Optimist vs Pessimist

GumboBC · 04-08-2005, 06:01 PM

Laughable at best. I gave two arguments that shot swiss cheese through everything you said, and I get zero facts or stats back. I get \"the offense was 2nd in the league in scoring\" yet you belittle the o-line at every turn and talk crap about Deuce in another thread, as if our QB was the reason for that ranking. Nice sell there. I am sure there are some immigrants who don\'t yet understand football you can sell that too. Explain Jake being FAR from terrible in the Superbowl, when his defense and running game were crap. Explain our QB completing 53.6% of his passes in a season, and having 20 turnovers in the year in question. You can\'t, so you bluster and flap your arms. Come out from behind the curtain wizard, we aren\'t in Oz any more. You are being exposed as a fraud.

Nice try. But ... I\'m not going to let you turn the table on me. NO SIR.

As soon as you answer my questions then we can move on to your little stat analysis.

Question number one:

1. How did the Panthers get to the super bowl when Delhomme had more turnovers than Brooks?

2. How did our offense score the 2nd most points in the NFC in 2002?

Don\'t want to answer? No problem ... Stop while you are ahead.

[Edited on 8/4/2005 by GumboBC]

spkb25 · 04-08-2005, 06:06 PM

i think im both depends on the week. haha

saintswhodi · 04-08-2005, 06:08 PM

Question one, did Jake or AB lead the league in LOST FUMBLES? AB. Was Jake a first year starter, or 3rd year like AB? First. Jake had 22 total turnovers, AB had 19, yeah huge difference. Nice call. How did the Panthers make the Superbowl? A LOT of good fortune, and a QB with a heart and half a brain.

Question 2, because we had Deuce and Joe Horn, and an awesome rookie season from Donte for the time he played. Little to do with a twenty turnover 53.6% cpmpletion percentage QB. Your turn.

GumboBC · 04-08-2005, 06:14 PM

Question one, did Jake or AB lead the league in LOST FUMBLES? AB. Was Jake a first year starter, or 3rd year like AB? First. Jake had 22 total turnovers, AB had 19, yeah huge difference. Nice call. How did the Panthers make the Superbowl? A LOT of good fortune, and a QB with a heart and half a brain.

Question 2, because we had Deuce and Joe Horn, and an awesome rookie season from Donte for the time he played. Little to do with a twenty turnover 53.6% cpmpletion percentage QB. Your turn.

You said exactly what I wanted you to say.

It\'s obvious that you give AB no credit for the offense in 2002. And you give him all the blame for every other year. And you called me a fraud? Dude, I\'m not going to belitte you like you did me. But, the only one being exposed is you.

And furthermore ... turnovers are turnovers. Delhomme had 22 and Brooks had 19. Yet the Panthers went to the superbowl despite those turnovers.

Again, I\'m not going to belitte you. I just post the facts. I never thought I\'d change your mind to begin with. I just wanted all of this out there for the world to read.

saintfan · 04-08-2005, 06:51 PM

A LOT of good fortune

Good Fortune? What? You mean Luck? Whodat has raked me over the coals for suggesting such a thing -- which I did suggest and I do agree with. Where ya at Whodat? Please explain to Whodi like you did to me about how there\'s no such thing as luck in the NFL. LMAO

saintswhodi · 04-08-2005, 07:15 PM

Gumbo, if you keep falsely claiming to prove points just so you can avoid answering queries that YOU have no answer for, I am sure people will be able to read for themselves what\'s going on. But just so everyone understands, Gumbo is calling me out cause I believe a first year starter who QB\'d his team to the Superbowl and single-handedly almost won it deserves a little more slack than a 5 year starter who still can\'t complete near 60% of his passes, leads the league in lost fumbles in his 3rd year, and leads the league in red zone turnovers his 4th, running his mouth the whole time. We all understand Gumbo.

saintfan, oh yes, luck had plenty to do with the Panthers good fortunes. I know one game we should have beaten them in OT, and Deuce fumbles at the two or something after a long run, they turned around scored and won. I mean, that\'s a little luck. And all the close games they won? Someone was smiling on them. Who can rake me over the coals for saying that if he likes.

