Is The Flozell Adams Age Truly Over?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

sorry - "tunnel vision" addressed a lot of replies to me today, not any one person. when it comes at you from all sides, things turn into a blur sometimes.

i'll stop here where i've said a lot of times that yes pat can make it. sure it can happen.

go cowboys. we rule. any player wearing a star will succeed and i just need to remember that cause we want it to be that way.

HE ACTUALLY PLAYED AND PLAYED WELL LAST YEAR AGAINST STARTERS. PLAYERS GENERALLY IMPROVE AFTER THEIR FIRST YEAR.

That is not me just saying it because i want it to be those are facts. If you dont like it cause they are better than your "hes a 7th rounder" tripe Im sorry.

Really ice for you to say that you are trying to have an intelligent convo and then resort to this is actually very ironic.

 

[iceberg]

HE ACTUALLY PLAYED AND PLAYED WELL LAST YEAR AGAINST STARTERS. PLAYERS GENERALLY IMPROVE AFTER THEIR FIRST YEAR.

That is not me just saying it because i want it to be those are facts. If you dont like it cause they are better than your "hes a 7th rounder" tripe Im sorry.

Really ice for you to say that you are trying to have an intelligent convo and then resort to this is actually very ironic.

and petitti never got a chance for a 2nd year to show improvement, did he?

yea, it is ironic. like i said, when you let yourself get "derailed" and collect another warning cause you lashed out to someone being what you called them, it really makes you not give a damn about the current convo anymore.

 

[superpunk]

hey, i tried having a good convo on it and that didn't work either and i was told i was a child holding my breathe.

what's the point of trying to have a good discussion if you're just going to get called out for your views?

Just ignore burmafrd and Winky.

Everyone else has brought up very legitimate points.

The OL could use more addressing. We could get after it and every other position in rounds 1-3. Very few are arguing vehemently against drafting a guard or tackle in the first, if the proper talent falls into our laps.

People take notice when you use polarizing words like ignore, and expect everyone else to be able to interpret "ignore", not actually as "ignore" in the literal sense, but in the sense you mean it as. And if you think that's confusing, you should read your posts weaseling out of your use of the term "ignore".

We've made several very nice (and in some instances, low cost) moves along the offensive line, and our starting lineup is set until Flozell is done. If we can get his replacement, or get more dominant at Center or guard, by all means.

But having a legit starting 5 doesn't come about by "ignoring" the offensive line. It's come through several fantastic moves by Bill Parcells and the rededication of Flozell and Gurode back at center. We'll see about Davis, but I think he'll be a good fit.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

and petitti never got a chance for a 2nd year to show improvement, did he?

yea, it is ironic. like i said, when you let yourself get "derailed" and collect another warning cause you lashed out to someone being what you called them, it really makes you not give a damn about the current convo anymore.

You saw that game where Leonard Little abused Pettitti? Pettitti was regularly used as a turnstile last season. He by all accounts improved physically it just wasnt enough.

Until Watkins becomes a turnstile bringing up Pettitti is moot.

And Im not lashing out at you. You are the one saying that Im all smiles and roses for no reason. So I outlined my reasoning for you for emphasis.

 

[iceberg]

Just ignore burmafrd and Winky.

Everyone else has brought up very legitimate points.

The OL could use more addressing. We could get after it and every other position in rounds 1-3. Very few are arguing vehemently against drafting a guard or tackle in the first, if the proper talent falls into our laps.

People take notice when you use polarizing words like ignore, and expect everyone else to be able to interpret "ignore", not actually as "ignore" in the literal sense, but in the sense you mean it as. And if you think that's confusing, you should read your posts weaseling out of your use of the term "ignore".

We've made several very nice (and in some instances, low cost) moves along the offensive line, and our starting lineup is set until Flozell is done. If we can get his replacement, or get more dominant at Center or guard, by all means.

But having a legit starting 5 doesn't come about by "ignoring" the offensive line. It's come through several fantastic moves by Bill Parcells and the rededication of Flozell and Gurode back at center. We'll see about Davis, but I think he'll be a good fit.

good points, and you're right on many of them.

to many however, doing ANYTHING means you didn't ignore it. fine. i get that.
to me, however, knowing what you need and intentionally failing to get it, ignores the problem.

yes, it's a "polarizing" word and yes, people will pick up on it and suddenly the entire convo is off into a goat trail up a rocky mountain to nowhere.

if people want to let that 1 word negate my point, fine. i can't stop them and won't bother trying. we're all raised differently with different point of view and events in our lives that define how we interpret *any* word.

in the sense of "we did something so therefor we didn't "IGNORE" the line -i'd agree that's a common stance and understanding about the use of the word. i just disagree and maybe taking liberties with the word still feel like we didn't do what we know what we needed to do.

semantics that leads to things that in the short term i take personally but in a few hours i'll blow it off and come on back into the convo again. till then the mood is gone, sorry.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Ice I dont anyone here thinks that drafting an OL on day 1 is a bad idea. Really this whole thing looks to have gone off onto a huge tangent over semantics.

but dont let the fact that we havent drafted an ol on day one since rogers and peterman get you down.

 

[iceberg]

You saw that game where Leonard Little abused Pettitti? Pettitti was regularly used as a turnstile last season. He by all accounts improved physically it just wasnt enough.

Until Watkins becomes a turnstile bringing up Pettitti is moot.

And Im not lashing out at you. You are the one saying that Im all smiles and roses for no reason. So I outlined my reasoning for you for emphasis.

i saw a 16 game investment we blew off. i think you mean mcq in the turnstile reference, but i get your point. (and screw up names this deep into many convo's also on my own : ) my point here was you lob out a generic "players usually improve in their 2nd year" statement that on the surface i'll agree with but can - just have others have done - point out where that's not always the case.

as for waiting to see what mcq can do, we completely agree here. but if we can get some insurance, i don't see a huge party foul there.

that's all.

 

[iceberg]

Ice I dont anyone here thinks that drafting an OL on day 1 is a bad idea. Really this whole thing looks to have gone off onto a huge tangent over semantics.

but dont let the fact that we havent drafted an ol on day one since rogers and peterman get you down.

like i said in a reply somewhere here a few times -we went down a goattrail to nowhere on the defination of a word and lost the entire meaning i don't think anyone would disagree upon in that it couldn't hurt to address the OL on day 1.