Second year QB?

[Splat]

Which second year QB will have the best season.

[Splat]

FYI I listed a few QB's that should not see the field unless a starter gets hurt for you homer fans.

[The Dynasty]

Tarvaris Jackson i hope.

Im going to say Cutler because of the weapons around him and the defense.

[draftguru151]

http://profile.ak.facebook.com/object/1781/43/n2225178837_38448.jpg

[Yung Flippa]

Tavaris Jackson, If Minnesota Gets Him Some Help

[princefielder28]

Matt Leinart with all those weapons and Ken Whisenhut

[Smooth Criminal]

I think it'll be Leinart. I think he will excel in Whisenhunts system and with the weapons around him. I expect Whis and Grimm to solve some of the O-line problems and finally take advantage of some of the great weapons he had.

[Young Nasty Man]

I would say Leinart but I can never really say anything positive about Arizona from last season. Vince Young is an easy answer but they have a lot of holes to fill considering they lost all of their running backs and evne thoguh he is a scrambler there are a lot of question marks. Cutler has the best potential to thrive. He has the arm and he is getting weapons on the offense. I'll be shocked if Denver doesn't do anyhting to their offense in the draft. Jay Cutler is the answer to that question.

[BuckNaked]

It's nice to see more people think Tarvaris Jackson will have a better year than Vince Young.

[remix 6]

It's nice to see more people think Tarvaris Jackson will have a better year than Vince Young.

VY lost weapons..Bennett..Henry. i cant see a lot of success as much as a sophomore slump

im gonna say Leinart
hes got arguably the best duo at WR..hes got Pope at TE..James at RB, new coach and should be improved OL

i see Cardinals heading in right direction which includes Leinart having a good year

[Severe Punishment]

VY lost his weapons, Jackson doesn't have but 1 to begin with.
Seriously, he's probably going to stink...just like the team.

[niel89]

cutler by a good amount. he is in the best situation. good defense, Denver running game, good weapons: walker, marshall, smith, schefler, graham. the kid was pretty good last year and should really excell after a year in the system and a better running game

[MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)]

http://profile.ak.facebook.com/object/1781/43/n2225178837_38448.jpg

Keep preachin' my brotha.

[MP123]

I think Leinart because I believe he's ahead of Cutler and Young as far as progression goes. I think he'll throw for over 3,000 yards with 25 touchdowns and <13 interceptions.

[etk]

FYI I listed a few QB's that should not see the field unless a starter gets hurt for you homer fans.

I voted for Gradkowski, and I gave you rep. I think that's what you wanted, right :)

[GiantRutgersFan]

I voted Cutler, but I think him and Leinart are gonna be close. Leinart has loads of weapons and SHOULD have a great offense. But then again there the Cardinals who always find a way to suck.


Tavaris Jackson lol

[etk]

Brucey has one less vote than Vince Young!!

:D:D:D

[ninerfan]

Lienart has the best weapons to throw to

[Auron]

I voted Cutler. I think with Travis Henry in the fold he'll have a reliable running game to help him, Javon Walker should have a great season, Marshall has another year in the system, and he'll have some great safety valves at TE in Graham, Scheffler.

[Space Ghost]

Quinton Porter FTW!!!

[Hurricane Ditka]

VY is a god.

[Titans10]

http://profile.ak.facebook.com/object/1781/43/n2225178837_38448.jpg

Cutler by a long shot. He has Henry to take pressure off the passing game and weapons in walker, scheffler, marshall and graham and of course they have a great defense in Denver.

[soybean]

Cutler by a long shot. He has Henry to take pressure off the passing game and weapons in walker, scheffler, marshall and graham and of course they have a great defense in Denver.

sooo cardinals have no weapons, long shot?

[HoopsDemon12]

If they can get matt some protection even a second longer....hes a pro bowler next year fo sho

[elway777]

Vince Young will put up 800 yards rushing with a 80+ QB rating. Young ftw.

[Staubach12]

Cutler. He's got the talent aroung him and great play himself. He's going to be very good. Leinart is a close 2nd. Young will dissapoint. Jackson will show potential, but won't do anything worth writing home about.

[Shiver]

I think Jay Cutler is a slam-dunk.

[Windy]

http://img403.imageshack.us/img403/6792/jaycutlergheyvo9.gif

[The Unseen]

Maurice Drew.

[Auron]

sooo cardinals have no weapons, long shot?

They definitely do, they've had great weapons for a while now.

What they need is some consistent play along the O-line, and with that will bring a threat from the running game. After that everything will fall in place for the QB.

If Whisenhunt can bring that to AZ, then they will be legit..until I see that though I'm going to be cautious in picking big things for the Cards.

['cuse-213]

Clemens goes onto beat pennignton in TC and win the division over the patriots.

[Xiomera]

1. Leinart
2. Cutler
3. Young

[Scotty D]

Cutler is in the best situation and I expect his team to do the best. But I think Young will perform the best individually. And who the hell is Quinton Porter?

[TCU]

I think that Brodie Croyle should get some serious playing time this year.

[doingthisinsteadofwork]

I said Croyle just cause I liked him alot coming out of college.
BUt in all seriousness its gotta be Cutler.best supporting cast.

[MP123]

Clemens goes onto beat pennignton in TC and win the division over the patriots.

You have got to be kidding me. Pennington's contract is $63 million. That alone will make him the starter. Also, he played very well last season. Clemens will have to be traded or become a free agent to be a starter.

[njx9]

i hope all 6 tarvaris jackson votes were from vikings homers. otherwise, someone may need their head checked.

[etk]

i hope all 6 tarvaris jackson votes were from vikings homers. otherwise, someone may need their head checked.

But he has such a live arm......

[Javzz]

If there's one thing I've learned in my football watching career, it's don't count out Vince Young.

[njx9]

If there's one thing I've learned in my football watching career, it's don't count out Vince Young.

he should be a WR.

[KILLERSANTA]

I voted Matt Leinart....Jay Cutler Sucks.....:)

[kris k]

Though I am a Cardinals fan and it would probably seem like a biased thought. I truly believe Leinart will have the most signifcant progress out of all the first year QB's. He'll have another year to be in sync with Boldin, Fitz, Johnson, and Pope. (news in 'zona are saying that Boldin, Fitz and Leinart are meeting regularly to catch and build rythm.)

[soybean]

I voted Matt Leinart....Jay Cutler Sucks.....:)

oh no you didnt! release the hounds! saying cutler sucks on this board is like saying calvin johnson is overrated or reggie bush can be a premier back. :)

[Space Ghost]

And who the hell is Quinton Porter?

