Everyone in the world thought we upgraded at QB...

That's how teams have been attacking the Colts all year long. Indy wants teams to try deep passes, which is why the holes in the coverage are in the short zones. Even the CBS commentators made note of that. Look, everyone knows that you're just babbling about this because you desperately want excuses to hate Carr. You just flat out don't like the guy and pull for him to do poorly, and even when he doesn't play poorly, you invent reasons to crap on him. He and Testaverde performed at pretty much the same level, but you only choose to shit on Carr. Your bias is obvious and no one thinks of you as informed or intelligent, so do the board a favor and shut up.

Really? I'm glad you told me, otherwise I never would have known to post well before the season that Carr's main problems were an unwillingness to take risks downfield and a tendency to speed through his progressions to the dump off too quickly. No one is saying that he's a Pro Bowler, dumbass, but he hasn't been awful either. He certainly wasn't one of the top 10 reasons we lost to the Colts. So again, shut the fuck up because you have no idea what you're talking about, you've never enriched the board with anything resembling insight, and you're being a total dick about your spectacular ignorance.

 

OK, you're right Collin...the Colts were desperately defending those 5yd pass routes by King, because they were terrified that he would break one for a TD, and that the Panthers would come back and win in the 4th quarter. I see your logic so clearly now. Yes, Carr's stats are very impressive.

 

specifically, Delhomme was a huge factor in the playoffs. I think the philosophical difference between us, so far, is that you think there are a couple elite quarterbacks, then the field. Maybe not, but we've had this argument to know that there isn't an array of shades involved in the process. There's elite, then a big dropoff where it doesn't seem to matter.

You're excusing play that could be better because the other parts aren't flawless, in my eyes. Same as the other veteran QB threads. Individuals and squads are individually responsible for their own play, but there seems to be a lot of deference to others' play when involved in veteran QBs in your arguments this year. That wasn't there last year.

average at times, below average at times. I don't agree that he was just as good as Vinny. He was more efficient, and to less results. That he specifically missed some shorter routes this week was a little troublesome, but more specifically I'm just concerned that he doesn't command the offense and just make things happen out there. I think coming into the season, if you told either of us that Carr was starting and Testaverde would play, we'd all expect Carr to outpace Testaverde, and I imagine we can both agree that Carr himself is able to do better than he is.

Don't guess at my intentions. For one, I never viewed him as a threat to Delhomme, at any point. You were the one consistently trying to cut him when most knew he wouldn't be. You're the one trying to pin any negatives said about Carr back on Delhomme. Couldn't be that individually a large group disagrees with you, it's individual bias on every part.

And here we go with the denial thing again. Really wish you were grown enough to not feel like you have to pull tricks, because it significantly diminishes your argument and changes the discussion from discussion to whether you feel you've "won".

It could really be left behind, though I doubt it will, and as I've said a hundred times before, you tend to believe you benefit from making things personal.

 

I've never suggested that you can plug just anyone in. There are a lot of quarterbacks who suck balls and will hurt your team, but there are also plenty of guys who can do a solid job. Jake is one of those, albeit one who has more ups and downs than average.

No, I'm not. Every time you feel like you aren't winning an argument, you resort to lying about what the other person is saying. Where did I ever say anything about the other parts of the team needing to be flawless? Where did I ever even hint at that? I didn't, and you're lying in suggesting that I did.

I'm saying that the Panthers have bigger problems than their quarterback play, and they do. That's a fact which is pretty obvious to anyone who doesn't have their head up their ass.

No, my opinion on that has remained the same. Again, you want to pretend that it's changed because you need to lie about what other people say when you can't actually beat them legitimately. I challenge you to find even one instance where I've changed my opinion on this subject. You can't and you probably won't even try, because you know that you're lying. Instead you'll just whine about me accusing you of lying, but that's pretty much what you should expect when you lie about someone's comments.

Seriously? You really want to take that position? I'm asking because I'm completely fed up with your shit and I'll be more than glad to start producing mountains of statistics and screenshots to give you a Thelt-style embarrassment. Carr completed 64% of his passes for 103 yards (4.1 per attempt), 0 touchdowns, and 0 interceptions. Testaverde completed 60% of his passes for 82 yards (also 4.1 per attempt), 0 touchdowns, and 1 interception. For you to pretend that Testaverde was better than Carr against the Colts again demonstrates what an idiot you're capable of being.

