This guy looks like a moron now

[LP]

[quote="Partial
No, I'm implying he can hang around if he is A) a superstar (which I don't believe) or B) until they have a shot at a superstar in the draft or FA.[/quote]

Just curious, do you think Ted should try to replace Rodgers with Vince Young?

[Fritz]

Partial, if you ever watched any Lost in Space re-runs:

"Danger! Danger, Will Robinson! Do not answer that question!"

Dr. Smith is up to no good.

[Bretsky]

Not true. This is part of the problem with this forum. People read what they want to read, not what is actually written.

I said, verbatim, "If you don't have a superstar QB, you should actively pursue improving this position until you do, just like any other position". You should not NOT draft Peyton Manning because you have ARod, for example

And you already made up your mind that ARod is not a superstar and refuse to give him a chacne to be so. You are IMPLYING that Rodgers should be replaced becuase he isn't a superstar.

The implying argument is bullshit

Perhaps if people would stick to the facts and not try to make implications or quote a poster for something he never said it'd be more peaceful

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Not true. This is part of the problem with this forum. People read what they want to read, not what is actually written.

I said, verbatim, "If you don't have a superstar QB, you should actively pursue improving this position until you do, just like any other position". You should not NOT draft Peyton Manning because you have ARod, for example

And you already made up your mind that ARod is not a superstar and refuse to give him a chacne to be so. You are IMPLYING that Rodgers should be replaced becuase he isn't a superstar.

The implying argument is bullshit

Perhaps if people would stick to the facts and not try to make implications or quote a poster for something he never said it'd be more peaceful

Maybe i'm missing it, but it sure seems like, according to partial we should be pursuing a superstar QB since Arod isn't one.

What am i missing? I really can't follow his logic at all....we shouldn't draft a peyton manning since we have Arod?

[Bretsky]

Not true. This is part of the problem with this forum. People read what they want to read, not what is actually written.

I said, verbatim, "If you don't have a superstar QB, you should actively pursue improving this position until you do, just like any other position". You should not NOT draft Peyton Manning because you have ARod, for example

And you already made up your mind that ARod is not a superstar and refuse to give him a chacne to be so. You are IMPLYING that Rodgers should be replaced becuase he isn't a superstar.

The implying argument is bullshit

Perhaps if people would stick to the facts and not try to make implications or quote a poster for something he never said it'd be more peaceful

Maybe i'm missing it, but it sure seems like, according to partial we should be pursuing a superstar QB since Arod isn't one.

What am i missing? I really can't follow his logic at all....we shouldn't draft a peyton manning since we have Arod?

Has Partial left open the possibility that AROD can develop into one ?

I think his logic is simple and most do not agree with him

AROD had a decent year but not an exceptional one
AROD is still unproven and he can turn out much better or worse than year one
AROD could have engineered more late game comebacks
AROD is in the 12-16 range of QB's now; he may get better or worse
AROD is NOT the sole reason they lost all of those games but shares the blame in those losses

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Not true. This is part of the problem with this forum. People read what they want to read, not what is actually written.

I said, verbatim, "If you don't have a superstar QB, you should actively pursue improving this position until you do, just like any other position". You should not NOT draft Peyton Manning because you have ARod, for example

And you already made up your mind that ARod is not a superstar and refuse to give him a chacne to be so. You are IMPLYING that Rodgers should be replaced becuase he isn't a superstar.

The implying argument is bullshit

Perhaps if people would stick to the facts and not try to make implications or quote a poster for something he never said it'd be more peaceful

Maybe i'm missing it, but it sure seems like, according to partial we should be pursuing a superstar QB since Arod isn't one.

What am i missing? I really can't follow his logic at all....we shouldn't draft a peyton manning since we have Arod?

Has Partial left open the possibility that AROD can develop into one ?

I think his logic is simple and most do not agree with him

AROD had a decent year but not an exceptional one
AROD is still unproven and he can turn out much better or worse than year one
AROD could have engineered more late game comebacks
AROD is in the 12-16 range of QB's now; he may get better or worse
AROD is NOT the sole reason they lost all of those games but shares the blame in those losses

No, I'm implying he can hang around if he is A) a superstar (which I don't believe) or B) until they have a shot at a superstar in the draft or FA.

1. For a first year starter, it was exceptional. The stats don't lie.
2. True. Nobody on this forum has suggested otherwise. Most were happy with him, and hope he continues to progress. This would be the case if Arod's predecessor was Brett, Majik, Dickey, Culpepper, Montana, etc.
3. False. Harv has shown this to false repeatedly. As has Patler.
4. Ok, but it is calling him average that bothers folks. Partial has shown little if any inclination to say he will get better.
5. Wrong. Partail puts most of the blame on the offense, the offense is lead by Arod. Arod is to blame. Partial puts the blame 50% at minimum on the offense. The fact that our ST and defense were poor, means nothing.

