You know what I did.

Dilfer = Peete = Roethlisberger...check the stats.



this never gets old.

 

Are you honestly surprised whenever you pick at someone and pick at someone and pick at someone, then they react? Haven't you ever read the sign at the zoo - "Don't feed the bears"? I don't have the slightest clue why you're behaving this way, especially in light of the way I've treated you lately.

I didn't have a problem with you suggesting that Williamson could be good one day, I just disagree. What I had a problem with, and subsequently corrected, was the idea that Williamson could be an immediate contributor, which you suggested, and the ludicrous idea that he could "pull 5-6 TDs as a situational backup."

That's fair because of the scenario, but I said McGahee because he was a first-rounder, as Jones will be. Really, the Jones situation is unprecedented. Other QBs have made the switch, but no one with this kind of incredible athleticism or potential.

*rofl* Very true.

Yes, he's an unknown, I was just pointing out that any concerns about the fact that Jones probably couldn't contribute much right away would also apply to Williamson. If I was convinced that Williamson would be a very good WR in the future, I wouldn't have a problem with him being selected, so the idea that they won't contribute right away is not bothersome to me. As mentioned, however, the team is likely to feel otherwise.

It's not a bad thing at all, I'm just pointing out that you can't object to Jones on the grounds that he can't contribute right now when Williamson isn't nearly as ready as Clayton to do so either. As mentioned, I don't have a problem with us selecting someone with an eye on the future.

Actually it is. You said I don't like Delhomme when I do, and I have the print to prove it. And you're still saying I want to replace Delhomme when what I'd really like is to have him at a reasonable price. Please keep in mind that YOU BROUGHT THIS UP AND ARE RUINING THIS THREAD BECAUSE YOU WANT SOME KIND OF PISSING CONTEST. You have repeatedly accused me of starting pissing contests, but you're bringing Delhomme into this thread, not me. Me liking Jason Campbell has nothing to do with Delhomme. I'd happily consider drafting Campbell in the second round if Peyton Manning was our quarterback. I happen to think he's "best available" material at that point, and potentially a special player.

I assumed this started out as a joke based on how much it irritates you when I say you have an emotional attachment to certain individuals. Now I'm starting to think you're serious, in which case that would make you an enormous hypocrite.

And for the record, I don't "love" Campbell. If I "loved" Campbell, wouldn't I be talking about him as a possibility at #14? I also equated my appreciation for him to my feelings about Leftwich, and if you'll care to remember, I didn't favor drafting Leftwich with our #9 pick either. I no more love Campbell than I love Elton Brown. I just happen to think that some of the players in the draft are better than some of the other players in the draft.



I'm honestly starting to regret asking you to participate in the magazine. You just have no ability to interact with me without letting your personal feelings make you want to pick a fight. If you have personal issues, keep it out of the god damned thread. You can Email me or send me a PM, but this behavior is ridiculous.

 

espn's take:

Has a very nonchalant attitude. Not sure if he loves playing the game of football. Looks like he's going through the motions in practice. Lacks experience as a receiver. Needs work in terms of hot reads and zone coverage recognition from WR position. Needs to improve crispness of routes but is a power-forward that will do a good job of using body to box DB's out. Must learn how to block. Doesn't seem overly willing, which is a big concern.

 

I dunno. I don't see the malice in the thread. I don't think I'm "feeding the bears" here, it's discussion. You feel one way about Williamson and Benson, I feel another way. That's neither rocket science nor WWIII-worthy.

Certainly, Jones probably won't contribute much, unless as a gimmick. Williamson might, or might not, but probably would if given plenty of opportunity. Maybe it doesn't exist here, or maybe the team would be progressive enough to play the better player - and I do think the players in question are better than Proehl.

I'm not objecting for that reason. I just don't buy into him. Maybe I'm being foolish, maybe I'm being guarded against youthful optimism around 97-98 where I dug workout warriors naively. Doesn't matter why - that I'm not heavy into him is reason enough for me to suggest I don't want him at 14.

Then maybe I'm misconstruing. Saying you don't want to pay him and apparently want to replace him, that still is worth questioning, to me. That it's worth getting mad over, or yelling about? No. If it's unreasonable, just dismiss it.