[Edited on 8/4/2005 by saintswhodi]

GumboBC · 04-08-2005, 07:23 PM

Gumbo, if you keep falsely claiming to prove points just so you can avoid answering queries that YOU have no answer for, I am sure people will be able to read for themselves what\'s going on

Falsely claiming to prove points? Hey, dude, you\'re the one always talking about Brooks\' turnovers and how they\'ve been holding us back.

And how do I respond to your statement about Brooks\' turnovers? Well, I let you know that Delhomme had more and he went to the super bowl. So did Tom Brady.

If that ain\'t proving a point, then I don\'t know what is !!

That doesn\'t mean I like Brooks turning the ball over and it doesn\'t mean that Brooks doesn\'t need to lower his turnovers. It just means that that isn\'t the reason for us missing the playoffs.

Unless you can explain to me how Delhomme and Tom Brady got their teams to the playoffs with all of those turnovers. And an intelligent answer would be nice. And the little snide comments can be left out as well.

I\'m sure other members can read too, saintwhodi. But my comparisions are solid.

saintswhodi · 04-08-2005, 07:39 PM

How are your comparisons solid? I have no idea how you draw these conclusions. My comments are not snide, they are coming from a point of being perplexed. You have proved NOTHING. We weren\'t even talking about Tom Brady so how did you prove anything about him? Anyone who can read can go back and see that. So what are you proving? NOTHING. EVER. I have given you answers you just wanna ignore and refuse to answer the questions I posed to you. You are like the boxer that raises his hand at the end of a fight even though he got his head beat in. Come on man. Let\'s get real for a second.

Delhomme was a first year starter. Brady is considered the second coming of Montana. And one of the best if not THE best QB in the league. You can\'t do better than to find a first year starter who in his second year VASTLY IMPROVED his numbers on a WORSE TEAM and a QB who has 3 Superbowl rings? Both have been to a Superbowl, where is your boy? Do you want someone to say they have better teams? Is that what you are trying to harp on? That\'s no point at all. We aren\'t talking about our QB getting us to the Superbowl, we are talking about simply MAKING THE PLAYOFFS. Both of these QBs went to the Superbowl in their first years starting. Bledsoe couldn\'t do it, Brady did. QB made the TEAM better. Panthers were 1-15, then 7-9 before Delhomme. With Jake they go to the Superbowl. QB MADE THE TEAM BETTER. So what point have you proven? None, again, but keep raising your arms. Punch drunkedness is excused. :P

mutineer10 · 04-08-2005, 07:48 PM

Ahh, it\'s just like the good old days...

Apparently the draft is coming just a couple weeks too late to keep the \"AB discussion ban\" going ... suits me. I\'ve always kinda liked the AB debates.

But \"he-who-must-not-be-named\" vs. AB??? That one goes WAY back...

Keep it up fellas, I\'m enjoying it (not sarcasm)

GumboBC · 04-08-2005, 07:50 PM

My comments are not snide, they are coming from a point of being perplexed.

I like you, saintwhodi. But there is no need for \"snide\" little comments like this one:

Come out from behind the curtain wizard, we aren\'t in Oz any more. You are being exposed as a fraud.

I don\'t care why you say things like that ... there is no need for it as things can turn ugly very quickly when things like that are said. And I don\'t particularly like being called a fraud. Can\'t we do without those kind of comments. I\'m not going to respond with anything simular and I\'d really like to be left out when it comes to comments like that. But, no hard feelings.

You have proved NOTHING. We weren\'t even talking about Tom Brady so how did you prove anything about him?

So Delhomme turning the ball over has no bearing on how QBs turning the ball over affects their teams? Are we only to look at Brooks and the offense in a vaccum? IMHO, that would be pretty closed minded. Can\'t we put Brooks\' turnovers in some kind of context. IMO, without context there is no arguement.

And you and I have discussed Brady\'s turnovers before. As well as many other QBs who had about the same number of turnovers as Brooks. Surly you remember. If not then I can post them again.

