Matt Moore?

[Rack]

It's a goofy point.

What comparison are you going to use next? Are you going to say the chance of us releasing Lousaka Polite is analogous to the Chargers releasing Ladanian Tomlinson?

You're kinda slow, aren't you?


Nevermind, I'd have better luck explaining it to a doorknob.

 

[Stautner]

You're kinda slow, aren't you?


Nevermind, I'd have better luck explaining it to a doorknob.

LOL - you make a stupid comment likening Stanback's situation to the Colts releasing Peyton Manning and you are shocked that people don't fall right in line with what you are saying?

Sure, anything's possible, but if I were making an analogy I wouldn't compare the possibilty of an overcast sky overnight with the possibility of the sun exploding tomorrow. I would pick something at least within the same realm of possibility.

But, I guess that makes me slow ........

 

[Rack]

The comment wasn't stupid, you just don't have the mental capacity to understand it's meaning.


And you're getting stuck on what is, essentially, NOT the main point.

Sure, anything's possible, but if I were making an analogy I wouldn't compare the possibilty of an overcast sky overnight with the possibility of the sun exploding tomorrow. I would pick something at least within the same realm of possibility.

Wow.

 

[Stautner]

The comment wasn't stupid, you just don't have the mental capacity to understand it's meaning.


And you're getting stuck on what is, essentially, NOT the main point.






Wow.

Hell, you aren't making ANY point.

All you are doing is calling people names without even trying to explain yourself, and hoping no one notices that you aren't even writing anything of substance.

All I have been saying is that I personally felt that given Stanback's reputation as an outstanding athlete with outstanding upside I felt like a team would pick him up if he had to clear waivers.

On the other hand, you responded by treating me like an idiot and coming up with some goofy analogy about how "anything's possible", including Manning being released by the Colts.

I challenge you to find anyone on here that would accept that as a reasonable analogy ...... but instead I'm sure you will continue to comment on my mental capacity while failing to make any point whatsoever.

 

[Rack]

Hell, you aren't making ANY point.

.

Which proves you aren't getting it.


And I haven't called anyone any names. Another thing you don't understand, what a surprise.

 

[Rack]

I challenge you to find anyone on here that would accept that as a reasonable analogy

FYI, it wasn't an analogy. It was an exhaggeration (I thought that much was obvious even to you).

 

[Stautner]

Which proves you aren't getting it.


And I haven't called anyone any names. Another thing you don't understand, what a surprise.

Here are your last three posts:

FIRST:
You're kinda slow, aren't you?


Nevermind, I'd have better luck explaining it to a doorknob.

SECOND:
The comment wasn't stupid, you just don't have the mental capacity to understand it's meaning.


And you're getting stuck on what is, essentially, NOT the main point.


THIRD:

Which proves you aren't getting it.


And I haven't called anyone any names. Another thing you don't understand, what a surprise.9 Minutes Ago 05:09 PM




Now which of these contains the point I'm supposed to get?

 

[Stautner]

FYI, it wasn't an analogy. It was an exhaggeration (I thought that much was obvious even to you).

Ohhhh - an exxageration .........

And so it was so ridiculoulsly exxagerated that anyone should have been able to see it, right?


So what was the point of using it in your argument ........... ?

 

[Rack]

Ohhhh - an exxageration .........

And so it was so ridiculoulsly exxagerated that anyone should have been able to see it, right?


So what was the point of using it in your argument ........... ?

Exactly, you didn't get it. This proves you couldn't get it.



It was used to point out that Stanback clearing waivers isn't "Beyond the realm of possibility".


If you still don't get it, ask someone else cuz I'm done trying to explain it to you. My 3 year old nephew gets it, don't know why you can't figure it out.

 

[Stautner]

Exactly, you didn't get it. This proves you couldn't get it.



It was used to point out that Stanback clearing waivers isn't "Beyond the realm of possibility".


If you still don't get it, ask someone else cuz I'm done trying to explain it to you. My 3 year old nephew gets it, don't know why you can't figure it out.

It's also not beyond the realm of possibility that the sun could explode tomorrow ....... so what?

You don't get it - I offered my opinion and you apparently couldn't accept it as my opinion.

I wasn't trying to present it as fact - just my opinion.

