|
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 260
2nd String
|
OP
2nd String
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 260 |
Quote:
LOL...your hole is growing deeper.
You said he would start over Anderson because he has everything that Anderson does.
So now it goes one of two ways. You're either talking about stats, in which you automatically lose, or you're saying that he would start over Anderson, an experienced player who made the pro bowl, purely because of physical tools.
So you tell me, which horrific argument did you make?
No. It doesn't go one of two ways - it only goes one way. I said physical skills. You can't deny that Russell is very gifted physically.
I like how you say experienced when he hasn't even started a whole NFL season (15 games isn't a whole season). He had one good season, and now he is a God? You don't even know if Anderson is consistent from season to season.
I know, I have no room to talk. But I did say give Russell a season and we can compare then. That way we can compare Russell and Anderson after their first year playing a full season.
Win, lose, or tie, Raiders 'til I die.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 260
2nd String
|
|
OP
2nd String
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 260 |
Quote:
Quote:
If it just took a turn to the worse, what did it start as?
It started off as a man crush that Snack boy had on Al Davis,then we found out he has one for Jamarcus Russell too.
Hopefully he has some high school home work to do and we don't hear from him for a while.
My man crushes are nothing compared to the man crushes you browns fans have for your god-like, experienced, Pro Bowl QB Anderson.
Since it was the weekend, i had a life to attend to. Now I have my homework to do.
Win, lose, or tie, Raiders 'til I die.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,044
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,044 |
Quote:
When one of the Brown's top picks flops, do you just say: "Oh well, I don't mind another losing season."?
Of course not, but it doesn't really personally affect me. The last thing I would imagine myself doing would be to visit an opposing message board saying how my team is better then a team with a winning record. 
That being said, it wouldn't bother me to see Russell do well for Oakland. I never understood why certain fans hope that a player to be a bust... Now I could understand if they were in the same division, but in a different division? That doesn't scream "fan" to me.
I want the Cleveland Browns to be my pallbearers so they can let me down for the last time.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659
Poser
|
|
Poser
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659 |
The Browns have how many championships? Please, you're embarassing yourself with each and every post.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,276
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,276 |
J/C...... 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 260
2nd String
|
|
OP
2nd String
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 260 |
Quote:
J/C......
Actually, you feed my troll-ness just by replying to this thread.
Win, lose, or tie, Raiders 'til I die.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,675
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,675 |
Quote:
Quote:
LOL...your hole is growing deeper.
You said he would start over Anderson because he has everything that Anderson does.
So now it goes one of two ways. You're either talking about stats, in which you automatically lose, or you're saying that he would start over Anderson, an experienced player who made the pro bowl, purely because of physical tools.
So you tell me, which horrific argument did you make?
No. It doesn't go one of two ways - it only goes one way. I said physical skills. You can't deny that Russell is very gifted physically.
I like how you say experienced when he hasn't even started a whole NFL season (15 games isn't a whole season). He had one good season, and now he is a God? You don't even know if Anderson is consistent from season to season.
I know, I have no room to talk. But I did say give Russell a season and we can compare then. That way we can compare Russell and Anderson after their first year playing a full season.
No no no. You said Russell would start over Anderson. You don't have room to talk. That was a stupid thing to say, and now you have to take your lumps.
Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,675
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,675 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
If it just took a turn to the worse, what did it start as?
It started off as a man crush that Snack boy had on Al Davis,then we found out he has one for Jamarcus Russell too.
Hopefully he has some high school home work to do and we don't hear from him for a while.
My man crushes are nothing compared to the man crushes you browns fans have for your god-like, experienced, Pro Bowl QB Anderson.
Since it was the weekend, i had a life to attend to. Now I have my homework to do.
If by "Man Crush" you mean defending him against ridiculous statements, then yes, I'll admit that I have a man crush.
Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 260
2nd String
|
|
OP
2nd String
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 260 |
Quote:
No no no. You said Russell would start over Anderson. You don't have room to talk. That was a stupid thing to say, and now you have to take your lumps.
