ZachEY Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Drew Brees is listed at 6-0 209. He hasn't missed a game in five years. Your boy Big Ben is 6-5 241 and he's missed more games than Brees the last five years. No he hasn't but you're offensively structuring your argument to ignore the fact that he tore his rotator cuff on the last game of the season. You also ignore that Big Ben's biggest injury was on a motorcycle. Brees has the far greater injury in football terms. Timing is only relevent in your misleading argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZachEY Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 It comes down to their balls. But you're right, size doesn't matter when it comes to Quarterbacks and injuries. Kellen Winslow Jr? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klecko73isGod Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 No he hasn't but you're offensively structuring your argument to ignore the fact that he tore his rotator cuff on the last game of the season. You also ignore that Big Ben's biggest injury was on a motorcycle. Brees has the far greater injury in football terms. Timing is only relevent in your misleading argument. Actually Roethlisberger did not miss a single game due to the motorcycle accident which happened in the offseason between his rookie and second year. He started the Steelers first four games of the season, got hurt against San Diego in week five (their bye was week four,) missed the Jacksonville game in week six, played the next two weeks and then missed weeks 9, 10 and 11. http://www.nfl.com/players/benroethlisberger/gamelogs?id=ROE750381&season=2005 If you're gonna hold my feet to the fire about Brees' injury, you're not gonna get away with claiming the Roethlisberger missed games due to the motorcyle accident because he didn't miss a single game because of the accident. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irish Jet Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Actually Roethlisberger did not miss a single game due to the motorcycle accident which happened in the offseason between his rookie and second year. He started the Steelers first four games of the season, got hurt against San Diego in week five (their bye was week four,) missed the Jacksonville game in week six, played the next two weeks and then missed weeks 9, 10 and 11. http://www.nfl.com/players/benroethlisberger/gamelogs?id=ROE750381&season=2005 If you're gonna hold my feet to the fire about Brees' injury, you're not gonna get away with claiming the Roethlisberger missed games due to the motorcyle accident because he didn't miss a single game because of the accident. The accident was between his second and third season. He did miss some games and just wasn't right throughout the season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTM Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 The accident was between his second and third season. He did miss some games and just wasn't right throughout the season. Besides the fact that rothlisberger is a barely functioning idiot that takes way too many hits.. If he played a little safer and got rid of the ball quicker, he'd probably never get hurt.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZachEY Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Actually Roethlisberger did not miss a single game due to the motorcycle accident which happened in the offseason between his rookie and second year. He started the Steelers first four games of the season, got hurt against San Diego in week five (their bye was week four,) missed the Jacksonville game in week six, played the next two weeks and then missed weeks 9, 10 and 11. http://www.nfl.com/players/benroethlisberger/gamelogs?id=ROE750381&season=2005 If you're gonna hold my feet to the fire about Brees' injury, you're not gonna get away with claiming the Roethlisberger missed games due to the motorcyle accident because he didn't miss a single game because of the accident. Hold your feet to the fire. As if you didn't blatantly manipulate reality to make your argument. Mine was a mistake in memory as opposed to an attempt to mislead, which as it turns out, was still correct, as he missed week 1 in Jacksonville, and as Irish points out, perhaps more importantly, he was absolutely not the same player that season... Which was 2006. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klecko73isGod Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 The accident was between his second and third season. He did miss some games and just wasn't right throughout the season. So it was after his second season? It caused him to miss one game: http://www.nfl.com/players/benroethlisberger/gamelogs?id=ROE750381&season=2006 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klecko73isGod Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Hold your feet to the fire. As if you didn't blatantly manipulate reality to make your argument. Mine was a mistake in memory as opposed to an attempt to mislead, which as it turns out, was still correct, as he missed week 1 in Jacksonville, and as Irish points out, perhaps more importantly, he was absolutely not the same player that season... Which was 2006. Sorry if I totally forgot Brees had an injury that caused him to not miss a single game. Roethlisberger missed one game due to the motorcycle accident. He missed four the previous season due to FOOTBALL INJURY. You made no valid point on Roethlisberger despite you pathetic attempt at spin. The bottom line remains, size has no correlation to injury in the NFL, if it did, guys like Leon Washington and Maurice Jones-Drew and Emmitt Smith and Barry Sanders would never get to play at this level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTM Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 The bottom line remains, size has no correlation to injury in the NFL, if it did, guys like Leon Washington and Maurice Jones-Drew and Emmitt Smith and Barry Sanders would never get to play at this level. Maurice jones-drew is a fire plug.. You are missing my point. It's not only that sanchez is short.. it's that he's very slight looking and also pretty.. he can use some steroids i think.