Do you always go to such great lengths to prove an opinion - which no one denies is just an opinion - is only an opinion?

 

[5Stars]

It's also not beyond the realm of possibility that the sun could explode tomorrow ....... so what?

You don't get it - I offered my opinion and you apparently couldn't accept it as my opinion.

I wasn't trying to present it as fact - just my opinion.

Do you always go to such great lengths to prove an opinion - which no one denies is just an opinion - is only an opinion?

:laugh1: :laugh1: :laugh1:

That's funny because both of you are doing it!

 

[Rack]

:laugh1: :laugh1: :laugh1:

That's funny because both of you are doing it!

 

[Stautner]

:laugh1: :laugh1: :laugh1:

That's funny because both of you are doing it!

Not me - I have no problem at all with him having the opinion that Stanback would clear waivers and make it to the practice squad.

I have never once tried to prove that to be wrong - I have only said I have a different opinion.

Apparently you haven't read this thread.

 

[5Stars]

Not me - I have no problem at all with him having the opinion that Stanback would clear waivers and make it to the practice squad.

I have never once tried to prove that to be wrong - I have only said I have a different opinion.

Apparently you haven't read this thread.

I have read the whole thing...and just to throw my opinion in...I don't think he would clear wavers...!

Don't assume, Stautner...bad Stautner, bad, bad , bad...!!

 

[5Stars]

Not me - I have no problem at all with him having the opinion that Stanback would clear waivers and make it to the practice squad.

I have never once tried to prove that to be wrong - I have only said I have a different opinion.

Apparently you haven't read this thread.

:laugh1: Oh, really now?

 

[Stautner]

I have read the whole thing...and just to throw my opinion in...I don't think he would clear wavers...!

Don't assume, Stautner...bad Stautner, bad, bad , bad...!!

It was an assumption based on your making a false statement.

Show me once where I tried to prove he was wrong in his opinion about Stanback clearing waivers.


The only thing I ever said was that I didn't think he would. That's it - I didn't try to present arguments or facts or anything else about his opinion - all I ave did was give a very brief reason for my opinion.

 

[5Stars]

It was an assumption based on your making a false statement.

Show me once where I tried to prove he was wrong in his opinion about Stanback clearing waivers.


The only thing I ever said was that I didn't think he would. That's it - I didn't try to present arguments or facts or anything else about his opinion - all I ave did was give a very brief reason for my opinion.

And that, my good friend is where you went wrong...!

And what "false statement" did I make? I said you both are argueing about each other opinions when you stated to Rack that Do you always go to such great lengths to prove an opinion


Are you drinking?

:laugh2:

 

[dogunwo]

The comment wasn't stupid, you just don't have the mental capacity to understand it's meaning.


And you're getting stuck on what is, essentially, NOT the main point.






Wow.

whats up with the insulting others' intelligence all time? So he disagrees with you. Make another point or get over it.

 

[Rack]

It was an assumption based on your making a false statement.

Show me once where I tried to prove he was wrong in his opinion about Stanback clearing waivers.


The only thing I ever said was that I didn't think he would. That's it - I didn't try to present arguments or facts or anything else about his opinion - all I ave did was give a very brief reason for my opinion.

Oh now you're trying to turn the whole thing around on me.

All I said is that anything is possible, including Stanback clearing waivers. And that isn't even debatable being that ANYTHING is possible.

Now, if you want to say it's not PROBABLE, then that's something else.


But you can't say it's impossible then say you have no problem with my opinion of the matter at the same time. You'd be contradicting yourself.

whats up with the insulting others' intelligence all time? So he disagrees with you. Make another point or get over it.

I didn't insult, I merely pointed it out.

 

[CaptainQuint]

Romo's slightly different because he wasn't QBing a BCS school but there's a chance that he would have made it through waivers his rookie year.

Good point, Stan, but Tom Brady played for a big school, and Brady was almost undrafted. New England fans in 2001 may have made comments about Brady similar to those we're making about Matt Moore, and Boston media pronounced the Patriots' 2001 season dead, when Bledsoe's lung was punctured by Moe Lewis. If Bledsoe had been replaced in 2001 by the 2007 version of Brad Johnson, would New England have made it as far as the Snow Bowl?