Yes. I did say that. It was a stupid thing to say that the most physically gifted player would start?
Win, lose, or tie, Raiders 'til I die.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 242
1st String
|
|
1st String
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 242 |
over someone who has a good season on his resume, yes, it is. this argument is going in circles. just come back when jamarcus has actually proven himself.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109 |
Both of them are more physically gifted than Tom Brady, but neither of them would start over him.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,675
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,675 |
Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 260
2nd String
|
|
OP
2nd String
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 260 |
Quote:
Both of them are more physically gifted than Tom Brady, but neither of them would start over him.
Well the Patriots wouldn't have drafted a QB in the first round. The Browns and Raiders needed a QB, so they drafted one.
Win, lose, or tie, Raiders 'til I die.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 260
2nd String
|
|
OP
2nd String
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 260 |
Quote:
over someone who has a good season on his resume, yes, it is. this argument is going in circles. just come back when jamarcus has actually proven himself.
Well, thanks for continuing the circle with me by telling me to come back when JaMarcus proves himself. I'm ready to end this argument, but people keep saying stuff and, as the original poster, I feel it is my duty to respond.
Win, lose, or tie, Raiders 'til I die.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,675
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,675 |
They THOUGHT they needed a QB. If the Browns knew Anderson would play as good as he did, then they wouldn't have drafted Quinn.
You have no argument here.
Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 260
2nd String
|
|
OP
2nd String
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 260 |
Quote:
They THOUGHT they needed a QB. If the Browns knew Anderson would play as good as he did, then they wouldn't have drafted Quinn.
You have no argument here.
I'm not arguing your point. It just sucks because Quinn is now a very rich back up.
Win, lose, or tie, Raiders 'til I die.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 242
1st String
|
|
1st String
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 242 |
you would be the one continuing the argument. it's been concluded that you have no basis for your opinion until russell plays at least a season. the fact that you keep making contradictory arguments is what's making this thread continue.
i'll try to sum everything up: if the two were coming out of college at the same time and were both rookies, russell would start for a team over anderson, being initially the more highly touted prospect. because anderson is a proven nfl quarterback coming off of a 10-5 season, however, one would have to be an idiot to start a (virtual) rookie over him. if you choose continue debating, fine, but keep in mind that these are the facts.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,276
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,276 |
Quote:
Quote:
They THOUGHT they needed a QB. If the Browns knew Anderson would play as good as he did, then they wouldn't have drafted Quinn.
You have no argument here.
I'm not arguing your point. It just sucks because Quinn is now a very rich back up.
And your's is a very rich starting interception fat boy! 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,675
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,675 |
Quote:
Quote:
They THOUGHT they needed a QB. If the Browns knew Anderson would play as good as he did, then they wouldn't have drafted Quinn.
You have no argument here.
I'm not arguing your point. It just sucks because Quinn is now a very rich back up.
Last I saw, he didn't make that much since he hasn't been starting or really playing that much.
How's that hole doing?
Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,853
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,853 |
Quote:
[Just to be an ass, I decided to find a grammatical error you have posted. Your post on Chad Johnson changing his name has at least two errors. Let me point them out for you.
"I find him extremely annoying and wish I'd never hear his name again."
And wish I had never hear his name again? That doesn't make much sense to me.
Were you born in pittsburgh? "I'd" - has many different meanings. In this case, it was used correctly. Here's the sentence: "...and wish I'd never hear his name again.".
100% proper usage. "I'd", as in " ...I would, as in "I wish I would never hear his name again.". Make sense?
In the future, if you want to smack people on the english language, it would behoove you to actually learn it. Course, they probably don't do that until your sr. year in high school.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 260
2nd String
|
|
OP
2nd String
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 260 |
Quote:
Were you born in pittsburgh? "I'd" - has many different meanings. In this case, it was used correctly. Here's the sentence: "...and wish I'd never hear his name again.".
100% proper usage. "I'd", as in " ...I would, as in "I wish I would never hear his name again.". Make sense?
