Marciano - Fired!!

[Arky]

Originally Posted by barrett

If it's on the internet then it must be true.

But seriously, you say you are basing it on facts and not making things up like me. That facts show Kubiak is not helping Keenum and is working against him.

Facts would say Kubiak signing Keenum last year, praising him for 2 straight years, letting him compete for the backup job, jumping him ahead of Yates to start, giving him 6 consecutive starts even though he's never won a game, and grooming him from UDFA to starting QB show that Kubaik has greatly helped Keenum's development. Kubiak may be a below average HC (by definition, more wins than losses), but he has gotten better QB play compared to QB talent than most do. You said Keenum stunk it up in the Jags game, and yet when Kubiak pulled him for stinking it up, you think it is some kind of plot to ruin his development? And then you quote the existence of anonymous internet message board posts (from another message board), as proof you are right?

And then with a straight face you say I can complain but I'll be called on it when I make stuff up? Will you stop calling me on it if I said there are others on the internet (Chuck) that think it's true? By your backwards logic doesn't that mean it's a fact based theory and not one I made up?

Too many questions. Waste. Of. Time.

But, hey, you got Chuck in your corner. lol

[barrett]

Originally Posted by Arky

Too many questions. Waste. Of. Time.

But, hey, you got Chuck in your corner. lol

I'm sorry I had to go ahead and bring logic into it.

Go Texans and let's make a great hire. I'm for Gruden.

[Arky]

Originally Posted by barrett

I'm sorry I had to go ahead and bring logic into it.

No, the discussion began because I was questioning your logic - your portrayal of conniving old McNair as pandering to the fans. I disagreed and presented my side.

Then, you get all strawman, bring in some of my past viewpoints, ask 28 questions to analyze my logic and generally suggesting I don't have my s**t straight.

It's kinda like when I was a younger fella: I had some buds who went through a "everyone's a hypocrite" stage. They could spin things to make anybody out as a hypocrite - even a preacher. I kinda get that feeling with you and "logic" in our back and forth. And that's why I'm reluctant to continue - not to mention the huge time suck..... Thank god, they eventually moved on. Besides, I just got Batman: Arkham Origins and I need to go kick the Penguin's butt...

[barrett]

Originally Posted by Arky

No, the discussion began because I was questioning your logic - your portrayal of conniving old McNair as pandering to the fans. I disagreed and presented my side.

Then, you get all strawman, bring in some of my past viewpoints, ask 28 questions to analyze my logic and generally suggesting I don't have my s**t straight.

It's kinda like when I was a younger fella: I had some buds who went through a "everyone's a hypocrite" stage. They could spin things to make anybody out as a hypocrite - even a preacher. I kinda get that feeling with you and "logic" in our back and forth. And that's why I'm reluctant to continue - not to mention the huge time suck..... Thank god, they eventually moved on. Besides, I just got Batman: Arkham Origins and I need to go kick the Penguin's butt...

I mentioned logic because I wanted consistency out of you. I was asking that you hold yourself to the same standard you want to hold me. If I can't make things up, you can't make things up. If being agreed with by some internet poster makes your opinion a supported fact, being agreed with by some internet crackpot conspiracy theorist (chuck again) makes my argument supported fact. You want it both ways.

If expecting you to be consistent makes me like buds you used to have who spun preachers as hypocrites I am truly at a loss.

Good luck with Batman and I am glad you have video games to help you escape the time suck of arguing with me.

[Arky]

Originally Posted by barrett

I mentioned logic because I wanted consistency out of you. I was asking that you hold yourself to the same standard you want to hold me. If I can't make things up, you can't make things up. If being agreed with by some internet poster makes your opinion a supported fact, being agreed with by some internet crackpot conspiracy theorist (chuck again) makes my argument supported fact. You want it both ways.

If expecting you to be consistent makes me like buds you used to have who spun preachers as hypocrites I am truly at a loss.

Good luck with Batman and I am glad you have video games to help you escape the time suck of arguing with me.

Just keep it simple, barrett. Discussing or debating on the internet doesn't have to be complex. Just lay out your side and rest your case. Someone doesn't have to be right or wrong. One side doesn't have to have "faulty logic". It can be different logic or different rational thinking. If I made issue with everything I disagree with on internet forums, I'd never leave the keyboard. You seem like a smart guy so, by all means, share your opinions and don't feel "attacked" if someone disagrees with you.

No need to apologize (sincerely or facetiously). I just didn't feel like addressing your 28 questions (hyperbole alert) one at time...

Peace.

[HPF Bob]

Fellas. It's a small group here. No need to spit in anyone's eye here.

The folks who hated Kubiak and Marciano got what they wanted this week and it only cost them one terrible season. Schaub may soon follow.

Now, we can set about bitching over what Wade Phillips does or the next HC or the next QB that gets brought in because, as fans, that's what we do best.