You're easier to read than the funny pages, but you always deny the obvious. You spent years denying that you had a thing for George Seifert before finally admitting it, and you've demonstrated similar bias with other individuals since then.

I'm not trying to pin anything on Delhomme. He's the best quarterback we have on the roster, and I've never said otherwise. But it's blindingly obvious that Carr has not been bad, which is why no one will actually debate me on that. Cowards like you and monstercat make snide comments and then run away or whine whenever I prove that you're wrong.

You are in denial. There's no trick involved here, that's simply who you are. You don't want to believe that people also view you as a condescending ass. You want to believe that you're loved. You want to believe that you're objective. You want to believe that you're nothing like me. It's beyond clear that you have never been comfortable looking in the mirror and have spent inordinate time crafting delicate illusions to hide the truth from your own consciousness.

 

and they're off...

 

Like when you stated people were saying Vinny = awesome because you were sensitive about Carr criticism?

I took it to mean that, based on past conversations. There does seem to be a change in ideal as to what a QB is responsible for, in my mind.

I didn't say otherwise. I feel that QB play is in that same (lolz) handful of problems, and we can have better quarterback play. I don't see why we couldn't.

Specifically, you got rid of all other variables of the difference between 2005 and 2006, noting Jake was the (and the only) reason we were sucking on third down, without noting any other variables or why they did or didn't factor. You stated it was completely on him, and now with other quarterbacks in play, it's giving them the benefit of the doubt and they could win with good teams. They're just conduits for good play elsewhere.

No I'm not! But wait, then I'm in denail. Oh noes. See, I just can't win, you've trapped me in a useless box of bullshit that doesn't actually fit.

lolz. No. Again, you'd look rational if you could cut this out, but instead you're not worried about discussing, you're lashing out, and I don't see that as being rational.

 

Have people been criticizing Vinny's performance and I just missed it? There were certainly people praising him.

So that's basically your way of saying that you can't find anything to justify your claim, correct? You had no basis for saying that I had changed my opinion, you just lied about that to be annoying.

We could have better play pretty much everywhere, which isn't close to the point. What we've been getting at QB has been adequate to win ball games. We've been avoiding stupid turnovers for the most part, and getting first downs. There hasn't been a loss yet where QB play was the main culprit.

He was. When you have the worst QB rating in the league on third downs and you go from being good offensively on third downs the previous year to being the worst that year, it's the QB's fault. If that were happening again now, I'd certainly be bitching about it, but it's not.

No, you can't, and it has nothing to do with me or TBR. This is obviously an issue that affects you in all aspects of your life.

I look rational anyway. Perhaps you meant reasonable, but I'm not going to look reasonable if I stop pointing out that you have a history of bias and obvious difficulty facing your own flaws. I'd need a wholesale change of behavior to seem reasonable, and that ain't happening.

So again:
Testaverde & Carr = fine
Jake = better
QB performance /= why we're losing

 

I missed awesome. So maybe you were exaggerating a little, and there wasn't the "you're stretching because you're ashamed of how your sensitive subject is playing" slinging. There wasn't really a reason, because it's not that big a fucking deal to anyone.

It's my way of taking what you said. That seems like a really simple statement.

Didn't say there was (OMGLIAR!!!!111). I'm saying I'm expecting more, just as I'm expecting more of other areas as well. I don't like that Carr is doing everything just fine and this is the best we get out of him. I expected more. Did you not?

Nothing at all changed in a full year, of course. I know, distance was close. There were obviously a lot of variables, and in this circumstance, it goes directly toward blaming the QB. This year, we hear how it's the other facets of play, the play calling, the competition, the team isn't good enough, and so on. Just like the argument with veteran QBs. When they're doing well, they're doing well. When they're not doing well, it's because they're on teams that aren't supporting them. No less circular logic than the denial uselessness.

Oh, absolutely. Of course, you always felt that being personal and putting up insults helps you somehow, but they're right up there with correcting spelling. The worst thing is, you could just stick to the subject and do just fine, but you can't.

Yes. I know a lot of people who call people liars, cowards, losers on a daily basis based on arguments. On Springer.

 

I'm happy that if you google 'David Carr Sucks' this thread is the last hit on page 2.

Captain Mud Butt was a #1 hit. I bet if I leave that title for awhile - number 1 hit for David Carr Sucks.