In the future, if you want to smack people on the english language, it would behoove you to actually learn it. Course, they probably don't do that until your sr. year in high school.
Actually, I was born a bit north of that.
Please don't try to correct me when you can't even correctly use capital letters. Last time I checked, a city such as Pittsburgh is spelled with a capital "P". The same goes for the word "English".
You did a nice job already pointing out what DeepThreat already said. You probably did a few Google searches just to make sure he was right, then decided to repeat what he said - only in more words.
Anyways, this grammar war should stop now. I was corrected, so I corrected someone. I thought that might be the end of it.
And people are saying that I keep continuing the different arguments in this thread? (crescent_fresh)
Win, lose, or tie, Raiders 'til I die.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 260
2nd String
|
|
OP
2nd String
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 260 |
Quote:
you would be the one continuing the argument. it's been concluded that you have no basis for your opinion until russell plays at least a season. the fact that you keep making contradictory arguments is what's making this thread continue.
i'll try to sum everything up: if the two were coming out of college at the same time and were both rookies, russell would start for a team over anderson, being initially the more highly touted prospect. because anderson is a proven nfl quarterback coming off of a 10-5 season, however, one would have to be an idiot to start a (virtual) rookie over him. if you choose continue debating, fine, but keep in mind that these are the facts.
You seem to miss the fact that Russel and Quinn came out before Anderson's amazingly experienced Pro-Bowl-palooza. So, your summary makes no sense. Are you saying that coaches would start Anderson because they could see that he would have a breakout season? No, you are just babbling a bunch of goo that is stupid enough to make me respond. Then, you respond and say I'm continuing the argument.
If you want this argument to be over with, don't say anything more on the subject. I would be glad for the argument to keep going because that is the whole reason I started this thread - to cause argument.
Win, lose, or tie, Raiders 'til I die.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 260
2nd String
|
|
OP
2nd String
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 260 |
Quote:
Last I saw, he didn't make that much since he hasn't been starting or really playing that much.
How's that hole doing?
Something tells me he made more than you did last year.
I just noticed your signature. I'm sorry to hear that you support the punching of horses. Raider fans would never want Oakland players to hit animals. 
Win, lose, or tie, Raiders 'til I die.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 260
2nd String
|
|
OP
2nd String
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 260 |
Quote:
And your's is a very rich starting interception fat boy!
Russell is an interception fat boy? I'm telling on you.
Win, lose, or tie, Raiders 'til I die.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563 |
For a title as dumb as this, the thread has gotten a lot out of this Raider fan.
Browns > Raiders.
End O' Story.
you had a good run Hank.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 242
1st String
|
|
1st String
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 242 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,675
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,675 |
Quote:
Quote:
Last I saw, he didn't make that much since he hasn't been starting or really playing that much.
How's that hole doing?
Something tells me he made more than you did last year.
I just noticed your signature. I'm sorry to hear that you support the punching of horses. Raider fans would never want Oakland players to hit animals.
Since I'm in law school, I sure hope he made more than me last year, but relatively speaking, he was not an overpayed backup.
You're really peeing into the wind in the last few posts.
Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 260
2nd String
|
|
OP
2nd String
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 260 |
Quote:
For a title as dumb as this, the thread has gotten a lot out of this Raider fan.
Browns > Raiders.
End O' Story.
Yeah, I tried to make the most unpleasant title possible. I think I did a great job because everyone hates Al.
Browns lost to Oakland last time they played...
Win, lose, or tie, Raiders 'til I die.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 260
2nd String
|
|
OP
2nd String
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 260 |
Quote:
Derek Anderson is a better NFL quarterback, right now, than Jamarcus Russell. Your entire point was that he "doesn't have anything Russell doesn't", but he does. You can't just completely ignore the fact that one is a proven asset, while the other is not. If your argument is that Russell is more hyped than DA when DA was coming out of college, you're absolutely right. You seem to be saying that Anderson should not have started for Cleveland last year because he wasn't a blue chip prospect. He did, though, as you know, and led the team to 10 wins while throwing 29 touchdown passes. I don't think any of us see the point in discussing some ridiculous hypothetical fantasy scenario that's going on in your head in which we go back in time to 2007 and choose a starting quarterback. You truly make no sense. You can't just change the subject on a whim to suit whatever nonsensical argument you're making that a Bowl season hype QB that hasn't played is the second coming of Elway.