The guy I voted for because its too early. I looked him up after and found out he was the BC Eagles quarterback.

[cardsalltheway]

http://profile.ak.facebook.com/object/1781/43/n2225178837_38448.jpg

QFT. 10.....

[BroadwayJoe10]

are we going on wins or individual stats..cause as far as im concerned the only thing that matters is who has the most tallies in the win column and who helped their team get them...i think cutler is in the position to have the most wins and i think vince young will.. hell, he'll be vince young...and of course leinhart will throw up some gaudy stats but as far as wins go, as much as i want the cardinals to turn it around i just can't beleive it till i see it

[Non_Sequitur]

Vince Young.

I'm officially a convert. I wasn't a fan of Crayons Young as he came out of college.




Watch out for Clemens if Pennington gets injured though. That guy is a first round talent and would have went in front of Cutler had he not broken his leg in his senior season.

[doingthisinsteadofwork]

I highly doubt that.

[smittyjs]

Cutler will have the best season, with Young in a close second.

[smittyjs]

oh no you didnt! release the hounds! saying cutler sucks on this board is like saying calvin johnson is overrated or reggie bush can be a premier back. :)
Are part of the Dogs :) ;)

[smittyjs]

VY lost weapons..Bennett..Henry. i cant see a lot of success as much as a sophomore slump

im gonna say Leinart
hes got arguably the best duo at WR..hes got Pope at TE..James at RB, new coach and should be improved OL

i see Cardinals heading in right direction which includes Leinart having a good year
Bennett wasn't much of a lost, if Brandon jones can step up like the coaches are thinkin then i can only see young struggling for a few games, but injuries could kill the connection. I'm worried about henry, but i think Young will elp White and the rest of the running game like he did with Henry last season.

[OzTitan]

he should be a WR.

How on earth a troll became a mod here is still beyond me.

[niel89]

How on earth a troll became a mod here is still beyond me.

im fairly sure that was a joke

[njx9]

How on earth a troll became a mod here is still beyond me.

speaking of massive homer who can't take a joke when it involves a titans player. if that wasn't already such a pathetic response to a clear and obvious joke, i would go further, but you already made yourself look stupider than i ever could. congrats.

[niel89]

speaking of massive homer who can't take a joke when it involves a titans player. if that wasn't already such a pathetic response to a clear and obvious joke, i would go further, but you already made yourself look stupider than i ever could. congrats.

i know VY would be a much better running back than a WR

[njx9]

i know VY would be a much better running back than a WR

i really thought he should've been a safety. i mean, he's quick enough to play most tight ends, but his hieght would be a major advantage... although, realistically, he'd probably need at least 5-6 years to learn the position first.

[BlindSite]

Matt Leinart. Easily. IMO he's going to be a tom brady figure in 3 years. He'll take Arizona to a superbowl over the next 5 years and come away with a ring.

[TheChampIsHere]

Im predicting Vince to go through a little bit of a sophmore slump as DCs devise ways to take his legs away from him and its gonna be hard to do what he did last year again...And the Titans didnt do much to improve the talent level of the team this offseason, this is a team with a lot of holes.

So I think its Cutler or Leinart, who I both expect to have good years. Theyre both in very good situations and are promising young players.

[TheChampIsHere]

speaking of massive homer who can't take a joke when it involves a titans player. if that wasn't already such a pathetic response to a clear and obvious joke, i would go further, but you already made yourself look stupider than i ever could. congrats.

ahhh.....first post Ive noticed from you anywhere in a little while....and what do ya know? Insulting people, acting like youre smarter than everyone else....etc etc

And what was it you said, something about you only insult people who are stupid? And all this coming from a guy who is claiming that the guy who won the OROY and 2 rose bowls playing QB should be playing WR or S....And HES the dumb one.

[wogitalia]

Tavaris Jackson, If Minnesota Gets Him Some Help

We dont have enough draft picks to get him the kind of help he needs. We refuse to sign FA's and as it stands we currently have a very good LG and C, a good LT and an average RB. We dont have a WR who should be higher than 3rd in a depth chart and our starting TE going into the season is a complete unknown.

I vote Leinart, he looked really good as the season went on and has by far the best receiving corp of those listed.

Cutler is an obvious second option.

Brodie Croyle is the surprise option, depends on what happens with Green, but if Croyle ends up starting, he has some weapons out there are a line that whilst not as good as a few years ago is still solid.

[Ewing]

he should be a WR.

Who did you blackmail to get mod? Seriously, I wanna know. I kid, I kid.

Anyway, I'd go with Cutler due to have the best line and overall team. However, people are acting like Henry and Bennett are incredible players who can't be replaced. They're both vastly average and White can replace Henry while whoever the Titans pick in round one can replace Bennett.

[eacantdraft]

Jey Cutler. He is in the best organization of any of these QB's.

Leinart has to learn a new system and still has a bad offensive line and a bad defense.

Young has lost some of his supporting cast

[OzTitan]

speaking of massive homer who can't take a joke when it involves a titans player. if that wasn't already such a pathetic response to a clear and obvious joke, i would go further, but you already made yourself look stupider than i ever could. congrats.

Clear and obvious? rofl. If you're joking on the net, at least use a smiley. A :rolleyes: would have been a good one. Heck, maybe even something a little more obvious like "Oh no, remember, VY can't play QB, he should be a WR". You know, to emphasize the sarcasm. Unfortunately, we can't detect sarcasm in plain text.

I'd say the sole stupidity here lies in the failure to utilize the English language well enough to portray obvious sarcasm. I don't have the time to wade through every post of yours to form a nack of when you're deploying sarcasm or not, particularly when half are arguments.

And I'd like you to please find for me one example of myself being a "massive homer". Resulting to homer calling at the first sign of an argument is about the lowest form of intelligence the forum experience can offer, right after massive homers themselves. Me thinking you referred to VY as a WR with a one line, non explanatory post is not being a homer, as that is the very definition of an Internet troll - posting something usually with little thought behind it looking for a reaction.

[rchrd]

i hope all 6 tarvaris jackson votes were from vikings homers. otherwise, someone may need their head checked.

I'd be surprised if 3 of them were Viking homers. I'm one of the biggest and even managed to keep it in my pants to vote Cutler. I'm just hoping he (Jackson) doesn't get killed out there. That'd be a plus.

[MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)]

i really thought he should've been a safety. i mean, he's quick enough to play most tight ends, but his hieght would be a major advantage... although, realistically, he'd probably need at least 5-6 years to learn the position first.


Pfffffft. He sucks so much he should be the waterboy. Wait, that's too much, third string waterboy.

[draftguru151]

Pfffffft. He sucks so much he should be the waterboy. Wait, that's too much, third string waterboy.

3rd string CFL water boy.

[niel89]

3rd string CFL water boy.

pshh practice squad cfl water boy

[Bengals1690]

Leinart has help around him unlike any other 2nd year QB. Now if the questionable O line of the Cards holds up, he should have a monster year.

[KWill93]

Leinart
Cutler

[etk]

i really thought he should've been a safety. i mean, he's quick enough to play most tight ends, but his hieght would be a major advantage... although, realistically, he'd probably need at least 5-6 years to learn the position first.

I could see Vince Young as a poor man's Pat Watkins if he was given 8 years to develop at FS.

Seriously he would be a good WR on a HB pass Matt Saracen style.

[njx9]

ahhh.....first post Ive noticed from you anywhere in a little while....and what do ya know? Insulting people, acting like youre smarter than everyone else....etc etc

And what was it you said, something about you only insult people who are stupid? And all this coming from a guy who is claiming that the guy who won the OROY and 2 rose bowls playing QB should be playing WR or S....And HES the dumb one.

jesus christ. it was sarcasm you bloody idiot. i even said so in the post you quoted.

in fact, if you had any flaming idea what you're talking about, it would've been clear that, last year at about this time, there were debates on this bloody board about whether vince should go in the top five, and how long it would take him to become a decent quarterback. some folks, who pretty much everyone else on this board wrote off, argued that he was a WR at best (some in comparison to the vick debates, but that's a different story you still wouldn't fathom). on the other hand, you're clearly going to be one of those users who follows me from thread to thread to "call me out" on things that i say. you might try, you know, reading the bloody post you're going to quote in the future to prevent yourself from looking like a 12 year old with a vendetta. get a life.

[njx9]

Clear and obvious? rofl. If you're joking on the net, at least use a smiley. A :rolleyes: would have been a good one. Heck, maybe even something a little more obvious like "Oh no, remember, VY can't play QB, he should be a WR". You know, to emphasize the sarcasm. Unfortunately, we can't detect sarcasm in plain text.

and yet everyone else who's responded has figured it out. amazing how no one can detect sarcasm. :roll: (better?)

I'd say the sole stupidity here lies in the failure to utilize the English language well enough to portray obvious sarcasm. I don't have the time to wade through every post of yours to form a nack of when you're deploying sarcasm or not, particularly when half are arguments.

no, the sole stupidity lies in thef act that you thought it was ok to immediately jump to a personal attack without having any vague idea what was going on in the thread. but hey, i'm glad you called me out for being a troll. brilliant reply, even had i been serious. (also, while we're discussing the english language, it's knack, and people don't really "deploy" sarcasm although that's a lexical argument more than anything).

And I'd like you to please find for me one example of myself being a "massive homer". Resulting to homer calling at the first sign of an argument is about the lowest form of intelligence the forum experience can offer, right after massive homers themselves. Me thinking you referred to VY as a WR with a one line, non explanatory post is not being a homer, as that is the very definition of an Internet troll - posting something usually with little thought behind it looking for a reaction.

*yawn* immediately jumping on anyone who attacks any of your favorite players with an immediate knee-jerk reaction is fairly homerific, regardless of how weakly you'd like to defend it with "see? i just did what you did, so my comment isn't anywhere near as classless as yours".

[frogstomp]

(also, while we're discussing the english language, it's knack, and people don't really "deploy" sarcasm although that's a lexical argument more than anything).

How about I deploy my foot in your ass?!

[OzTitan]

and yet everyone else who's responded has figured it out. amazing how no one can detect sarcasm. :roll: (better?)

Everyone else who responded? I was the first person to respond to it. Nice logic there. And just because people didn't respond to it before me doesn't mean everyone assumed it wasn't sincere. Half probably couldn't care less either way, and the other half probably have you on ignore (either manual or automatic).

no, the sole stupidity lies in thef act that you thought it was ok to immediately jump to a personal attack without having any vague idea what was going on in the thread. but hey, i'm glad you called me out for being a troll. brilliant reply, even had i been serious. (also, while we're discussing the english language, it's knack, and people don't really "deploy" sarcasm although that's a lexical argument more than anything).

It wasn't a personal attack, it was justified if it was a sincere post. That would have been a textbook example of a troll post - quick, stupid and aimed at getting a reaction. The fact it was not clearly obvious an attempt at sarcasm places the blame squarely on you. I don't know you personally, how the flying 747 f*ck am I meant to know when you're being sarcastic or not when you're using a completely non-emotional medium like text? You have to accompany sarcasm with something on the net', it's simply common knowledge.

And you've got to be kidding me - pointing out I missed a "k" in knack? That paragraph of yours above itself is absolutely riddled with uncapitalized words, not to mention an "f" in the word "the". Rofl. Oh and "deploying" sarcasm is perfectly fine - sarcasm is a tool of language and you deployed it in your response.

So basically so far we have homer calling and trying to bring it down to English lessons - what's next, are you going to say your dad can beat up mine?

*yawn* immediately jumping on anyone who attacks any of your favorite players with an immediate knee-jerk reaction is fairly homerific, regardless of how weakly you'd like to defend it with "see? i just did what you did, so my comment isn't anywhere near as classless as yours".

The thing is, I DON'T jump on anyone who "attacks" any of my favorite players. I don't care if people want to criticize VY and post why they don't like him, but I'll occasionally bite on troll bait with some bait of my own. If you were sincere and had posted a detailed reason as to why you think VY is a WR, I may have still replied, but with an equally detailed response.

Trust me, there are still people who sincerely think VY should have been a WR. How do you expect me to know you're not one of them? Because you think the idea is so outlandish it has to be sarcasm? Because you think somehow I should magically know you were being sarcastic?

Instead of being an aggressive argumentative douche bringing out the homer card and further agitating the situation, you could have simply explained it was sarcasm and I would have apologized. I'd have every right to respond in such a way to a post like that if it was sincere - that doesn't make me a homer, it would be a flat out troll attempt and I'd expect any fan to respond similarly. Take one of your favorites and tell me you wouldn't fire back if someone posted something similar and meant it.