When we play against good defenses like tenn....arod blew it. Partial devalues the opponent at every turn to blame the offense.

Any and all success ARod had was due to the "unbelievable talent," "top 5 wr" and good TE, line and RBs. THat leaves him plenty of room to say if we lose those players and the offense sputters, "see, without great talent, he can't do anything."

[cpk1994]

No, I'm implying he can hang around if he is A) a superstar (which I don't believe) or B) until they have a shot at a superstar in the draft or FA.

1. For a first year starter, it was exceptional. The stats don't lie.
2. True. Nobody on this forum has suggested otherwise. Most were happy with him, and hope he continues to progress. This would be the case if Arod's predecessor was Brett, Majik, Dickey, Culpepper, Montana, etc.
3. False. Harv has shown this to false repeatedly. As has Patler.
4. Ok, but it is calling him average that bothers folks. Partial has shown little if any inclination to say he will get better.
5. Wrong. Partail puts most of the blame on the offense, the offense is lead by Arod. Arod is to blame. Partial puts the blame 50% at minimum on the offense. The fact that our ST and defense were poor, means nothing.

When we play against good defenses like tenn....arod blew it. Partial devalues the opponent at every turn to blame the offense.

Any and all success ARod had was due to the "unbelievable talent," "top 5 wr" and good TE, line and RBs.

This pretty much sums Partial's bullshit up. Nice work.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Thanks.

Bretsky...i think you would be hardpressed to find anyone who is claiming Arod is a superstar or the greatest thing since sliced bread. We are pleased with what he showed and based upon that we hoping for better days ahead.

But, in the NFL, transitioning from one QB to the next...we sure appear to be in much better shape than many teams that have sputtered to find a qb: vikes, bears, bills, cleveland, rams, oakland, tampa, detroit, etc.

[Bretsky]

Thanks.

Bretsky...i think you would be hardpressed to find anyone who is claiming Arod is a superstar or the greatest thing since sliced bread. We are pleased with what he showed and based upon that we hoping for better days ahead.

But, in the NFL, transitioning from one QB to the next...we sure appear to be in much better shape than many teams that have sputtered to find a qb: vikes, bears, bills, cleveland, rams, oakland, tampa, detroit, etc.

Honestly our views are probably about the same; you comented on all of the points I made and I could poke holes in each one of your comments as well. And you could polk holes back...etc etc..

A while back RG was the guy everybody disrespected and bagged one....as a poster instead of his posts

Now I see P being that guy

[HarveyWallbangers]

Partial probably deserves it. I wish he'd talk about his supermodel girlfriend from Florida again. The ARod bit is getting stale.

[Bretsky]

The dirty talk has definitely been lacking around here lately

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Thanks.

Bretsky...i think you would be hardpressed to find anyone who is claiming Arod is a superstar or the greatest thing since sliced bread. We are pleased with what he showed and based upon that we hoping for better days ahead.

But, in the NFL, transitioning from one QB to the next...we sure appear to be in much better shape than many teams that have sputtered to find a qb: vikes, bears, bills, cleveland, rams, oakland, tampa, detroit, etc.

Honestly our views are probably about the same; you comented on all of the points I made and I could poke holes in each one of your comments as well. And you could polk holes back...etc etc..

A while back RG was the guy everybody disrespected and bagged one....as a poster instead of his posts

Now I see P being that guy

IF ours are probably the same...then you are with most of this forum..cept for the radicals who blindly hate.

Poke holes: Sorry, i doubt it. Those are the facts. I'd be curious as to the holes you would poke. I dont' think they would be holes..i think we/you would be refining the statements...a big difference.

Partial is being attacked for what he writes, for his logic..and his steadfast, unwavering wavering. When you get a large consensus of people who think differently and use different methodologies to come to mass agreement and conclusion on the nature of his posts....that speaks volumes.

I have had my arguments with Partial, yes, but they are over his facts and usage. Toss me out. Do you think that Patler should be tossed as well? The long list of posters arguing with partial is impressive in diversity.

Partial is like cancer. There are many ways to attack it. And, like cancer we only want to see him in remission or at least contained...so we all may enjoy our packer life.

[cpk1994]

The dirty talk has definitely been lacking around here lately

Don't give Skinbasket any exucse to post porn.

[LP]

Partial, if you ever watched any Lost in Space re-runs:

"Danger! Danger, Will Robinson! Do not answer that question!"

Dr. Smith is up to no good.

Hey now, I resemble that remark!

[Scott Campbell]

A while back RG was the guy everybody disrespected and bagged one....as a poster instead of his posts.

I didn't see it like that. The comments disrespected Sherman.


And I like Partial. We'd all probably miss him if he were gone.