T1B

What was Oakland's defense doing yesterday? That was a horrific performance. Here is to another losing season from the duhs.

They was God awful.

Go Coogs' wrote:They was God awful.

especially when you consider that the duh's were crowding the line defying tebow to beat them with his arm.....300 yards on the ground?

What's the story with just 2 sacks on Tebow...more of an emphasis on the run by the Broncos or did Tebow do a better job of getting rid of the ball soon and/or he was just able to escape the rush? Last week, the Broncos offensive line was clowned the Lions front...it was as much them playing poorly as it was Tebow looking entirely lost when the pocket collapsed around him.

Shoalzie, contrary to mvscal's wild-ass assertion that stemmed from his clearly not having watched the actual game about which he was ignorantly flapping his gums, Oakland was not routinely sending the house after Tebow. Their defensive ends were not charging upfield on every play, going for sacks. The backers were mostly staying at home, as were the safeties and corners. Whether it was Tebow or McGahee, they knew Denver was going to run as much as possible in the hopes of limiting Tebow's exposure in the passing game, and still they were unable to stop them. They sold out against the run...to no effect. Many of Tebow's completed passes were the result of single coverage leaving his receivers wide-fucking-open following blown assignments by the safeties.

Oakland's defense in the second half was the stuff of legend. It was just comically bad.

Nobody takes anything you say even remotely seriously. You're a fucking hack. Plain and simple.

Dungver's O line can't pass protect its way out of a wet paper bag. That's why Tebow is starting, idiot.

You were too busy watching Phillip throw multiple Pick Sixes to have even watched the Oakland game...idiot. Quit pretending that you're not talking out of your ass. Denver only gave up two sacks yesterday against a usually solid Oakland pass rush simply because Oakland wasn't going hard after sacks. They were were staying home to guard against the run, which you would know had you actually watched the game.

Since you didn't, however, you're just trying to bluster your way through again with loud, abrasive bullshit. It's the mvscal way.

Oh, and we're still waiting on that conveniently nebulous schedule/set of criteria you've devised to chart Tebow's successful NFL career path, you ridiculous pussy.

The plan—or, rather, the execution of the plan—didn't work too well, as I stated above...

Oakland was not routinely sending the house after Tebow. Their defensive ends were not charging upfield on every play, going for sacks. The backers were mostly staying at home, as were the safeties and corners. Whether it was Tebow or McGahee, they knew Denver was going to run as much as possible in the hopes of limiting Tebow's exposure in the passing game, and still they were unable to stop them. They sold out against the run...to no effect.

Oakland's defense in the second half was the stuff of legend. It was just comically bad.

Van wrote:Denver only gave up two sacks yesterday against a usually solid Oakland pass rush simply because Oakland wasn't going hard after sacks.

Riiight. After giving up seven sacks to Detroit in a rout the week before, the Duhs decided to lay back and not pressure Tebow because....uh?



Idiot.

Oh, and we're still waiting on that conveniently nebulous schedule/set of criteria you've devised to chart Tebow's successful NFL career path, you ridiculous pussy.

Go ahead and pull up the post draft thread from last year. That's where the information you seek was posted. I'm not going do it for you. The fact remains that you're an idiot who has invested his credibility in the ridiculous and rapidly unraveling premise that Tebow doesn't belong in the NFL.

Melt on...

KC Scott wrote:

Van wrote:. Denver only gave up two sacks yesterday against a usually solid Oakland pass rush simply because Oakland wasn't going hard after sacks. They were were staying home to guard against the run, which you would know had you actually watched the game.

Either that plan didn't work so well, or you should rethink that argument

He already kicked his own ass with that argument yesterday when he attempted to suggest that Dungver was running lots of screens and draws to "protect Tebow" rather than slow down a relentless pass rush.

He's pretty much a complete mess of a one trick pony at this point.

Loading up to stop the run is exactly what Oakland did. If you'd watched the game, you'd know. Shit, even the color guy on the telecast was pointing out how the Raider D-Lineman weren't rushing upfield, opting instead to stay at home to guard against screen passes and/or Tebow simply taking off. It was plainly obvious. It was equally obvious that they failed to execute their plan.

Watch some football sometime, loudmouth. Watch, then comment. Don't just throw out empty barbs that resonate with your usual transparent nothingness.

It's hilarious the way you consider everyone a "hack." Newsflash, Ego Boy: We're all "hacks," most definitely including you. The last time I checked, no one here is getting paid to give their opinions on football. Not that that would matter anyway, since even those types are routinely called "hacks" by posters here, usually for the sin of being in disagreement with said posters about...anything.