In any case, what I originally said wasn't even a personal attack if you were being sarcastic anyway - the attack was for being a troll, which was well justified if you were sincere, but since you weren't, it's totally moot. The troll tag was completely dependent on you being serious and since you knew you weren't, I don't see how you'd take offense. You knew it was sarcasm, and you knew I thought it was real - I wouldn't have called you a troll otherwise. All you had to do was point out it was sarcasm and my response would have been irrelevant, but no, you couldn't do that without a conflict; a "knee jerk" reaction of your own.

Perhaps I should have made room for the potential of sarcasm despite the fact in this day and age I would have presumed people realized you *have* to be painfully obvious on the net when using it, but there was still absolutely no reason for you to find offense at being called a troll when you weren't being serious, it's pretty clear by this and the amount of arguments you are involved in around here you're looking for it.

[niel89]

i thought it was obvious sarcasm

im serious about the practice cfl waterboy....................(sarcasm)

[Caddy]

Leinart is going to find it hard not to succeed throwing to Boldin and Fitzgerald.

[omecool20]

I think VY will have a better year than the rest. It would be interesting to see what the Titans will do with him as their 2nd year starter.

[OzTitan]

i thought it was obvious sarcasm

im serious about the practice cfl waterboy....................(sarcasm)

Why did you think it was obvious sarcasm? There is nothing obvious about it. How would you distinguish between that and a real post of the same opinion?

"he should be a WR"

It doesn't sound like sarcasm to me. No attempt to make it obvious at all. As I said, just because your real opinion is the idea of VY being better as a WR is so wrong it has to be sarcasm doesn't mean it is for everyone, I've encountered plenty of people who actually believe that even to this day.

Not to mention he quoted this post while saying it:


If there's one thing I've learned in my football watching career, it's don't count out Vince Young.


I'm sorry but when you reply to that with "he should be a WR", I fail to see any obvious sarcasm. I don't even see why you'd reply to that post with sarcasm, that makes no sense to me. I could see why a troll would reply to that with troll bait though, as it would then be a differing opinion expressed in a manor that attempts to create conflict. Doing that would be trying to attack a positive post on VY and spin it into a flame war, but responding to that with sarcasm seemed redundant to me, and still does actually. It's an odd way to agree with a statement that's for sure.

I could understand if the post he quoted had something at all to do with VY being a WR, but I fail to see how what he posted was at all relevant to the post he quoted in a sarcastic tone - saying "he should be a WR" in a sarcastic tone is something I would have thought would be best aimed at a negative post about VY, not a positive post. It makes absolutely no sense when you read it as sarcasm so naturally I presumed it wasn't.

[Addict]

Why did you think it was obvious sarcasm? There is nothing obvious about it. How would you distinguish between that and a real post of the same opinion?

"he should be a WR"

It doesn't sound like sarcasm to me. No attempt to make it obvious at all. As I said, just because your real opinion is the idea of VY being better as a WR is so wrong it has to be sarcasm doesn't mean it is for everyone, I've encountered plenty of people who actually believe that even to this day.

Not to mention he quoted this post while saying it:



I'm sorry but when you reply to that with "he should be a WR", I fail to see any obvious sarcasm. I don't even see why you'd reply to that post with sarcasm, that makes no sense to me. I could see why a troll would reply to that with troll bait though, as it would then be a differing opinion expressed in a manor that attempts to create conflict. Doing that would be trying to attack a positive post on VY and spin it into a flame war, but responding to that with sarcasm seemed redundant to me, and still does actually. It's an odd way to agree with a statement that's for sure.

I could understand if the post he quoted had something at all to do with VY being a WR, but I fail to see how what he posted was at all relevant to the post he quoted in a sarcastic tone - saying "he should be a WR" in a sarcastic tone is something I would have thought would be best aimed at a negative post about VY, not a positive post. It makes absolutely no sense when you read it as sarcasm so naturally I presumed it wasn't.

wow. Do you usually tend to "prove" you intellect through using very complicated phrases and words to say very basic and simple things?

[OzTitan]

wow. Do you usually tend to "prove" you intellect through using very complicated phrases and words to say very basic and simple things?

I'm not sure I get what you mean - you're asking if I usually tend to prove my intellect when posting? Or if I usually try to prove my intellect when posting? Because if it's the latter, no - just as someone suffering from dyslexia doesn't usually try and prove they struggle with words, I write and post how it comes naturally to me, and I'm not quite sure what phrases and words you're specifically referring to as "very complicated".

[njx9]

Everyone else who responded? I was the first person to respond to it. Nice logic there. And just because people didn't respond to it before me doesn't mean everyone assumed it wasn't sincere. Half probably couldn't care less either way, and the other half probably have you on ignore (either manual or automatic).

what relevance do you think the fact that you responded before niel has on anything? does that somehow make my comment less obviously sarcastic, or does it somehow justify your ridiculous response? i fail to see the bearing here. i also find it funny that you continue to try to push the "everyone hates you" ********, which is a verifiably untrue opinion.

It wasn't a personal attack, it was justified if it was a sincere post. That would have been a textbook example of a troll post - quick, stupid and aimed at getting a reaction.

prove that, in either instance, it was aimed at getting a reaction.

The fact it was not clearly obvious an attempt at sarcasm places the blame squarely on you.

you're still the only moron who has decided that it was a completely serious response. no one whose opinion has any value has agreed with you. stop trying to state that that was the case as if it's somehow more factual every time you say it.

I don't know you personally, how the flying 747 f*ck am I meant to know when you're being sarcastic or not when you're using a completely non-emotional medium like text?

it's called common sense. not that tough. failing that, you might have tried not screaming "troll" at the first opportunity. but yeah, i'm sure scott would kill to have a grade A troll as a mod. i'm sure ward would put up with it. i think we're getting back into common sense territory.

You have to accompany sarcasm with something on the net', it's simply common knowledge.

the fact that you are incapable of distinguishing sarcasm and honest opinion does not mean the full burden of your inability to maybe, you know, look into it before posting a knee jerk response does not place the burden on me. no one put a bloody gun to your head and told you to reply before you had any idea what you were talking about. again, you're the guy who failed to see what every user after you was able to see. why should i have to cater to the lowest common denominator on this board? if you don't understand my posts, don't bloody reply to them.

And you've got to be kidding me - pointing out I missed a "k" in knack? That paragraph of yours above itself is absolutely riddled with uncapitalized words, not to mention an "f" in the word "the". Rofl. Oh and "deploying" sarcasm is perfectly fine - sarcasm is a tool of language and you deployed it in your response.

