Fuzzy Thoughts at GB 2016

[Clove]

Come on, Clove. No one in this thread has even hinted at what you are asserting. The kid was off. You saw it. We saw it. Everyone saw it. Aikman mentioned it (early). The fact is Cincinnati is a MUCH more formidable defense (especially in the secondary) than Green Bay is and he was on point against that D. Just in case you were wondering, they were paid to stop Dak, also. Dak had no such troubles against them . The kid had an "off" day in his intermediate accuracy. Everyone on the planet saw it, except you, I suppose. Have fun with that stance.

Do you care that we won? Seriously? Do you care? Did you not like how he bounced back? Did you want him to play flawlessly through out the entire game? Of course he had some issues early but he figured it out and he WON US THE GAME! What more do you want dude?

 

[Solution]

Do you care that we won? Seriously? Do you care? Did you not like how he bounced back? Did you want him to play flawlessly through out the entire game? Of course he had some issues early but he figured it out and he WON US THE GAME! What more do you want dude?

You know I think Dak is single, you should get in touch with his people.

 

[Clove]

At least you admit that this is about your bias against Romo.

This was about your starting negatively with a QB who actually won the game. Had you started with how well he played, then went back to the mistakes he made, I would have loved your post. Your post came off as staunch and predatory against Dak Prescott. Had he lost the game, I would have agreed with you 100%. Had he had no touch downs or first downs or manged the game properly, then I would have agreed with your approach.

 

[Trouty]

@Solution again, I apologize, brother.

 

[Clove]

I stated that he was accurate on his deep throws and made good decisions amongst other things. This take is straight up ignorant. I'm beginning to think you are just trolling me.

Why would I troll you dude. I disagreed with you, I still do, and that's my right. If you rebut, I will rebut. That's how this goes. I know you've done good things on this board for years, this isn't my first rodeo. But you know that if I don't like something, I'll say something about it.

Just like a lot of people look at the stats and think Romo had one of his best games in Green Bay in 2014 and I disagree. Because in order to have a good game, you have to make smart decisions in tight games and he didn't.

 

[Clove]

I'm not sure you understand the concept of a game review. It's one person's assessment of of what they think happened. Fuzzy didn't create a thread to pick on Dak.

If you disagree, just go through each pass on a play by play basis and give your opinion of that exact pass. We'll see who has the most accurate assessment. I can post the play by play recap as a template if you need it.

I disagreed with the Dak version of his game review, is that okay with you?

 

[Solution]

@Solution again, I apologize, brother.

hah no worries man.

 

[xwalker]

My criticism to him is that instead of leading with the positive points of Dak Prescott, all he does is tears the guy down. The 4th round QB who stood tall in the face of adversity, and all Fuzzy does is talk about how awful he was. And to me, this is the epitome of negative bias towards the new QB.

The entire process of becoming a better player is that people (usually coaches) critique you and then you work to improve.

This post is very similar to what he will get from the coaches. This is not pee-wee football where the coaches just say great effort regardless of performance.

The coaches don't coach based on win/loss. They coach based on a review of each play.
When Garrett says we'll clean it up, he means that they will go through each play with each player and point out things that need to improve.

 

[jday]

You can put me on ignore, I promise you I will sleep so good tonight.
.

 

[xwalker]

I disagreed with the Dak version of his game review, is that okay with you?

Without specifics, your posts are a waste of time.

 

[Clove]

The entire process of becoming a better player is that people (usually coaches) critique you and then you work to improve.

This post is very similar to what he will get from the coaches. This is not pee-wee football where the coaches just say great effort regardless of performance.

The coaches don't coach based on win/loss. They coach based on a review of each play.
When Garrett says we'll clean it up, he means that they will go through each play with each player and point out things that need to improve.

You do understand that ALL QUARTERBACKS make mistakes right? You do know this right? I'm just wondering because you act as if he lost the game. My point was that he did not talk about all of the good plays he made. All Qbs make bad plays, everyone in the history of the universe makes bad throws every game from now until the end of time. We all know this. Even the great Joe Montana has made mistakes and missed open receivers, etc... If you lead with this after a loss, I'm on board. It's deserved. But if you lead with this when the guy scores 3 touch downs, that's 3 touch downs, and leads his team to a 30 to 16 victory, it's stupid.

 

[Clove]

Without specifics, your posts are a waste of time.

I disagree with him saying that Dak was inaccurate. What I saw was him hitting receiver after receiver. At first he was missing guys just like all QBs do. Whoopty doo. If you're not used to seeing guys missed, you'd better stop watching football. It's bed time for you.

 

[Undisputed]

 

[skinsscalper]

Do you care that we won? Seriously? Do you care? Did you not like how he bounced back? Did you want him to play flawlessly through out the entire game? Of course he had some issues early but he figured it out and he WON US THE GAME! What more do you want dude?

I already said I don't want more. I've been happy with the win since Sunday evening I could care less about "how big we won". I already stated that in another post and that I can't stand that type of poster so take that straw man and shove it up your ***.