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZachEY Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Sorry if I totally forgot Brees had an injury that caused him to not miss a single game. Roethlisberger missed one game due to the motorcycle accident. He missed four the previous season due to FOOTBALL INJURY. You made no valid point on Roethlisberger despite you pathetic attempt at spin. The bottom line remains, size has no correlation to injury in the NFL, if it did, guys like Leon Washington and Maurice Jones-Drew and Emmitt Smith and Barry Sanders would never get to play at this level. Yeah... you forgot. That same injury landed him in New Orleans. Had it not happened, in all likelihood, he remains a Charger, and there's a good chance they win a SB. Yes, Rothelisberger has gotten hurt quite a bit. Just because you point it out repeatedly, doesn't mean I'm disagreeing with it. Your argument also ignores the fact that a player like Big Ben does nothing to try to avoid injuries. He takes a ton of hits and basically looks for contact. Pointing out guys like Leon and Barry is also irrelevent because they play a style of ball that avoids contact. Run Leon 30 times between the tackles and let's talk about it. Further, unlike a running back, who can run outside, run out of bounds, a QB has to stand in there and take hits straight up big hits. They don't face the wear and tear injuries as much like running backs, they face the instantaneous one big hit injuries you see. Those are the things that I'd rather have a big guy take than a smaller one. Your argument about Namath ignores his knee condition before entering the league. And for the record, I don't necessarily agree with CTM that Sanchez is going to be injury prone. I just agree that your argument is a disaster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klecko73isGod Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Maurice jones-drew is a fire plug.. You are missing my point. It's not only that sanchez is short.. it's that he's very slight looking and also pretty.. he can use some steroids i think.. Ahh I got it. You're just being a moron. That's cool man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vicious89x Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Sorry if I totally forgot Brees had an injury that caused him to not miss a single game. Roethlisberger missed one game due to the motorcycle accident. He missed four the previous season due to FOOTBALL INJURY. You made no valid point on Roethlisberger despite you pathetic attempt at spin. The bottom line remains, size has no correlation to injury in the NFL, if it did, guys like Leon Washington and Maurice Jones-Drew and Emmitt Smith and Barry Sanders would never get to play at this level. I think the guys you're pointing out are just different. Look at them, for example I'm 5'7 and weight 150 lbs. I lift a lot, and have a decent amount of muscle. Now Leon, he's 5'8... and 195 lbs. He's built like a friggin tiny tank. He's an inch taller then me and has 45 lbs on me and I guarantee it's all muscle. He's just built much stouter and tougher. If I'm not incorrect in my assumption here the concern is that Sanchez is 227lbs with 6 inches on Leon. Their weight difference is 32 lbs. Meanwhile Leon and myself are 1inch difference with a 45lb weight difference. I realize they are different positions which call for different things, but like I said I think the concern is that Sanchez is built leaner rather then bigger. Then again I think this whole debate is kind of silly as you can't really determine what makes a tough QB. Brady is 6'4 and 225, and McNabb is 6'2 and 240. I think it's not really a debate as who's been more durable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustInFudge Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Maurice jones-drew is a fire plug.. You are missing my point. It's not only that sanchez is short.. it's that he's very slight looking and also pretty.. he can use some steroids i think.. Gheyhomofag Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klecko73isGod Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 I think the guys you're pointing out are just different. Look at them, for example I'm 5'7 and weight 150 lbs. I lift a lot, and have a decent amount of muscle. Now Leon, he's 5'8... and 195 lbs. He's built like a friggin tiny tank. He's an inch taller then me and has 45 lbs on me and I guarantee it's all muscle. He's just built much stouter and tougher. If I'm not incorrect in my assumption here the concern is that Sanchez is 227lbs with 6 inches on Leon. Their weight difference is 32 lbs. Meanwhile Leon and myself are 1inch difference with a 45lb weight difference. I realize they are different positions which call for different things, but like I said I think the concern is that Sanchez is built leaner rather then bigger. Then again I think this whole debate is kind of silly as you can't really determine what makes a tough QB. Brady is 6'4 and 225, and McNabb is 6'2 and 240. I think it's not really a debate as who's been more durable. Yes, and their relative durability has NOTHING to do with their size. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vicious89x Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Yes, and their relative durability has NOTHING to do with their size. It might. It might not. All the guys you pointed out are like miniature tanks. And were durable. Then McNabb is big and gets hurt often. I see the point in CTM's argument, but still I think that you can't really make a determination on injury without seeing a guy playing a regular season game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMC Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Maurice jones-drew is a fire plug.. You are missing my point. It's not only that sanchez is short.. it's that he's very slight looking and also pretty.. he can use some steroids i think.. CTM has some issues he needs to work out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klecko73isGod Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 It might. It might not. All the guys you pointed out are like miniature tanks. And were durable. Then McNabb is big and gets hurt often. I see the point in CTM's argument, but still I think that you can't really make a determination on injury without seeing a guy playing a regular season game. CTM's argument is that he is afraid Sanchez might get hurt because he's "pretty." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustInFudge Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 CTM's argument is that he is afraid Sanchez might get hurt because he's "pretty." I'm gorgeous and I've never had a major injury. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vicious89x Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 CTM's argument is that he is afraid Sanchez might get hurt because he's "pretty." Yet you ignore the fact where he referred to him as slight. He's a skinny pretty boy. Basically saying a skinny pretty boy doesn't want to be punched in the mouth. I don't think it's that hard to understand. I also think it's a bit silly to be concerned about it but it's a reach feeling, just like you thinking Gholston is gonna have 2 sacks Sunday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klecko73isGod Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Yet you ignore the fact where he referred to him as slight. He's a skinny pretty boy. Basically saying a skinny pretty boy doesn't want to be punched in the mouth. I don't think it's that hard to understand. I also think it's a bit silly to be concerned about it but it's a reach feeling, just like you thinking Gholston is gonna have 2 sacks Sunday. You're giving Chan too much credit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTM Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Ahh I got it. You're just being a moron. That's cool man. Not at all.. its the same type of thing that i said about the noodle arm as early as 2002 btw.. lets hope I'm not 2-2 Have you ever been in a fight or close to getting in one, I can tell you that I'd fight a guy that looks like Mark Sanchez 10 out 10 times over a guy that looks like Chuck Lidell, even though they are similiar size.. why is that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vicious89x Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Not at all.. its the same type of thing that i said about the noodle arm as early as 2002 btw.. lets hope I'm not 2-2 Have you ever been in a fight or close to getting in one, I can tell you that I'd fight a guy that looks like Mark Sanchez 10 out 10 times over a guy that looks like Chuck Lidell, even though they are similiar size.. why is that? Then again you get guys like Manny Pacquiao who are smaller then me but would knock you on your ass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMC Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Not at all.. its the same type of thing that i said about the noodle arm as early as 2002 btw.. lets hope I'm not 2-2 You said Chad was pretty in 2002??? Man, you really are ghey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTM Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 CTM has some issues he needs to work out. ha! I'm surprised your all sanchez all the time echo chamber you've created inside your empty head is able to filter the backhanded complement Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTM Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 You said Chad was pretty in 2002??? Man, you really are ghey. lol.. No.. chad is a girlie man. I bet he still doens't shave.. Sanchez is pretty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMC Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 ha! I'm surprised your all sanchez all the time echo chamber you've created inside your empty head is able to filter the backhanded complement Empty head? Did you think that was Klecko who posted that? Man, CTM, you're ghey AND blind??? WTF??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTM Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Empty head? Did you think that was Klecko who posted that? Man, CTM, you're ghey AND blind??? WTF??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTM Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 I'm gorgeous and I've never had a major injury. yeah.. but you play a different game with mens that doesn't involving hitting, light spanking maybe, but not hitting.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustInFudge Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 yeah.. but you play a different game with mens that doesn't involving hitting, light spanking maybe, but not hitting.. First you call Sanchez pretty, now you admit that I'm gorgeous, gheyhomofag Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTM Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 First you call Sanchez pretty, now you admit that I'm gorgeous, gheyhomofag so let me get this straight... the virgin who selected the only picture that could make joe klecko seem ghey as an avatar, the dood who runs around calling crusher muffin and telling him he loves him, and the guy that insists that "joe namath is hot in a daniel craig sort of way" are all telling me I'm gay? Does this mean I'm welcome in your club now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustInFudge Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 so let me get this straight... the virgin who selected the only picture that could make joe klecko seem ghey as an avatar, the dood who runs around calling crusher muffin and telling him he loves him, and the guy that insists that "joe namath is hot in a daniel craig sort of way" are all telling me I'm gay? Does this mean I'm welcome in your club now? Yes. Welcome. Your initiation present will be sent to you via PM. Its not safe for work, unless of course you are at you "other" job. Then feel free to open up the big picture of Klecko and Crusher nude eating ribs covered with peanut butter instead of BBQ sauce, over a jets coffee table, sitting on individual Jets bean bags that look like green and white ABA basketballs underneath there enormous asses, while drinking whole milk straight out the carton. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klecko73isGod Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Yes. Welcome. Your initiation present will be sent to you via PM. Its not safe for work, unless of course you are at you "other" job. Then feel free to open up the big picture of Klecko and Crusher nude eating ribs covered with peanut butter instead of BBQ sauce, over a jets coffee table, sitting on individual Jets bean bags that look like green and white ABA basketballs underneath there enormous asses, while drinking whole milk straight out the carton. YOU SAID YOU WOULDN'T SHOW THAT TO ANYBODY!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTM Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Yes. Welcome. Your initiation present will be sent to you via PM. Its not safe for work, unless of course you are at you "other" job. Then feel free to open up the big picture of Klecko and Crusher nude eating ribs covered with peanut butter instead of BBQ sauce, over a jets coffee table, sitting on individual Jets bean bags that look like green and white ABA basketballs underneath there enormous asses, while drinking whole milk straight out the carton. Good god! It's actually safe for work however as the blubber covers their bad places... Unless you were talking about their bare breasts.. but i think that's still ok as they are kind of males.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustInFudge Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Good god! It's actually safe for work however as the blubber covers their bad places... Unless you were talking about their bare breasts.. but i think that's still ok as they are kind of males.... Researches are working frantically to figure out if we have discover a new species or if its good ole obesity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.