*yawn* someone else whining about the fact that i don't capitalize words. wow. the point was not my typos. the point was that you called me out (originally, YOU called ME out) for a lack of ability to use an english language you clearly have less than no mastery over. in your next post, you use terrible phrasing and sentence structure to convey ideas that could've and should've been expressed far more simply. let's not turn this into a conversation about english. your high school diploma and spell check will not hold up nearly as well as you think they will.

So basically so far we have homer calling and trying to bring it down to English lessons - what's next, are you going to say your dad can beat up mine?

your'e the one who brought up english and lack of ability to use it in the first place. jesus christ, do you just type things and then immediately forget what you said and what accusations you made? this is just not that difficult. but it's cool, in your next worthless response, i get to look forward to you blaming me for bringing up whether my dad could beat up yours. can't bloody wait. please god, if you can't keep up with me, at least try to keep up with yourself, or are you actually getting dumber by the minute?

The thing is, I DON'T jump on anyone who "attacks" any of my favorite players. I don't care if people want to criticize VY and post why they don't like him, but I'll occasionally bite on troll bait with some bait of my own.

then expect to get called an idiot when you miss on a "gotcha".

If you were sincere and had posted a detailed reason as to why you think VY is a WR, I may have still replied, but with an equally detailed response.

and given 98% of the rest of my posts on this board, the lack of reasoning may have been a slight indication to most users that that was not a serious comment. i guess that doesn't apply when you're dealing with a half-wit.

Trust me, there are still people who sincerely think VY should have been a WR. How do you expect me to know you're not one of them? Because you think the idea is so outlandish it has to be sarcasm? Because you think somehow I should magically know you were being sarcastic?

because i would expect you to, you know, THINK about it before replying. if i wrote something about cutler and sarf responded with "he's worthless." i would know he was kidding. if random fan x with more than 5 posts on the board said the same thing, i would try to figure out where they were coming from first. it's just not that hard to "view all posts by..." and if you're too lazy to spend those 5 seconds, you probably shouldn't spend them posting a BS response.

Instead of being an aggressive argumentative douche bringing out the homer card and further agitating the situation, you could have simply explained it was sarcasm and I would have apologized. I'd have every right to respond in such a way to a post like that if it was sincere - that doesn't make me a homer, it would be a flat out troll attempt and I'd expect any fan to respond similarly. Take one of your favorites and tell me you wouldn't fire back if someone posted something similar and meant it.

why would i respond in any way other than the way you did? why would i be concilliatory? the onus STILL isn't on me. and i haven't once said you had no right to post that garbage. but don't whine when i post back in a similar fashion.

In any case, what I originally said wasn't even a personal attack if you were being sarcastic anyway - the attack was for being a troll, which was well justified if you were sincere, but since you weren't, it's totally moot. The troll tag was completely dependent on you being serious and since you knew you weren't, I don't see how you'd take offense. You knew it was sarcasm, and you knew I thought it was real - I wouldn't have called you a troll otherwise. All you had to do was point out it was sarcasm and my response would have been irrelevant, but no, you couldn't do that without a conflict; a "knee jerk" reaction of your own.

where, exactly, did i take offense? and this conflict was FAR from a knee jerk reaction.

Perhaps I should have made room for the potential of sarcasm despite the fact in this day and age I would have presumed people realized you *have* to be painfully obvious on the net when using it, but there was still absolutely no reason for you to find offense at being called a troll when you weren't being serious, it's pretty clear by this and the amount of arguments you are involved in around here you're looking for it.

no, you people are looking for it. if i disagree, suddenly some moron feels it has to be a 45 page discussion. i, being the kind, generous person that i am, feel that you should be educated. some people take offense to being wrong and feel obligated to continue discussions long past where they were useful. *shrug* stop projecting your feelings onto me.

two things in all of this seem clear:

1) you've never read any of my posts, thus the final sentence is a complete lie you just made up because it seemed insightful and like it proved your point.

2) you've read some of my posts and thus not believeing it was sarcasm makes this entire discussion even worse and clearly points a big index finger right at the common sense center of your brain.

they are mutually exclusive and one of them must be true. which is it?

[703SKINS202]

its definetly between vy and ml

[frogstomp]

This fight is boring. When do they move on to the "Jello" stage?

[OzTitan]

what relevance do you think the fact that you responded before niel has on anything? does that somehow make my comment less obviously sarcastic, or does it somehow justify your ridiculous response? i fail to see the bearing here. i also find it funny that you continue to try to push the "everyone hates you" ********, which is a verifiably untrue opinion.

What relevance do you think no one else publicly stating they thought it was serious has on anything? Just because no one came out and questioned it publicly doesn't mean everyone took it as a joke or sarcasm, as I said most probably couldn't care less.

prove that, in either instance, it was aimed at getting a reaction.

I'm not sure why I should have to, given I'm not accusing you of being serious now you've made it clear it was an attempt at sarcasm. If it was serious of course it would be an attempt at getting a reaction - as I said it's a classic troll post designed to start an argument, so classic in fact it has even when it wasn't serious! lol

you're still the only moron who has decided that it was a completely serious response. no one whose opinion has any value has agreed with you. stop trying to state that that was the case as if it's somehow more factual every time you say it.

Um, it is factual for me - I took it as serious, and I think anyone with a level head can see it was clearly not an obviously sarcastic post. I've still yet to hear how it was obviously sarcastic, and "common sense" doesn't cover it I'm afraid. Common sense suggests to me you posting that message when quoting someone saying something positive about VY means you were trying to agitate the person you were quoting, I still don't understand how you were meaning to use sarcasm or the point of it.


it's called common sense. not that tough. failing that, you might have tried not screaming "troll" at the first opportunity. but yeah, i'm sure scott would kill to have a grade A troll as a mod. i'm sure ward would put up with it. i think we're getting back into common sense territory.

Well, he sure has a mod that likes to insult his readers. Call me crazy, but as a mod I think you should be a little more reluctant to fuel an argument of this nature. As I said, if you realized I had interpreted it as serious and simply made it clear it was an attempt at sarcasm, it'd be over. Instead you seem hell bent on stating your own facts that it was definitely clearly 100% sarcasm, which is definitely clearly 100% wasn't.

the fact that you are incapable of distinguishing sarcasm and honest opinion does not mean the full burden of your inability to maybe, you know, look into it before posting a knee jerk response does not place the burden on me. no one put a bloody gun to your head and told you to reply before you had any idea what you were talking about. again, you're the guy who failed to see what every user after you was able to see. why should i have to cater to the lowest common denominator on this board? if you don't understand my posts, don't bloody reply to them.

