Quote Originally Posted by Fritz View Post
Here's your exact quote, Wist:

"The only way we can run the ball is by using the pass to set up the run..."

Notice your word choice: the "only" way. You didn't say, except sometimes they do it. You said "only," and when someone calls you on it, you excuse it as the exception and fall back on your usual namecalling - we're all "homers."

So if you don't mean "only," then don't choose that word.

You argue, over and over again, that you are spot-on correct in your analysis. Any evidence counter to your ideas you excuse as irrelevant, or so occasional as to not count, or sheer luck. Like your infamous claim that the whole 2010 SB run was luck.

So you're always right because you dismiss anything that doesn't fit your pre-conceived notions.

And you talk about other people being unrealistic.
Like I said... years of ineptitude is erased with 1 instance in which they ran for a 1st down - and this is what you guys hang your hat on??

In a court of law circumstantial evidence can be dismissed if it is thread bare and does not amount to weight. The weight in this case however, is on my side of the argument - it is you guys who are in denial.

In terms of running the ball, we can't consistently do it b/c of philosophical reasons; and in terms of stopping the run, the same is true. When the coaching staffs on either side of the ball get their heads of out their asses, i.e. MM incorporates some power running plays, and dunderdummy gets away from his beloved 2-4 and actually schemes an effort to hold down the LOS - then we can at least be average on both sides of the ball; but that doesn't happen very often, does it??

It is you guys who are trying to defend the blind squirrel.