The whole argument is that you claimed Fuzzy said Dak played badly (which was NEVER uttered ONE TIME in his post) and continued by turning coat and saying that he tore Dak down before giving him props (you DO understand that when giving a film review, it's typically done chronologically, right? It's easier to go play by play and quarter by quarter and follow the narrative). You then went full ****** and started talking in circles about things that were never said in a continuing cycle of putting words in people's mouths to perpetuate a horse**** argument that didn't have a foot to stand on when you started it. As a result, you've lost all credibility in this thread and on this subject. I'm done babysitting you through the thread. Have fun.

 

[waldoputty]

You do understand that ALL QUARTERBACKS make mistakes right? You do know this right? I'm just wondering because you act as if he lost the game. My point was that he did not talk about all of the good plays he made. All Qbs make bad plays, everyone in the history of the universe makes bad throws every game from now until the end of time. We all know this. Even the great Joe Montana has made mistakes and missed open receivers, etc... If you lead with this after a loss, I'm on board. It's deserved. But if you lead with this when the guy scores 3 touch downs, that's 3 touch downs, and leads his team to a 30 to 16 victory, it's stupid.

Clove

It is obvious you are a big fan.
But Fuzzy is doing everyone a big service here.
He worked real hard to analyze the game for us.
Most of us who read this thread really appreciate what Fuzzy does.
I certainly do.

A lot of us enjoy his report.
It helps us understand what happened.
It helps us understand how Dak and the rest of the team may progress or not.
He wrote a lot about other players also.
Because we care about the team.
Fuzzy is certainly not going up to Dak in person and say "you suck" to discourage him...

We won this game.
We want more.
And we cannot get enough of what happened last Sunday.

 

[Scotman]

Outstanding analysis. I'm pretty good at watching the game and seeing the big picture, but I simply don't know enough about watching film to be able to give an in-depth analysis like this. It is so much more informative than anything I can catch on TV.

One thing I was happy to see in the game was that our kicker seems to be well on the mend. We often take the kicker for granted, but not this guy. The bye week hit at a perfect time for him to get healthy.

This game was different for Dak, IMO. I thought he looked like a rookie this last week. An AMAZING rookie, but a rookie just the same. I actually thought this was his worst game, including New York. I think because GB has a pretty effective defense that the game sped up a little bit for Dak. His passes were catchable, just not placed as well as in previous weeks. All that said, I share the enthusiasm for Dak that many others here do. I think I'm more up on Dak than even Clove. This kid is winning games...after coming in as a late fourth round pick! Are you kidding me? Even Romo, an UDFA, had plenty of time to sit back and watch. Dak comes in and may very well just take the team away from Romo. Amazing kid. If his worst effort is a winning game, I'll take it. He needs to correct the miscues from the GB game or they'll come back to get him, though. Perhaps the most encouraging thing I saw from Dak, in what I feel like was his worst professional game, is that he bounced back from each mistake and overcame them. If he can do that, the sky is the limit for him.

Thanks again for the terrific analysis, Fuzzy. So much more insight that I could gather on my own.

 

[Clove]

I already said I don't want more. I've been happy with the win since Sunday evening I could care less about "how big we won". I already stated that in another post and that I can't stand that type of poster so take that straw man and shove it up your ***.

The whole argument is that you claimed Fuzzy said Dak played badly (which was NEVER uttered ONE TIME in his post) and continued by turning coat and saying that he tore Dak down before giving him props (you DO understand that when giving a film review, it's typically done chronologically, right? It's easier to go play by play and quarter by quarter and follow the narrative). You then went full ****** and started talking in circles about things that were never said in a continuing cycle of putting words in people's mouths to perpetuate a horse**** argument that didn't have a foot to stand on when you started it. As a result, you've lost all credibility in this thread and on this subject. I'm done babysitting you through the thread. Have fun.

I stand by what I said, and if you're offended by it, go cry in the corner. The guy made about 5 bad throws, the rest were either on purpose, or good to great throws. If he's going to do a statistical analyst of a QB, then do the ENTIRE THING. If you only talk about his negatives, you're being an ***hole on purpose.

 

[skinsscalper]

I stand by what I said, and if you're offended by it, go cry in the corner. The guy made about 5 bad throws, the rest were either on purpose, or good to great throws. If he's going to do a statistical analyst of a QB, then do the ENTIRE THING. If you only talk about his negatives, you're being an ***hole on purpose.

And if he had done that, then you would have a valid argument. He didn't and the ***hole turns out to be you. Weird.

 

[Clove]

Clove

It is obvious you are a big fan.
But Fuzzy is doing everyone a big service here.
He worked real hard to analyze the game for us.
Most of us who read this thread really appreciate what Fuzzy does.
I certainly do.

A lot of us enjoy his report.
It helps us understand what happened.
It helps us understand how Dak and the rest of the team may progress or not.
He wrote a lot about other players also.
Because we care about the team.
Fuzzy is certainly not going up to Dak in person and say "you suck" to discourage him...

We won this game.
We want more.
And we cannot get enough of what happened last Sunday.

My advice for him next time is to lead with what he did good FIRST, which rarely did. If you're going to talk about all the bad things our QB did, why not give a good assertion on the good that he did. I would have loved to see that, but it never happened. I wonder why?

 

[Clove]

And if he had done that, then you would have a valid argument. He didn't and the ******* turns out to be you. Weird.

You must be a Romo lover, smells like it.