There are many reasons why people may not take up issue with it other than presuming it was sarcasm. Again, I still would like a clear reason why it should be, without a shadow of a doubt, considered obvious sarcasm. As I said, I've met plenty of people with that opinion on VY who would post such a thing to try and start a flame war. Give me one good reason why what you posted couldn't be taken as a serious post - I've seen plenty like it before.

*yawn* someone else whining about the fact that i don't capitalize words. wow. the point was not my typos. the point was that you called me out (originally, YOU called ME out) for a lack of ability to use an english language you clearly have less than no mastery over. in your next post, you use terrible phrasing and sentence structure to convey ideas that could've and should've been expressed far more simply. let's not turn this into a conversation about english. your high school diploma and spell check will not hold up nearly as well as you think they will.

If you don't want to turn it into a conversation about English, don't bring up irrelevant misspellings of a word then. My qualm with your use of English was a questionable use of sarcasm that seemed to have no place with what you were quoting and a lacking of any real measures to make sure the message was obviously sarcasm. You need to do more than read out what your typing to yourself in a sarcastic tone for Internet readers to know what you're trying to do.

your'e the one who brought up english and lack of ability to use it in the first place. jesus christ, do you just type things and then immediately forget what you said and what accusations you made? this is just not that difficult. but it's cool, in your next worthless response, i get to look forward to you blaming me for bringing up whether my dad could beat up yours. can't bloody wait. please god, if you can't keep up with me, at least try to keep up with yourself, or are you actually getting dumber by the minute?

See above. My bringing up of English was relevant to the reasonings as to why I thought you were being serious, yours have so far been petty attempts at insults.

because i would expect you to, you know, THINK about it before replying. if i wrote something about cutler and sarf responded with "he's worthless." i would know he was kidding. if random fan x with more than 5 posts on the board said the same thing, i would try to figure out where they were coming from first. it's just not that hard to "view all posts by..." and if you're too lazy to spend those 5 seconds, you probably shouldn't spend them posting a BS response.

Maybe you would know he was kidding because you know him as a poster? Maybe because "he's worthless" is so generic and basic it would have to be the lamest argument ever if he was serious. VY as a WR is a touchy subject that shows a direct specified attack at a player (if it were serious). It's not quite as random.


why would i respond in any way other than the way you did? why would i be concilliatory? the onus STILL isn't on me. and i haven't once said you had no right to post that garbage. but don't whine when i post back in a similar fashion.

Because due to your lazy use of sarcasm, I was led to believe you were being serious. I didn't call you a horrible excuse for a human being and a moron or whatever, I called you a troll because I thought you were serious, and anyone without a significant degree of knowledge of your posts (like myself) could easy be forgiven for thinking so. Now that I know you weren't serious, my troll insult is not sincere at all, obviously. If the roles were reversed, I would have acknowledge that maybe - just maybe - my post was a little vague in intention and simply made it clear you misunderstood it. I wouldn't have lashed out in retaliation with random name calling as I would have realized you were only calling me a troll because you thought I was serious, and that clearing the matter up would have reversed that judgment.

I've already stated I could have been a little more weary of the fact it might have been sarcasm, but that really shouldn't change your response - you acted as if I insulted you severely and I fail to see how being called a troll when it was a simple misunderstanding is insulting. A simple "I was being sarcastic dude" would have sufficed. Obviously, you didn't have to take the high road and you clearly didn't, but all I'm saying is, my original insult was based on what you said being serious and it wasn't, and the fact I took it seriously isn't entirely my fault no matter how you want to look at it.


where, exactly, did i take offense? and this conflict was FAR from a knee jerk reaction.

Erm, the 1st reply of yours after my troll comment where you quickly made sure to call me stupid?


no, you people are looking for it. if i disagree, suddenly some moron feels it has to be a 45 page discussion. i, being the kind, generous person that i am, feel that you should be educated. some people take offense to being wrong and feel obligated to continue discussions long past where they were useful. *shrug* stop projecting your feelings onto me.

two things in all of this seem clear:

1) you've never read any of my posts, thus the final sentence is a complete lie you just made up because it seemed insightful and like it proved your point.

2) you've read some of my posts and thus not believeing it was sarcasm makes this entire discussion even worse and clearly points a big index finger right at the common sense center of your brain.

they are mutually exclusive and one of them must be true. which is it?

It is 2), although with a more realistic twist. I've read some of your posts, likely an amount of posts in line with what an occasional poster like myself would have read of a regular poster, and I've concluded you seem to get in a lot of arguments, but not enough to actually pick up on your traits. Thanks to this lovely little incident, I now know you like to reply to posts with unusual sarcasm. I still don't know why you were even being sarcastic to the post you quoted, it still doesn't seem to relate to what the OP stated at all. It makes MUCH more sense if you were being serious however. It comes off as a specific attack on VY for an issue that only really affects him and a handful of other QB's. It doesn't seem to me like a random off the wall joking post.

Anyway, I apologize for reading too much into your statement and retaliating strongly to it without inquiring whether it was serious first, but there is no way what you posted is clearly sarcasm, particularly to a more casual poster as myself. It isn't realistic to presume everyone knows your personality when posting and knows when you're joking without language and visual aids like smilies, even if you do have 10K+ posts, so there was no need to fly off the handle and start the "stupid" etc tag because I misinterpreted a vague post of yours.

[portermvp84]

VY is going to tear it up.

[eacantdraft]

What relevance do you think no one else publicly stating they thought it was serious has on anything? Just because no one came out and questioned it publicly doesn't mean everyone took it as a joke or sarcasm, as I said most probably couldn't care less.



I'm not sure why I should have to, given I'm not accusing you of being serious now you've made it clear it was an attempt at sarcasm. If it was serious of course it would be an attempt at getting a reaction - as I said it's a classic troll post designed to start an argument, so classic in fact it has even when it wasn't serious! lol



Um, it is factual for me - I took it as serious, and I think anyone with a level head can see it was clearly not an obviously sarcastic post. I've still yet to hear how it was obviously sarcastic, and "common sense" doesn't cover it I'm afraid. Common sense suggests to me you posting that message when quoting someone saying something positive about VY means you were trying to agitate the person you were quoting, I still don't understand how you were meaning to use sarcasm or the point of it.