I did bring in Delhomme, and suggesting drafting a QB at 45 would have bearing on Delhomme, whether you're mad about it or not. If you'd draft Campbell even with Manning, great. I didn't assume that, and the past talks about Delhomme suggest replacement. If you can honestly say that the Campbell pick has absolutely nothing to do with JD, and that you're more than happy with him as a starter, then I have no point and no objection, but still won't see the need.

Either way, the pick wasn't without or above question. Nor is anyone here above question or a bit of fun.

No, that part was fucking with you. I thought it wasn't rational for you to say that about any of the things that you've suggested over the years I'm "in love with", so I used it. You over-reacted and got all mad and shit, which I neither expected nor really care about - if it's absurd, dismiss it. I don't have anything against you and God only knows I'd much rather talk actual football with you than quibble over meaningless psychobabble. So settle the fuck down about it. The Delhomme issue I have an issue with, not you.

As for that magazine, I don't really care either way. If you take disagreement and chiding that seriously, and honestly feel that you're going to take out some form of punishment because you're mad, then question why
*you asked me to write, and
*why you're mad. I don't see anything worth being mad about in this, and my life won't revolve around being asked to write for a magazine or not writing for a magazine. My wife and sleep are both more interesting than talking about this, to boot.

Past that, I don't have a problem with you - I know what to expect with you, your positives and negatives, and don't take what you say personally, even though I believe you do mean harm sometimes. If I did have a specific problem with you, I would bring it up in private. This isn't a personal issue, and I apologize if you took it personally, but all the same I'm not looking to tiptoe around you or feel you're above question.

 

Williamson has some experience at WR while Jones does not, but Williamson is still considered raw. He or Jones would make plays with their physical skills, but neither are ready to truly be NFL receivers in their rookie seasons.

And I'm perfectly ok with that, but take note that you were objecting to Jones at least in part on the grounds that he wouldn't be ready to play immediately. That wasn't legitimate considering that you do favor Williamson, who suffers from the same problem. But you not thinking Jones will ever be a quality WR is just as fine as me thinking the same about Williamson.

I don't want to pay him the enormous amount we are paying him. By the same token I was a supporter of Muhammad and I do think he still could have helped us, but I didn't want him back at an enormous price either. Anyone who thinks that means I don't like Muhammad is being utterly irrational. I've made my stance clear repeatedly, but you continue to pick at me about this. How could I take that as anything but an attempt to cause conflict?

You didn't ask why I liked Campbell. You didn't ask if I intended to have him replace Delhomme. You deliberately said things that aren't true in an attempt to piss me off. You succeeded.

The "joke" was when you said " Jason and Collin, sitting in a tree :rofl -ing" And I laughed about it. But then you went well beyond joking when you wrongly accused me of things regarding Delhomme, and made that misrepresentation of my opinion on Campbell much more serious. I even asked you not to pick a fight with me over Campbell, but did you respect that wish? Did you listen? No. You continued to attack me on that front, presumably knowing that you were grossly misrepresenting both my opinion of Delhomme, my opinion of Campbell, and the innocence of my picks.

I asked you to write because you have the football knowledge to do a good job, and because I thought it would convince you that I actually do respect that knowledge.

I'm mad because you're saying that I'm lying about my feelings regarding Delhomme when I have printed proof to the contrary, because you're misrepresenting what I think of Campbell, and most of all because you took an entirely innocuous situation and intentionally changed it into yet another fight between us. I'm pissed because in spite of my attempts to make peace, you choose to start $#!+ yet again. I showed you respect that you have yet to show in return.


You claim you don't want fights and psychobabble only to encourage that very thing. But I agree that sleep is a good idea right now. Maybe cooler heads will prevail in the morning, and maybe then you can extend me the courtesy of not intentionally trying to piss me off.

 

you really don't have to write your senior thesis to get your point across about football.

 

>>How could I take that as anything but an attempt to cause conflict?

You could take it any way you wanted it to. You could take it as me actually misrepresenting what you said, and maybe I did. The two do sync up, and even if they do - there's nothing to be pissed off about there. There's nothing there to take personally, so best advice is "don't".