Wait a second. I just realized something. You're actually operating under the premise that your opinions carry greater weight than anyone else's here, aren't you?

You are, aren't you?



Goddammit, mvscal, you still don't get that no one's opinion here carries any weight with a given poster unless and until that opinion happens to mirror said poster's. You truly do think otherwise, though, don't you? It doesn't matter that you've been shown to be a completely clueless doofus on too many occasions to list, nope, you still think that your word is the Last Word.

Seriously, you need psychiatric help. For someone who's as wrong as you so often are to be walking around carrying a God Complex, wow, that's just fucking beautiful.

KC, what are you talking about? Denver chose to run because they knew it was their only chance. Oakland knew the same thing so they loaded up to stop the run, thus accounting for the diminished sack total. Even with Oakland knowing what was coming, they proved unable to stop it.

Is such a concept foreign to you? You've never seen teams load up to stop something and still fail miserably? Ever watch a Georgia Tech game? Hell, I take it you've never watched any of the 'defenses' in your own favorite college football conference. Those 'tards all know exactly what Landry Jones is going to do, they scheme for it all week, they line up to prevent it on Saturday...and they give up 450 passing yards and 50 points anyway.

The Raider defense was that bad yesterday. They knew what was coming, they schemed to prevent it, and they failed like crazy. That's all it was.

Van wrote:The Raider defense was that bad yesterday. They knew what was coming, they schemed to prevent it, and they failed like crazy. .

They schemed and failed to stop a guy who "doesn't belong in the NFL"?!? Uh, wrong. Not even the Duhs suck that hard.

That's all it was

Either that or maybe Tebow really does belong in the league.

you still don't get that no one's opinion here carries any weight with a given poster unless and until that opinion happens to mirror said poster's

Some opinions carry more weight than others. Yours, for instance, carries no weight whatsoever. Not because you disagree with me, but because you clearly don't know what the fuck you're talking about. You sit there gushing over Palmer's "smooth footwork" while that clown is throwing picks all over the field and the guy you insist doesn't even belong in the league kicks your ass.

That's why you're a joke.

Van, the people who's opinions matter in the NFL forum are right here.

2011 NFL Pick 'Em Standings
Felix…..82 pts.
Shoalzie…..82
DallasFanatic…..81
KC Scott…..79
packwin13…..79
poptart…..79
War Wagon…..79
Th…..78
ChargerMike…..77
godzilla2002…..77
jiminphilly…..77
Kansas City Kid…..77
stuckinia…..77
Truman…..77
DELSDAD…..76
Harvdog…..76
Papa Willie…..76
Bucmonkey…..75
cannonball…..74
Jsc810…..71

I don't see your name there, neither mvs.

How does it feel to know that your opinion matters less than cannonball?

mvscal wrote:Go ahead and pull up the post draft thread from last year. That's where the information you seek was posted. I'm not going do it for you.

Of course you won't, for two reasons. 1. The post is no longer there, having been wiped out along with every other post on this board during the Katy-Perk purge. 2. You don't want to be held to it.

Look, pussy, just post your revised schedule. I'll even let you factor in the shortened preseason, just so you can stretch it out another year. Jesus, I've never seen you vag out like this. It's really fucking embarrassing. For god's sake, man up already.

The fact remains that you're an idiot who has invested his credibility in the ridiculous and rapidly unraveling premise that Tebow doesn't belong in the NFL.

Rapidly unraveling? It was merely two days ago that people were openly speculating on whether yesterday's game would be his final start of the season. He's been playing that awfully. Even yesterday he again completed fewer than 50% of his passes while averaging only 5.9 yards per attempt, you pathetic dirtclod, despite Oakland handing him wide-open receivers on a silver platter.

And that was his good game! Think he can keep a team winning in the NFL with those sorts of numbers?

You truly haven't even watched any of his games this year, have you? That must be it. You're talking all this shit without even having watched him play. You're still jacking off to his "I'm gonna work harder!" Gators speech.

You're a joke.

Oh, and no, my "credibility" is not invested in this or in any other single arguing point. No one's is. Credibility lasts until the next topic, at which point the reader either agrees or disagrees with you. Where credibility is established or destroyed is in actions such as yours lately, wherein you're clearly pussing out like a little girl over your abortion of a Tebow schedule. You simply don't want it posted here for everyone to see, now that you're being called on it. You know you're making ridiculous excuses for the guy, and aren't willing to own it.

Yep, for all your banal bluster, you really are a joke.

mvscal wrote:

Van wrote:The Raider defense was that bad yesterday. They knew what was coming, they schemed to prevent it, and they failed like crazy.