I will repeat myself again and say that Anderson doesn't have anything on Russell - physically. We already went over this.
And I said that Russell came into the NFL before Anderson was "experienced". At that time, both QBs were unproven and I think Russell would have won a starting job over Anderson - because he is more "gifted" than Anderson. I never mentioned stats or experience - you guys just brought that into my argument. I never said I thought Anderson shouldn't have started because he wasn't a "blue chip prospect". He obviously didn't win the starting job outright because he would have started week 1, but he won his back up position and then was able to hold the starting job.
"I don't think any of us see the point in discussing some ridiculous hypothetical fantasy scenario..."
Well, you keep replying so you obviously see some point in this discussion. If you don't, then simply don't reply.
Win, lose, or tie, Raiders 'til I die.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109 |
Quote:
Anyways, this grammar war should stop now. I was corrected, so I corrected someone.
Wrongly if I might add.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109 |
Quote:
I will repeat myself again and say that Anderson doesn't have anything on Russell - physically. We already went over this.
And I will repeat that if physically was all that important Tom Brady and Peyton Manning would be nothing other than a 3rd string quarterback like Ken Dorsey.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563 |
Quote:
Quote:
For a title as dumb as this, the thread has gotten a lot out of this Raider fan.
Browns > Raiders.
End O' Story.
Yeah, I tried to make the most unpleasant title possible. I think I did a great job because everyone hates Al.
Browns lost to Oakland last time they played...
Do you really want to argue that Oakland is a better team, right now, than the Browns?
you had a good run Hank.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 260
2nd String
|
|
OP
2nd String
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 260 |
Quote:
Wrongly if I might add.
I got you on the other one. You had an extra "t". Obviously an accident, just like my extra comma.
Win, lose, or tie, Raiders 'til I die.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 260
2nd String
|
|
OP
2nd String
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 260 |
Quote:
Do you really want to argue that Oakland is a better team, right now, than the Browns?
Right now neither team has a record. You could go off of last year's record, but then we wouldn't be arguing about who is the better team "right now". I don't know how you would argue at this point in the season.
Just because you had a good season last year, doesn't mean you will have another good one. Look at Oakland. In 2002, Oakland went to the Super Bowl. Next year, Oakland was 4-12.
Win, lose, or tie, Raiders 'til I die.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563 |
Quote:
Quote:
Do you really want to argue that Oakland is a better team, right now, than the Browns?
Right now neither team has a record. You could go off of last year's record, but then we wouldn't be arguing about who is the better team "right now". I don't know how you would argue at this point in the season.
Just because you had a good season last year, doesn't mean you will have another good one. Look at Oakland. In 2002, Oakland went to the Super Bowl. Next year, Oakland was 4-12.
Your team was old in 2002. That is why you fell off the face of the earth.
MY team is young and coming up. No matter how you look at it, the Browns have more talent than the Raiders.
you had a good run Hank.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 260
2nd String
|
|
OP
2nd String
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 260 |
Quote:
Your team was old in 2002. That is why you fell off the face of the earth.
MY team is young and coming up. No matter how you look at it, the Browns have more talent than the Raiders.
Yes, Oakland was old but my point still makes sense. Besides, young players are less experienced - sometimes more likely to make mistakes. Mistakes that could cost games.
More talent? Oakland is a very talented team with a ton of potential (It just has to be seen if the potential will turn into wins).
The only places I would say you had more talent are the O-line and WRs.
Tell me why you think the Browns have more talent than the Raiders.
Win, lose, or tie, Raiders 'til I die.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563 |
Quote:
Quote:
Your team was old in 2002. That is why you fell off the face of the earth.
