Discussion Board
Welcome Guest! You can login or register. Login or Register.
2 Pages<12

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
User is suspended until 5/28/2018 11:54:40 AM(UTC) DakotaT  
#41 Posted : Friday, December 23, 2011 12:41:04 PM(UTC)
zombieslayer said: Go to Quoted Post
With all due respect, I used to carpool with a Motorcycle Mechanic. I had just started my first job in Software Engineering. I forgot the context, but he called himself stupid. I said, "you're not stupid. You're smarter than half the Engineers I work with. You could get broken vehicles to work and make head shots at 100 meters without a scope."

Yes, I was serious.

In the ol' Dungeons & Dragons, there's Intelligence & Wisdom. They are two separate scores. In real life, I have about a 15 or 16 Intelligence and a 6 or 7 Wisdom. I'll do stupid stuff that very few other people here will do in real life. I've made more mistakes than any of you. The ONLY reason we're doing well today is that I happen to be very good at accounting.

If I had my Intelligence and your Wisdom, I'd be unstoppable. Unfortunately I got my Intelligence and my common sense, of which the latter is pretty close to nil.



You were suppose to say, no Dakota - you're the smartest fkr in here. [grin1] But I guess I'll settle for wisdom. Really all wisodm would be is the tenacity to survive bullshit - but that's what I am - an unlucky dumbass.

Merry Christmas Nostraslayer - according to the prophets we have less than a year to go - Maybe we should go get Wade laid next fall?

zombieslayer  
#42 Posted : Friday, December 23, 2011 1:40:29 PM(UTC)
DakotaT said: Go to Quoted Post
You were suppose to say, no Dakota - you're the smartest fkr in here. [grin1] But I guess I'll settle for wisdom. Really all wisodm would be is the tenacity to survive bullshit - but that's what I am - an unlucky dumbass.

Merry Christmas Nostraslayer - according to the prophets we have less than a year to go - Maybe we should go get Wade laid next fall?



Maybe the rest of you have a year to go but I'm living to be downright nasty, and I'll rub it in to all those unappreciative young brats that I'll never die and they'll never inherit my money.

Merry Christmas Dakota, and Merry Christmas as well to anyone reading this.
Stevetarded  
#43 Posted : Friday, December 23, 2011 2:13:46 PM(UTC)
nerdmann said: Go to Quoted Post
LOL, Lang is good, but over Sitton? I guess they count the guard spots as different positions, but Dann! And Bush!?


There is always heavy favoritism toward the left side of the offensive line in these things (and all-pro for that matter) and they don't separate the positions into LT/RT etc it's just T and G. Usually the pro bowl lines are 2 LTs and 2 LGs. It's completely stupid.
zombieslayer  
#44 Posted : Friday, December 23, 2011 2:23:11 PM(UTC)
Stevetarded said: Go to Quoted Post
There is always heavy favoritism toward the left side of the offensive line in these things (and all-pro for that matter) and they don't separate the positions into LT/RT etc it's just T and G. Usually the pro bowl lines are 2 LTs and 2 LGs. It's completely stupid.


Is it?

The Left side is where you put your better blocker. Like it or not, the O is built around the QB. His health is your #1 concern long-term.

Most QBs are right-handed. Just how it is. If a guy is coming from his right side, he can see it and take appropriate measures. If a guy is coming from his left side, especially around the Left Tackle, he may be blindsided.

I don't have the stats for it, but I can almost guarantee you that when a QB gets injured in a sack, it's more likely that he got injured from his Left side and not the Right.

Even more of a guarantee, when a QB fumbles it's more than likely from the Left side as well. If you know you're gonna get hit, you protect the ball. That's what you're trained to do.
Zero2Cool  
#45 Posted : Friday, December 23, 2011 2:40:27 PM(UTC)
DakotaT said: Go to Quoted Post
I told you dumbasses this before. Cliff Clavin used the word to describe Carla's new husband when he was goaltending for the Bruins.

Oh yeah, that's how much detail I put into television. I have a mind chock full of uselessness.


chalk*
Nonstopdrivel  
#46 Posted : Friday, December 23, 2011 2:46:27 PM(UTC)
No, "chock" is correct. [duh]
User is suspended until 5/28/2018 11:54:40 AM(UTC) DakotaT  
#47 Posted : Friday, December 23, 2011 3:46:03 PM(UTC)
Nonstopdrivel said: Go to Quoted Post
No, "chock" is correct. [duh]



Nice try Zero, I guess there's somebody in here I'm smarter than. Congratulations on successfully navigating a truck through 4 or 5 states.
Dexter_Sinister  
#48 Posted : Friday, December 23, 2011 7:06:22 PM(UTC)
Nonstopdrivel said: Go to Quoted Post
No, "chock" is correct. [duh]

Unless he was saying DakotaT's mind if full of chalk.

