you are doing here. I've said SO FREAKING MANY times in this thread that my issue is about the questions you ask yet you won't even address that.

I told you to ask me any question you want. I'm still waiting.

Fine. Here is the question. Why shouldn't we keep Roy?

 

[AdamJT13]

First, my comment was on your thin skinned responses to posts, not to a particular right/wrong claim you made.

So I wasn't just "pretending," as you claimed?

The fact remains, whenever challenged by knowledgeable people you often go into a shell of semantics and deflection as you are doing here.

Examples, please.

I've said SO FREAKING MANY times in this thread that my issue is about the questions you ask yet you won't even address.

Questions that I ask yet won't address? Huh? What question have I asked without addressing?

Fine. Here is the question. Why shouldn't we keep Roy?

Well, that's not a loaded question or anything.

If we don't keep him, it's because his salary/cap number is too high for the role he's expected to play and/or the production we expect to get out of him.

If we do keep him at his current salary, it's because we don't have any better options at that position right now.

If we keep him at a lower salary, it's because he agreed to take less money and we'd expect to get commensurate production out of him.

There are millions of different options for keeping him, trading him, releasing him, etc., all of which fall somewhere on the scale of what we "should" or "shouldn't" do.

With few exceptions, I'd never say we "should" do something so general as keeping or not keeping a specific player under any circumstances, because it implies that there are no circumstances when we should do the opposite. Are there NO circumstances in which we shouldn't keep Roy? Of course not. If he happily agrees to take the minimum salary this season, we'd be stupid not to keep him.

 

[Thick 'N Hearty]

Abe v. Adam: The Death Match

 

[Thick 'N Hearty]

BTW, just heard on ESPN radio that RW38s agent said the Cowboys are in trade discussions with another team. Didn't identify the proposed partner, nor could they get confirmation from the Boys