MY team is young and coming up. No matter how you look at it, the Browns have more talent than the Raiders.
Yes, Oakland was old but my point still makes sense. Besides, young players are less experienced - sometimes more likely to make mistakes. Mistakes that could cost games.
More talent? Oakland is a very talented team with a ton of potential (It just has to be seen if the potential will turn into wins).
The only places I would say you had more talent are the O-line and WRs.
Tell me why you think the Browns have more talent than the Raiders.
Well, besides going 10-6.
The Browns have a pro bowler at NT in Shaun Rogers. They have a pro bowl returner in Cribbs, a pro bowler in Kellen Winslow who is probably the second best TE in the AFC. They have a Pro Bowl rookie LT, a very very good LG in Steinbach. The Browns also have the best FB in the NFL. You can also include Jamal Lewis who is in or near the top tier of NFL RB's, Corey Williams who has shown a lot of talent in Green Bay, and they have one of the best young Safety's in the game in Sean Jones. There is a reason the Browns are seen as a legit playoff contender.
Your team is maybe the second best team in the AFC West. Jamarcus Russell has talent, but i'll wait to see how that translates on the field. You have a very talented defense with Kirk Morrison and Thomas Howard. I've always liked Micheal Huff and D'Angelo Hall, who while having problems with his attitude, is a pretty talented player. Your offensive line is average at best, pretty decent at run blocking, which is good because you have one of the best young talents in the game with Darren McFadden. Other than that? WR's look very weak, and you have an unproven QB to go along with that on offense. Your team is like the Vikings of the AFC.
So, in a nutshell, that is why I think the Browns have more talent.
you had a good run Hank.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 260
2nd String
|
|
OP
2nd String
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 260 |
Quote:
Well, besides going 10-6.
The Browns have a pro bowler at NT in Shaun Rogers. They have a pro bowl returner in Cribbs, a pro bowler in Kellen Winslow who is probably the second best TE in the AFC. They have a Pro Bowl rookie LT, a very very good LG in Steinbach. The Browns also have the best FB in the NFL. You can also include Jamal Lewis who is in or near the top tier of NFL RB's, Corey Williams who has shown a lot of talent in Green Bay, and they have one of the best young Safety's in the game in Sean Jones. There is a reason the Browns are seen as a legit playoff contender.
Your team is maybe the second best team in the AFC West. Jamarcus Russell has talent, but i'll wait to see how that translates on the field. You have a very talented defense with Kirk Morrison and Thomas Howard. I've always liked Micheal Huff and D'Angelo Hall, who while having problems with his attitude, is a pretty talented player. Your offensive line is average at best, pretty decent at run blocking, which is good because you have one of the best young talents in the game with Darren McFadden. Other than that? WR's look very weak, and you have an unproven QB to go along with that on offense. Your team is like the Vikings of the AFC.
So, in a nutshell, that is why I think the Browns have more talent.
Honestly, I wasn't expecting the response you gave. I expected you to talk up the Browns and talk down the Raiders. You know a lot more about the Raiders than a non fan might. No one really mentions Morrison or Howard, although they are great players. No one ever mentions Asomugha because no one can spell/pronounce his name. He is also very good and Hall and Asomugha give Oakland a great corner tandem.
I don't know much about the Browns to be honest, so I will avoid an analysis like you provided. However, I still feel the Raiders are a very talented, young team.
Win, lose, or tie, Raiders 'til I die.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109 |
The Raiders have some talent but they have no O-Line and until they get one, they will continue to be at the bottom of the league. I think Asomugha is the best corner in the NFL.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563 |
Quote:
The Raiders have some talent but they have no O-Line and until they get one, they will continue to be at the bottom of the league. I think Asomugha is the best corner in the NFL.
Well, I guess, in someways you're right, and it really pains me to do this, but...
The Raiders have a very good run blocking line, they just have a very poor pass blocking line.
That is why you'll see the Raiders run, run and run some more this year.
you had a good run Hank.
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk The Smack Shack The Supreme Al Davis
|
|
