how about backing it up like this... because i sure as hell wouldn't want to play receiver with a guy who locks in on one guy. no, thanks. because if i had a chance to play for a guy who i thought was better, i'd want to do it. particularly since my salary is tied up in my productivity...and in my mind, at the very least, the QB has to be able to get me the damn ball. is that good enough? because that's the basis of my opinion on the matter. is that arrrogant to post that??? is it arrogant to think that? if you think so, do you know what arrogant means?
But until 15 minutes ago, no one had posted anything that suggested anyone on the team was upset with David Carr.
Do I think it's arrogant for Tobey Maguire to think like an NFL player? Yes I do. In all seriousness, I still don't see the big deal in someone asking for actual tangible evidence to back up an opinion like that.
No one had posted anything that suggested they loved him to death either. but MadMax is right - it won't matter - because Magistrate Judge Ric, administrator of the BBS Rules of Procedure, has built in a presumption in favor of his default view, so if you can't satisfy your burdens to his level - you lose.
that was good! but seriously...do you think Roger Clemens is coming back this year? be careful!!! the internet police are watching!!!!
you're right, max. (and msn. and major.) it's not irresponsible for YOU to suggest it; what i find irresponsible is that today's it's YOUR opinion; tomorrow it's anti-carr fan's FACT. "i heard eric moulds didn't like playing with carr..." THAT'S where i'm coming from. you guys don't need to deal in conjecture - you're better, smarter posters than that. it's a challenge to YOU to raise the level of discussion; to not inadvertently feed the masses who's only interests are to spit vitriol and misinformation to get a rise or some attention. if we've veered completely off course from that, or i've obscured that POV, i apologize for my role in doing so. but that's where i'm coming from. i expect crap like this from joe-radio-call-in-show douchebag and/or richard justice; not from people here who i know are better than that.
Do you seriously not see a difference between a) speculating on where a player might sign and b) saying that you believe a player is disliked by his teammates? If I said it was my opinion that Roger Clemens is going to the Yankees because he is actually having a homosexual relationship with Andy Pettitte, you would have absolutely no problem with me having that opinion? Or could you see where it'd be annoying if someone said I believe Roger Clemens is signing here and you asked if he had anything substantial to back that up and he said no and I don't have to. At the very least, that'd be annoying.
but MM, here's the fundamental difference with this post as opposed to those i was going after - you kept it about yourself; you didn't apply YOUR assumption/opinion to someone else.
But in this sentence, it's the guy who's misquoting that was irresponsible. See, you've taken your frustration with all this drivel out on myself and others. Then why couldn't you say so that forthrightly from the beginning? "msn, I think that's BS. And, when you post BS like that, somebody's going to run with it and turn it into this ridiculous Internet rumor." Instead, you levied all of your own vitriol against that kind of stuff at me. Thanks for the complement. And I respect your opinions very much. While I should have worded that original post very differently or just refrained, I still very much wonder how much patience our plus players have with roster dead weight like David Carr. And you know what--that's a valid question. That's all it is, but it is that.
i honestly had every intention of qualifying "players" with "offensive" since the discussion was rooted in talk of his offensive teammates regretting their decision to come here and/or basing their decision on whether or not to stay onhis performance, but it eventually got left off. so i'm trapped and will take my medicine here, as i doubt at this point i'd be allowed a clarification. so yes, it was false [whispering] though he contradicted it a week later.[/whispering]
come on. seriously. this is stretching it. stop using metaphor. just use the actual thing we're talking about. homosexual relationship?? i shouldn't have mentioned roger apparently. if you told me you just had a hunch that roger was coming back (which i do, probably because i HOPE he does) that wouldn't frustrate me in the least. we all have guesses/opinions as to what will happen. suggesting that receivers might not like playing with david carr...is that really that much of a stretch? i'm not asking you to label their sexuality. i'm not even asking you to say that the players don't LIKE david carr. but that they might want to play with a QB that's actually shown something...that's arrogant??
yeah, you meant more glaring posts like this one from updawg, which kinda kicked this off: Ric, no one is saying he is a pariah, but he very well could be a negative reason in these decisions in the near future.
My point wasn't really to do a "gotcha". It was more to point out that there is SOME reason to believe what we believe. Statements like that, combined with the fact that it would be logical for receivers to get frustrated when they don't get the ball (as was the case with Moulds all season and even AJ towards the end of the season - he didn't have a 100 yard game in his last 10 games, and didn't break 30 in 3 of his last 5) and the fact that we feel it was pretty clearly Carr's fault they couldn't get the ball. I don't think its a huge reach to think the receivers might be annoyed with Carr. That said, I have no problem with the opposing opinion. But I think all of our points (Max, msn, and mine) is just that it's a valid thing to consider as it may become a very real factor this offseason, even if it wasn't in the past.
yes, max, because you're seeing this through YOUR pov. is it "reasonable" to assume receivers might consider it a coup to play with carr based on aj's 2 pro bowl appearences in 3 years...? it supposes your opinion is automatically shared by others and discounts the any alternatives. i mean, honestly, MM, if you were called in by the texans to make a case for letting carr go, where would "his teammates and future teammates MIGHT not like playing with him" rank on your list?
I believe the original post that started all this off (even if it was in a different thread) was one by updawg that said he'd actually read that there were players upset with Carr (and I'm pretty sure updawg specifically said AJ or Moulds). When Ric asked for evidence, he refused to provide it.
What do you think? Put yourself into the mind of an NFL receiver. Are any of these unreasonable assumptions: 1. You want to catch footballs 2. You want to score TDs (and maybe do some dances) 3. You'd like to win 4. Your next contract will likely be based on your performance during this contract Now, consider these facts: 1. Carr got progressively worse throughout last season 2. Two free agent receivers who signed with this team last year had their worst seasons here 3. The coach openly stated that took the ball out of Carr's hands in one game, and it was clear in other games that he did the same towards the end of the season. Would you think this was a good situation for you, as a free agent receiver? Last offseason was different. The assumption was that with good receivers, Carr would be better. That Gaffney and Bradford sucked and so Carr had no other options. If you were Moulds, you felt like you could be that second receiver Carr desperately needed. And playing beside a guy who commands so much attention in Andre Johnson, you'd be open a lot. That equals lots of catches and opportunities to be involved. So yes, you'd sign here. But what about now, with another season of evidence to work with? Is there anything in there that is totally unreasonable?