Which is pretty funny to me.
rabidgopher04  
#49 Posted : Friday, December 23, 2011 10:17:34 PM(UTC)
Nonstopdrivel said: Go to Quoted Post
A Mamluk (transliterated variously as mamlouk, mamluq, mamluke, mameluk, mameluke, mamaluke or marmeluke) was a slave who served as a soldier in Arabic cultures from the 9th through 19th century. The word comes from the Arabic مملوك (mamlūk), which meant "owned."

Berittener Mamluk in einer Darstellung von 1810
Ermordung der Mamluken in Kairo 1811

The famous Mameluke sword looks like this:

Mameluke sword wielded by Napoleon.

They are still carried by U.S. Marines in certain ceremonial contexts.

Marine ceremonial Mameluke sword

As an insult, it fails. I think people try to use it with the connotation of "troglodyte" or "Neanderthal" or something similar, but it misses wide of the mark.


This reminds me of "nimrod" used as an insult. Nimrod is a hunter or some such thing.
zombieslayer  
#50 Posted : Saturday, December 24, 2011 4:22:10 PM(UTC)
rabidgopher04 said: Go to Quoted Post
This reminds me of "nimrod" used as an insult. Nimrod is a hunter or some such thing.


Yes, the original Nimrod was from the Bible somewhere. NSD can probably fill us in as I haven't read the whole thing. He was a great hunter.

So the modern definition of Nimrod means great hunter. But yeah, it sounds funny so the morons turned a compliment into an insult.
Stevetarded  
#51 Posted : Saturday, December 24, 2011 6:31:54 PM(UTC)
zombieslayer said: Go to Quoted Post
Is it?

The Left side is where you put your better blocker. Like it or not, the O is built around the QB. His health is your #1 concern long-term.

Most QBs are right-handed. Just how it is. If a guy is coming from his right side, he can see it and take appropriate measures. If a guy is coming from his left side, especially around the Left Tackle, he may be blindsided.

I don't have the stats for it, but I can almost guarantee you that when a QB gets injured in a sack, it's more likely that he got injured from his Left side and not the Right.

Even more of a guarantee, when a QB fumbles it's more than likely from the Left side as well. If you know you're gonna get hit, you protect the ball. That's what you're trained to do.


Yes it's stupid. Just because most teams prefer to have their better blocker at LT doesn't mean that's always that case either. Look at the Packers line. Bulaga/Sitton are a hell of a lot better than Clifton/Lang. It's perfectly reasonable to think that a player at RT was a better player in a given season than another player at LT.

Even assuming the left side is more important the difference really to me is not that significant (especially at the G position), a crappy RT can destroy an offense pretty much as easily as a crappy LT (see Alan Barbre).

I don't have a problem really if the best players during a season are indeed both left side players but I think it's stupid that a player on the right side is automatically dismissed and it is assumed any left side player was better. Like Sitton last year he won awards for being one of the best offensive lineman in all of football and I don't think he got anywhere near an all-pro vote. A player who sat out half the season made 1st team all-pro.
zombieslayer  
#52 Posted : Sunday, December 25, 2011 2:46:03 PM(UTC)
Stevetarded said: Go to Quoted Post
Yes it's stupid. Just because most teams prefer to have their better blocker at LT doesn't mean that's always that case either. Look at the Packers line. Bulaga/Sitton are a hell of a lot better than Clifton/Lang. It's perfectly reasonable to think that a player at RT was a better player in a given season than another player at LT.

Even assuming the left side is more important the difference really to me is not that significant (especially at the G position), a crappy RT can destroy an offense pretty much as easily as a crappy LT (see Alan Barbre).

I don't have a problem really if the best players during a season are indeed both left side players but I think it's stupid that a player on the right side is automatically dismissed and it is assumed any left side player was better. Like Sitton last year he won awards for being one of the best offensive lineman in all of football and I don't think he got anywhere near an all-pro vote. A player who sat out half the season made 1st team all-pro.


You still didn't address my 2 points though:
1) Sacks from the Left side are more likely to lead in QB injury (an assumption, I have no stats for this),
2) Sacks from the Left side are more likely to lead to fumbles (also an assumption, but from watching lots of football from 1976 to 2011, there's a lot of experience in my noggin).

Both points are why both coaches and voters have prejudices against the Right side.

I'm not saying it isn't stupid. I'm just explaining "why" it is what it is.
wpr  
#53 Posted : Thursday, January 30, 2014 6:37:19 AM(UTC)
when you dig out an ancient thread that is long since dead you should indicate it somehow. It is very confusing.
Zero2Cool  
#54 Posted : Thursday, January 30, 2014 6:56:08 AM(UTC)
wpr said: Go to Quoted Post
when you dig out an ancient thread that is long since dead you should indicate it somehow. It is very confusing.


lol it's really quite random. I check the users to see what their seeing and this page had 9 guests on it. Clicked it. Rourke? Rourke who!!
wpr  
#55 Posted : Thursday, January 30, 2014 8:00:25 AM(UTC)
Zero2Cool said: Go to Quoted Post
lol it's really quite random. I check the users to see what their seeing and this page had 9 guests on it. Clicked it. Rourke? Rourke who!!