They schemed and failed to stop a guy who "doesn't belong in the NFL"?!? Uh, wrong. Not even the Duhs suck that hard.

Yesterday? Yes, they did. And it was more McGahee than Tebow anyway. The Raiders couldn't have stopped Taft High School yesterday.

That's all it was

Either that or maybe Tebow really does belong in the league.

It was simply that. There were so many blown assignments yesterday, it was like a Penn St youth camp.

Tebow does belong in the league...as a fullback, tight end or H-Back. He's a strong, powerful runner. What he's not is a real NFL QB. Eventually—and likely sooner rather than later—his ridiculously low completion percentage and lack of pocket awareness will see him back on the bench where he belongs.

you still don't get that no one's opinion here carries any weight with a given poster unless and until that opinion happens to mirror said poster's

Some opinions carry more weight than others.

No, they don't. They all carry only as much weight as the reader is prepared to give them at that moment, and that moment is nearly always predicated on whether the reader agrees with them or not.

Yours, for instance, carries no weight whatsoever.

Since you keep responding to everything I post, you're obviously lying. If my opinions carried no weight whatsoever with you, you'd treat them as you treat bradhusker's.

You keep responding to me because I was one of the people who called you out a long time ago about your stupid Tebow fawning in the college football forum. Now, every time you see Tebow go back in the pocket and break down like Toddowen amid a gathering of overly full, sweaty balls, you wince at your own words, wishing for all the world that you'd kept them to yourself.

Not because you disagree with me, but because you clearly don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

Which, for you, is always defined thusly: "You don't agree with me, therefore you don't know what the fuck you're talking about."

It's funny how that works, isn't it? Every time someone does agree with you, hey, look at that! There's mvscal not calling them a dumbfuck whose opinions are worthless.

Your God Complex is really quite amusing.

You sit there gushing over Palmer's "smooth footwork" while that clown is throwing picks all over the field and the guy you insist doesn't even belong in the league kicks your ass.

Palmer looked really good yesterday, and that was after only one full week of practice following more than a year of being out of football. You'd know that if you actually watched the game, which, again, of course you didn't.

Tebow? He looked decent...for Tebow. Any defense that was even halfway conscious would've destroyed him yesterday, just as Detroit's and Miami's did the previous two weeks.

Wags, who's cannonball?

Whatever. You know I participate in the college football Pick 'Em, which is far more popular than the one here. Meanwhile, mvscal conspicuously avoids both.

Anyway, how's this: If I'm still around come next year, I'll do the Pick 'Em here too. Will that work for you?

Van wrote: Yesterday? Yes, they did. And it was more McGahee than Tebow anyway. The Raiders couldn't have stopped Taft High School yesterday.

It was simply that. There were so many blown assignments yesterday, it was like a Penn St youth camp.

Tebow does belong in the league...as a fullback, tight end or H-Back. He's a strong, powerful runner. What he's not is a real NFL QB. Eventually—and likely sooner rather than later—his ridiculously low completion percentage and lack of pocket awareness will see him back on the bench where he belongs.

again with all the hostility towards tebow? what are you like brady quinn's cousin or something? bottom line here is that I'm an adamant denver fan and have been for a long time so I'm pretty familiar with the team....contrary to what you might believe, it wasn't Oakland simply laying down, it was some pretty good play on the part of the Broncos all across the board that made that win possible.....the offensive line (probably the weakest aspect of the team) were driving blocks and finishing them....truly an inspired performance by the Broncos in what has otherwise been a dismal season....

I could see the offense rallying to tebow which in turn motivated the defense to play hard....the defense could see that Tebow and Co. weren't giving up so they decided to step it up.....that's what makes Tebow different from Orton, and right now that's what makes Timmy an asset as the Denver QB.....was he great throwing the ball? not particularly, but he completed some pretty decent throws when they mattered and Denver came away with a win.....

Van wrote:Wags, who's cannonball?

IIRC, she's Godzilla's OL.

Anyway, how's this: If I'm still around come next year, I'll do the Pick 'Em here too. Will that work for you?

I'll hold you to that promise.

Felix, when did I ever say that Oakland's defense lay down for Denver? I said no such thing. I said that they were comically bad, with blown assignments left and right.

But you're right about Denver's O-Line playing a great game. They most certainly did.

Van wrote:

mvscal wrote:Go ahead and pull up the post draft thread from last year. That's where the information you seek was posted. I'm not going do it for you.

Of course you won't, for two reasons. 1. The post is no longer there, having been wiped out along with every other post on this board during the Katy-Perk purge. 2. You don't want to be held to it.