Well, he sure has a mod that likes to insult his readers. Call me crazy, but as a mod I think you should be a little more reluctant to fuel an argument of this nature. As I said, if you realized I had interpreted it as serious and simply made it clear it was an attempt at sarcasm, it'd be over. Instead you seem hell bent on stating your own facts that it was definitely clearly 100% sarcasm, which is definitely clearly 100% wasn't.



There are many reasons why people may not take up issue with it other than presuming it was sarcasm. Again, I still would like a clear reason why it should be, without a shadow of a doubt, considered obvious sarcasm. As I said, I've met plenty of people with that opinion on VY who would post such a thing to try and start a flame war. Give me one good reason why what you posted couldn't be taken as a serious post - I've seen plenty like it before.



If you don't want to turn it into a conversation about English, don't bring up irrelevant misspellings of a word then. My qualm with your use of English was a questionable use of sarcasm that seemed to have no place with what you were quoting and a lacking of any real measures to make sure the message was obviously sarcasm. You need to do more than read out what your typing to yourself in a sarcastic tone for Internet readers to know what you're trying to do.



See above. My bringing up of English was relevant to the reasonings as to why I thought you were being serious, yours have so far been petty attempts at insults.



Maybe you would know he was kidding because you know him as a poster? Maybe because "he's worthless" is so generic and basic it would have to be the lamest argument ever if he was serious. VY as a WR is a touchy subject that shows a direct specified attack at a player (if it were serious). It's not quite as random.




Because due to your lazy use of sarcasm, I was led to believe you were being serious. I didn't call you a horrible excuse for a human being and a moron or whatever, I called you a troll because I thought you were serious, and anyone without a significant degree of knowledge of your posts (like myself) could easy be forgiven for thinking so. Now that I know you weren't serious, my troll insult is not sincere at all, obviously. If the roles were reversed, I would have acknowledge that maybe - just maybe - my post was a little vague in intention and simply made it clear you misunderstood it. I wouldn't have lashed out in retaliation with random name calling as I would have realized you were only calling me a troll because you thought I was serious, and that clearing the matter up would have reversed that judgment.

I've already stated I could have been a little more weary of the fact it might have been sarcasm, but that really shouldn't change your response - you acted as if I insulted you severely and I fail to see how being called a troll when it was a simple misunderstanding is insulting. A simple "I was being sarcastic dude" would have sufficed. Obviously, you didn't have to take the high road and you clearly didn't, but all I'm saying is, my original insult was based on what you said being serious and it wasn't, and the fact I took it seriously isn't entirely my fault no matter how you want to look at it.




Erm, the 1st reply of yours after my troll comment where you quickly made sure to call me stupid?




It is 2), although with a more realistic twist. I've read some of your posts, likely an amount of posts in line with what an occasional poster like myself would have read of a regular poster, and I've concluded you seem to get in a lot of arguments, but not enough to actually pick up on your traits. Thanks to this lovely little incident, I now know you like to reply to posts with unusual sarcasm. I still don't know why you were even being sarcastic to the post you quoted, it still doesn't seem to relate to what the OP stated at all. It makes MUCH more sense if you were being serious however. It comes off as a specific attack on VY for an issue that only really affects him and a handful of other QB's. It doesn't seem to me like a random off the wall joking post.

Anyway, I apologize for reading too much into your statement and retaliating strongly to it without inquiring whether it was serious first, but there is no way what you posted is clearly sarcasm, particularly to a more casual poster as myself. It isn't realistic to presume everyone knows your personality when posting and knows when you're joking without language and visual aids like smilies, even if you do have 10K+ posts.


njx9's MO is do as I say, not as I do. One of the biggest hypocrits on this board.

He likes to insults posters right and left and say this player sucks because he sucks despite that player leading a team to beyond expectations.
But when the tables is turned on him, and someone doesn't like his favorite players , he comes in and starts to whine. Just start a negative thread about Eli, either of the Vicks, or Moss and see what happens. Just like a school girl who does when a boyband is dissed.

[frogstomp]

njx9's MO is do as I say, not as I do. One of the biggest hypocrits on this board.

He likes to insults posters right and left and say this player sucks because he sucks despite that player leading a team to beyond expectations.
But when the tables is turned on him, and someone doesn't like his favorite players , he comes in and starts to whine. Just start a negative thread about Eli, either of the Vicks, or Moss and see what happens. Just like a school girl who does when a boyband is dissed.

The word is hypocrites. The saying is "left and right", not "right and left."

"Tables is turned on him" doesn't make sense, and neither does "...like a schoolgirl who does when a boyband is dissed."

[bigbluedefense]

The word is hypocrites. The saying is "left and right", not "right and left."

"Tables is turned on him" doesn't make sense, and neither does "...like a schoolgirl who does when a boyband is dissed."

You need another Elisha sig. This one doesn't show off her body enough.

[frogstomp]

You need another Elisha sig. This one doesn't show off her body enough.

Seeing as I don't design sigs, why don't you get on that? ;)

[bigbluedefense]

Seeing as I don't design sigs, why don't you get on that? ;)

I would, but my sig making skills consists of going to google image search and copy and pasting that image onto my profile.

[MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)]

njx9's MO is do as I say, not as I do. One of the biggest hypocrits on this board.

He likes to insults posters right and left and say this player sucks because he sucks despite that player leading a team to beyond expectations.
But when the tables is turned on him, and someone doesn't like his favorite players , he comes in and starts to whine. Just start a negative thread about Eli, either of the Vicks, or Moss and see what happens. Just like a school girl who does when a boyband is dissed.

Exactly. As a Broncos fan, you know he has to stick up for his boys; the QB of the Giants, the QB of the Falcons, a WR/Punt returner for the Dolphins, and a Raiders wide receiver. Makes perfect sense.

[frogstomp]

Exactly. As a Broncos fan, you know he has to stick up for his boys; the QB of the Giants, the QB of the Falcons, a WR/Punt returner for the Dolphins, and a Raiders wide receiver. Makes perfect sense.

Well, it is obvious that all Bronco fans love the Raiders as well... just look at how much njx loves sarf!

[eaglesalltheway]

It all depends on what you go by. If you go by pure passing yards, I will say Cutler, but if you want to go by excitement and playmaking ability I will say Vince Young. I expect a lot from last year's QB draft class though.

[etk]

njx9's MO is do as I say, not as I do. One of the biggest hypocrits on this board.

He likes to insults posters right and left and say this player sucks because he sucks despite that player leading a team to beyond expectations.
But when the tables is turned on him, and someone doesn't like his favorite players , he comes in and starts to whine. Just start a negative thread about Eli, either of the Vicks, or Moss and see what happens. Just like a school girl who does when a boyband is dissed.