I was just messing with you.
Rss Feed
Users browsing this topic
Guest
2 Pages<12
Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Notification

Icon
Error

Fan Shout
Nonstopdrivel (18h) : should have done*
Zero2Cool (21-Feb) : Hi 😊😉
TheKanataThrilla (21-Feb) : I guess I should have did a refresh when I walked away from the computer.
TheKanataThrilla (21-Feb) : Peters is 25 with one year left on his contract at just over $3M
Zero2Cool (21-Feb) : Mel Kiper sticks with Marcus Davenport to GB in 2nd mock
Zero2Cool (21-Feb) : As for Marcus Peters, how old is he an what's his contract years left?
Zero2Cool (21-Feb) : Packers got tired of Sitton's antics.
Zero2Cool (21-Feb) : Sitton was released not because of play or salary, but personality. He will not be re-signed.
TheKanataThrilla (21-Feb) : If we are planning on possibly cutting Cobb I can see the 2nd round pick. A second round pick for Peters is a pretty good deal.
Smokey (21-Feb) : I'd offer Cobb + a 3rd round pick + a 6th round pick in 2019 for the CB Peters from KC.
TheKanataThrilla (21-Feb) : I guess that is a highter round pick
TheKanataThrilla (21-Feb) : Suggestion was a 2nd round pick. I would want a lower round pick. I think that is too much. A 3rd or 4th seems about right.
Smokey (21-Feb) : Cobb and WHAT PICK ?
TheKanataThrilla (21-Feb) : A suggestion I saw was a trade of Cobb and a Pick for Peters. I think that would be a great move.
Smokey (21-Feb) : Sitton was drafted be GB in 2008, not a young man at this point, but still is a "bear" of a man.
Cheesey (21-Feb) : Sitton? Maybe if the price is right.
Cheesey (21-Feb) : I doubt the Packers would try to resign Sutton. But who knows? If the price is right?
Zero2Cool (20-Feb) : Bears declining option on Josh Sitton. He'll be Free Agent.
Zero2Cool (20-Feb) : Chiefs CB Marcus Peters trade rumors -- come to Packers!
Smokey (20-Feb) : Join us in Packershome and be part of the discussion today .
Zero2Cool (19-Feb) : Elizabeeth ... good bye
Zero2Cool (19-Feb) : Saturday, August 19, 2017
Zero2Cool (19-Feb) : That's dedicated spammng!
Nonstopdrivel (19-Feb) : For some reason, I had to flush my DNS cache to access this site from my laptop today.
Nonstopdrivel (19-Feb) : I prefer toads to frogs, Smokey, thank you very much.
Rockmolder (19-Feb) : My girlfriends says thanks, Rourke.
Smokey (19-Feb) : Nonstopdrivel that you most likely say to all the frogs you meet .
Nonstopdrivel (19-Feb) : Rockmolder's avatar is so fucking sexy.
gbguy20 (19-Feb) : never seen the interview before. tough to listen to. can't believe it was 7 years ago
gbguy20 (19-Feb) : just watched a nick Collins tribute on yourube. the end featured an interview with nick reflecting on his injury
buckeyepackfan (17-Feb) : Saints De'Vante Harris nothing but a POS!!!!! Look up his tweetes on Florida killings!!
Nonstopdrivel (17-Feb) : They're laying new gas line near my house. The trucks are all from a company in Madison.
Smokey (14-Feb) : 2018 Hall o Fame Game/Aug.2,2018/Ravens vs Bears
Zero2Cool (13-Feb) : Based off 2017 records, Packers have toughest schedule for 2018
Smokey (13-Feb) : Wow, tough new 2018 Packer Schedule !
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2017 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 10 @ 3:25 PM
SEAHAWKS
Sunday, Sep 17 @ 7:30 PM
at Falcons
Sunday, Sep 24 @ 3:25 PM
BENGALS
Thursday, Sep 28 @ 7:25 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Oct 8 @ 3:25 PM
at Cowboys
Sunday, Oct 15 @ 12:00 PM
at Vikings
Sunday, Oct 22 @ 12:00 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Oct 29 @ 12:00 AM
- BYE -
Monday, Nov 6 @ 7:30 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 12 @ 12:00 PM
at Bears
Sunday, Nov 19 @ 12:00 PM
RAVENS
Sunday, Nov 26 @ 7:30 PM
at Steelers
Sunday, Dec 3 @ 12:00 PM
BUCCANEERS
Sunday, Dec 10 @ 12:00 PM
at Browns
Sunday, Dec 17 @ 12:00 PM
at Panthers
Saturday, Dec 23 @ 7:30 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Dec 31 @ 12:00 PM
at Lions
Think About It
Think About It
Recent Topics
7h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

7h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

7h / Random Babble / Cheesey

8h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

11h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

12h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Rockmolder

22h / Green Bay Packers Talk / TheKanataThrilla

22-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

21-Feb / Random Babble / Smokey

21-Feb / Random Babble / Pack93z

21-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Smokey

19-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Smokey

17-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Rockmolder

16-Feb / Around The NFL / Cheesey

14-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

Headlines