I'm not digging through it, but that thread. It wasn't deleted. If memory serves, mvscal talks in circles, brings up Drew Brees, and was repeatedly beaten in the head for his takes.

http://www.theoneboard.com/board/viewto ... ow#p667804

Felix wrote:again with all the hostility towards tebow? what are you like brady quinn's cousin or something?

No, he has simply invested too much personal credibility in the opinion that Tebow doesn't belong in the league. He will spin, twist, deflect and outright lie in order maintain that fiction.

Killian wrote:

Van wrote:

mvscal wrote:Go ahead and pull up the post draft thread from last year. That's where the information you seek was posted. I'm not going do it for you.

Of course you won't, for two reasons. 1. The post is no longer there, having been wiped out along with every other post on this board during the Katy-Perk purge. 2. You don't want to be held to it.

I'm not digging through it, but that thread. It wasn't deleted. If memory serves, mvscal talks in circles, brings up Drew Brees, and was repeatedly beaten in the head for his takes.

http://www.theoneboard.com/board/viewto ... ow#p667804

Your memory fails.

This is actually a predraft thread based on Tony Dungy's prediction that Tebow would be a 1st round pick. Of course, the usual college football forum 'think they know it alls' scoffed. They were proven wrong yet again.

Here's my first take on Tebow:

mvscal wrote:66.4 career completion percentage says you don't know what you're talking about either. That level of accuracy would put him in the top ten if not the top five in the NFL. No telling how well that will translate to the NFL but anyone claiming that he sucks based on what he has accomplished so far is an idiot.

He's got the size, strength, tremendous athleticism and the intangibles to succeed in the NFL. Those positives are balanced against the fact that he didn't play in a pro style offense and his throwing motion needs a little work. I don't see either of those negatives as being a showstopper.

I don't think Dungy is far offbase. The first round might be a reach, but I'm sure there are a lot of QB hungry teams downplaying their interest. Jax would be a great fit. It's a need position for them and they desperately need an attraction.

It was a reasonable, accurate take that has stood the test of time. I see no reason to walk any of that back. Looking through that thread there some other things I've noticed namely that 3 years as a starter seems to be the cutoff on whether or not a QB is going to "get it" in the NFL. Well, for everybody except Tebow who was written off as a failure before he was even drafted let alone played three years as a starter.

Cockharf, what you were asked to provide was your schedule (including your criteria) for how long it should take before Tebow's QB skillsets are sufficiently polished to allow him to be consistently successful at the NFL level. Nothing you C&P'd there addresses that issue.

Remember, you're the one who started this when you said, "He's right on schedule."

"What schedule?" I asked.

"Mine. I always said that he was a project, and measured in that light, yes, he's right on schedule," you answered. (Paraphrasing there. I just got back from a fucking marathon chemo session and a nightmare of a failed attempt at radiation therapy. I'm too damn exhausted to look up your exact words, but that was the gist of your statement.)

"Fine, so let's hear your schedule, including timeframes and specific criteria."

See, no other first-round QB picks are expected to need the basic skillsets training that you admit your boy still needs. Be that as it may, let's hear this 'reasonable' timetable for NFL success you've laid out for him, including a point at which you would concede he's proven himself incapable of sustaining a starting role as an NFL QB.

Again, I've already put that out there. I don't see any need to reset it for your convenience. What you have already quoted should be enough. Is six games as a starter a large enough sample size for a "project"? Killian gave Drew Brees three seasons as a starter to see if he "got it" and he was more NFL ready according to the both of you.

Go ahead and compare Drew Brees' first six games as a starter against Tim Tebow's and get back to me.

As long as it helps to serve your purpose, you've never had a problem with cutting and pasting your old quotes. You're avoiding doing so now simply because you don't wish to be pinned down by your own words.

I've asked you to back up your shit with specifics, what, four times now? It's clear that you're too much of a coward to stand and deliver. Whatever. This is becoming boring.

"Credibility."

First Raider game I've missed this season.

No time to really comment much right now, other than to say it wasn't terribly surprising.

15 Raider penalties.
Surprised?
ha

Oakland got absolutely shredded on the ground?
Surprised?
Hasn't that been happening, like, every 3rd or 4th week - for the last decade?


I think Van said horrendous.

Yeah, sounds that way.


I'll prolly have something more to say - maybe after the Oak/SD fiasco on Thursday night.

It's a coaching problem. Tom Cable really has to go. When will Davis figure this out and fire his ass?

Mikey wrote:It's a coaching problem. Tom Cable really has to go. When will Davis figure this out and fire his ass?

Sin,