[Edited on 8/4/2005 by GumboBC]

04-08-2005, 06:01 PM	#11
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616	Optimist vs Pessimist Laughable at best. I gave two arguments that shot swiss cheese through everything you said, and I get zero facts or stats back. I get \"the offense was 2nd in the league in scoring\" yet you belittle the o-line at every turn and talk crap about Deuce in another thread, as if our QB was the reason for that ranking. Nice sell there. I am sure there are some immigrants who don\'t yet understand football you can sell that too. Explain Jake being FAR from terrible in the Superbowl, when his defense and running game were crap. Explain our QB completing 53.6% of his passes in a season, and having 20 turnovers in the year in question. You can\'t, so you bluster and flap your arms. Come out from behind the curtain wizard, we aren\'t in Oz any more. You are being exposed as a fraud. Nice try. But ... I\'m not going to let you turn the table on me. NO SIR. As soon as you answer my questions then we can move on to your little stat analysis. Question number one: 1. How did the Panthers get to the super bowl when Delhomme had more turnovers than Brooks? 2. How did our offense score the 2nd most points in the NFC in 2002? Don\'t want to answer? No problem ... Stop while you are ahead. [Edited on 8/4/2005 by GumboBC]
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616

04-08-2005, 06:06 PM	#12
spkb25 10000 POST CLUB Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Baltimore, MD Posts: 13,097	Optimist vs Pessimist i think im both depends on the week. haha

04-08-2005, 06:08 PM	#13
saintswhodi 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 6,941	Optimist vs Pessimist Question one, did Jake or AB lead the league in LOST FUMBLES? AB. Was Jake a first year starter, or 3rd year like AB? First. Jake had 22 total turnovers, AB had 19, yeah huge difference. Nice call. How did the Panthers make the Superbowl? A LOT of good fortune, and a QB with a heart and half a brain. Question 2, because we had Deuce and Joe Horn, and an awesome rookie season from Donte for the time he played. Little to do with a twenty turnover 53.6% cpmpletion percentage QB. Your turn.

04-08-2005, 06:14 PM	#14
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616	Optimist vs Pessimist Question one, did Jake or AB lead the league in LOST FUMBLES? AB. Was Jake a first year starter, or 3rd year like AB? First. Jake had 22 total turnovers, AB had 19, yeah huge difference. Nice call. How did the Panthers make the Superbowl? A LOT of good fortune, and a QB with a heart and half a brain. Question 2, because we had Deuce and Joe Horn, and an awesome rookie season from Donte for the time he played. Little to do with a twenty turnover 53.6% cpmpletion percentage QB. Your turn. You said exactly what I wanted you to say. It\'s obvious that you give AB no credit for the offense in 2002. And you give him all the blame for every other year. And you called me a fraud? Dude, I\'m not going to belitte you like you did me. But, the only one being exposed is you. And furthermore ... turnovers are turnovers. Delhomme had 22 and Brooks had 19. Yet the Panthers went to the superbowl despite those turnovers. Again, I\'m not going to belitte you. I just post the facts. I never thought I\'d change your mind to begin with. I just wanted all of this out there for the world to read.
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616

04-08-2005, 06:51 PM	#15
saintfan Donated Plasma Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: San Francisco, CA Posts: 18,556 Blog Entries: 5	Optimist vs Pessimist A LOT of good fortune Good Fortune? What? You mean Luck? Whodat has raked me over the coals for suggesting such a thing -- which I did suggest and I do agree with. Where ya at Whodat? Please explain to Whodi like you did to me about how there\'s no such thing as luck in the NFL. LMAO

Latest Blogs
2023 New Orleans Saints: Training Camp Last Blog: 08-01-2023 By: MarchingOn Puck the Fro Browl! Last Blog: 02-05-2023 By: neugey CFP: "Just Keep Doing What You're Doing" Last Blog: 12-08-2022 By: neugey

04-08-2005, 07:15 PM	#16
saintswhodi 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 6,941	Optimist vs Pessimist Gumbo, if you keep falsely claiming to prove points just so you can avoid answering queries that YOU have no answer for, I am sure people will be able to read for themselves what\'s going on. But just so everyone understands, Gumbo is calling me out cause I believe a first year starter who QB\'d his team to the Superbowl and single-handedly almost won it deserves a little more slack than a 5 year starter who still can\'t complete near 60% of his passes, leads the league in lost fumbles in his 3rd year, and leads the league in red zone turnovers his 4th, running his mouth the whole time. We all understand Gumbo. saintfan, oh yes, luck had plenty to do with the Panthers good fortunes. I know one game we should have beaten them in OT, and Deuce fumbles at the two or something after a long run, they turned around scored and won. I mean, that\'s a little luck. And all the close games they won? Someone was smiling on them. Who can rake me over the coals for saying that if he likes. [Edited on 8/4/2005 by saintswhodi]