Can you try to make one post without mentioning school girls......

[frogstomp]

Can you try to make one post without mentioning school girls......

Or homosexuality.

Even when he mentions school girls, he manages to give off a homophobic vibe.

[etk]

Or homosexuality.

Even when he mentions school girls, he manages to give off a homophobic vibe.

I hate myself for giving away too much rep today, you deserve all of it over those mere humans

[soybean]

njx9's MO is do as I say, not as I do. One of the biggest hypocrits on this board.

He likes to insults posters right and left and say this player sucks because he sucks despite that player leading a team to beyond expectations.
But when the tables is turned on him, and someone doesn't like his favorite players , he comes in and starts to whine. Just start a negative thread about Eli, either of the Vicks, or Moss and see what happens. Just like a school girl who does when a boyband is dissed.

what is this 1999? boyband?

[etk]

what is this 1999? boyband?

Eacantdraft was clearly born in 1999...so yes!

[bigmac076]

what relevance do you think the fact that you responded before niel has on anything? does that somehow make my comment less obviously sarcastic, or does it somehow justify your ridiculous response? i fail to see the bearing here. i also find it funny that you continue to try to push the "everyone hates you" ********, which is a verifiably untrue opinion.



prove that, in either instance, it was aimed at getting a reaction.



you're still the only moron who has decided that it was a completely serious response. no one whose opinion has any value has agreed with you. stop trying to state that that was the case as if it's somehow more factual every time you say it.



it's called common sense. not that tough. failing that, you might have tried not screaming "troll" at the first opportunity. but yeah, i'm sure scott would kill to have a grade A troll as a mod. i'm sure ward would put up with it. i think we're getting back into common sense territory.



the fact that you are incapable of distinguishing sarcasm and honest opinion does not mean the full burden of your inability to maybe, you know, look into it before posting a knee jerk response does not place the burden on me. no one put a bloody gun to your head and told you to reply before you had any idea what you were talking about. again, you're the guy who failed to see what every user after you was able to see. why should i have to cater to the lowest common denominator on this board? if you don't understand my posts, don't bloody reply to them.



*yawn* someone else whining about the fact that i don't capitalize words. wow. the point was not my typos. the point was that you called me out (originally, YOU called ME out) for a lack of ability to use an english language you clearly have less than no mastery over. in your next post, you use terrible phrasing and sentence structure to convey ideas that could've and should've been expressed far more simply. let's not turn this into a conversation about english. your high school diploma and spell check will not hold up nearly as well as you think they will.



your'e the one who brought up english and lack of ability to use it in the first place. jesus christ, do you just type things and then immediately forget what you said and what accusations you made? this is just not that difficult. but it's cool, in your next worthless response, i get to look forward to you blaming me for bringing up whether my dad could beat up yours. can't bloody wait. please god, if you can't keep up with me, at least try to keep up with yourself, or are you actually getting dumber by the minute?



then expect to get called an idiot when you miss on a "gotcha".



and given 98% of the rest of my posts on this board, the lack of reasoning may have been a slight indication to most users that that was not a serious comment. i guess that doesn't apply when you're dealing with a half-wit.



because i would expect you to, you know, THINK about it before replying. if i wrote something about cutler and sarf responded with "he's worthless." i would know he was kidding. if random fan x with more than 5 posts on the board said the same thing, i would try to figure out where they were coming from first. it's just not that hard to "view all posts by..." and if you're too lazy to spend those 5 seconds, you probably shouldn't spend them posting a BS response.



why would i respond in any way other than the way you did? why would i be concilliatory? the onus STILL isn't on me. and i haven't once said you had no right to post that garbage. but don't whine when i post back in a similar fashion.



where, exactly, did i take offense? and this conflict was FAR from a knee jerk reaction.



no, you people are looking for it. if i disagree, suddenly some moron feels it has to be a 45 page discussion. i, being the kind, generous person that i am, feel that you should be educated. some people take offense to being wrong and feel obligated to continue discussions long past where they were useful. *shrug* stop projecting your feelings onto me.

two things in all of this seem clear:

1) you've never read any of my posts, thus the final sentence is a complete lie you just made up because it seemed insightful and like it proved your point.

2) you've read some of my posts and thus not believeing it was sarcasm makes this entire discussion even worse and clearly points a big index finger right at the common sense center of your brain.

they are mutually exclusive and one of them must be true. which is it?
how a troll got to be a mod is beyond me

[TheChampIsHere]

jesus christ. it was sarcasm you bloody idiot. i even said so in the post you quoted.

in fact, if you had any flaming idea what you're talking about, it would've been clear that, last year at about this time, there were debates on this bloody board about whether vince should go in the top five, and how long it would take him to become a decent quarterback. some folks, who pretty much everyone else on this board wrote off, argued that he was a WR at best (some in comparison to the vick debates, but that's a different story you still wouldn't fathom). on the other hand, you're clearly going to be one of those users who follows me from thread to thread to "call me out" on things that i say. you might try, you know, reading the bloody post you're going to quote in the future to prevent yourself from looking like a 12 year old with a vendetta. get a life.

LOL, I knew you would say that too. I almost went back and edited my post so you wouldnt be able to go on a tyrade about how Im stupid for not knowing it was sarcastic. But seriously, when your post only says he should be a WR how on earth is anyone supposed to know youre being sarcastic? And then when someone responds to a post that makes no sense, you immedietely resort to what you always do...belittlement, insults, etc...BTW, I wasnt on this board a year ago so I dont know anything about the argument that went on here a year ago.

Honestly, you are in another argument here that will probably go 10 pages. Maybe you should step back and think the reason you always get into these is because youre an asshole? Has it occured to you? Im not following you around, dont flatter yourself. But if I read a post and you say some ******** stuff or are stuck in your little superiority complex, im gonna call you on it.

[TheChampIsHere]

wow. Do you usually tend to "prove" you intellect through using very complicated phrases and words to say very basic and simple things?

you dont get it...with NJX9, if you dont state and restate your point 10 different times in several different ways with perfect punctuation and spelling, he will make a post where he attacks every part of the argument you didnt cover and try to turn around your words and make you look like an idiot.

[TheChampIsHere]

The word is hypocrites. The saying is "left and right", not "right and left."

"Tables is turned on him" doesn't make sense, and neither does "...like a schoolgirl who does when a boyband is dissed."

are you seriously correcting grammar on a message board?