04-08-2005, 07:23 PM	#17
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616	Optimist vs Pessimist Gumbo, if you keep falsely claiming to prove points just so you can avoid answering queries that YOU have no answer for, I am sure people will be able to read for themselves what\'s going on Falsely claiming to prove points? Hey, dude, you\'re the one always talking about Brooks\' turnovers and how they\'ve been holding us back. And how do I respond to your statement about Brooks\' turnovers? Well, I let you know that Delhomme had more and he went to the super bowl. So did Tom Brady. If that ain\'t proving a point, then I don\'t know what is !! That doesn\'t mean I like Brooks turning the ball over and it doesn\'t mean that Brooks doesn\'t need to lower his turnovers. It just means that that isn\'t the reason for us missing the playoffs. Unless you can explain to me how Delhomme and Tom Brady got their teams to the playoffs with all of those turnovers. And an intelligent answer would be nice. And the little snide comments can be left out as well. I\'m sure other members can read too, saintwhodi. But my comparisions are solid.
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616

04-08-2005, 07:39 PM	#18
saintswhodi 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 6,941	Optimist vs Pessimist How are your comparisons solid? I have no idea how you draw these conclusions. My comments are not snide, they are coming from a point of being perplexed. You have proved NOTHING. We weren\'t even talking about Tom Brady so how did you prove anything about him? Anyone who can read can go back and see that. So what are you proving? NOTHING. EVER. I have given you answers you just wanna ignore and refuse to answer the questions I posed to you. You are like the boxer that raises his hand at the end of a fight even though he got his head beat in. Come on man. Let\'s get real for a second. Delhomme was a first year starter. Brady is considered the second coming of Montana. And one of the best if not THE best QB in the league. You can\'t do better than to find a first year starter who in his second year VASTLY IMPROVED his numbers on a WORSE TEAM and a QB who has 3 Superbowl rings? Both have been to a Superbowl, where is your boy? Do you want someone to say they have better teams? Is that what you are trying to harp on? That\'s no point at all. We aren\'t talking about our QB getting us to the Superbowl, we are talking about simply MAKING THE PLAYOFFS. Both of these QBs went to the Superbowl in their first years starting. Bledsoe couldn\'t do it, Brady did. QB made the TEAM better. Panthers were 1-15, then 7-9 before Delhomme. With Jake they go to the Superbowl. QB MADE THE TEAM BETTER. So what point have you proven? None, again, but keep raising your arms. Punch drunkedness is excused. :P

04-08-2005, 07:48 PM	#19
mutineer10 Site Donor Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Baton Rouge, LA Posts: 1,739	Optimist vs Pessimist Ahh, it\'s just like the good old days... Apparently the draft is coming just a couple weeks too late to keep the \"AB discussion ban\" going ... suits me. I\'ve always kinda liked the AB debates. But \"he-who-must-not-be-named\" vs. AB??? That one goes WAY back... Keep it up fellas, I\'m enjoying it (not sarcasm)

04-08-2005, 07:50 PM	#20
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616	Optimist vs Pessimist My comments are not snide, they are coming from a point of being perplexed. I like you, saintwhodi. But there is no need for \"snide\" little comments like this one: Come out from behind the curtain wizard, we aren\'t in Oz any more. You are being exposed as a fraud. I don\'t care why you say things like that ... there is no need for it as things can turn ugly very quickly when things like that are said. And I don\'t particularly like being called a fraud. Can\'t we do without those kind of comments. I\'m not going to respond with anything simular and I\'d really like to be left out when it comes to comments like that. But, no hard feelings. You have proved NOTHING. We weren\'t even talking about Tom Brady so how did you prove anything about him? So Delhomme turning the ball over has no bearing on how QBs turning the ball over affects their teams? Are we only to look at Brooks and the offense in a vaccum? IMHO, that would be pretty closed minded. Can\'t we put Brooks\' turnovers in some kind of context. IMO, without context there is no arguement. And you and I have discussed Brady\'s turnovers before. As well as many other QBs who had about the same number of turnovers as Brooks. Surly you remember. If not then I can post them again. [Edited on 8/4/2005 by GumboBC]
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616