Well that's weird...

[Doppelganger]

Nice bro! No you're just DBCs brother or something. RIP DBC

See?

Totally incompetent.

 

[Doppelganger]

After your 7th audition with the band, you still can't figure out why you keep playing the meat flute.

And I'm the one off topic?

 

[Doppelganger]

You refuse to debate the point and stay on the topic of the thread.

How could you say this with a straight face?

I'm dealing nothing but numbers, facts and analysis in this thread.

It's you and your clown posse that can't make a single salient point to save your lives.

 

[jhtheking]

Way to completely dodge the argument by bringing up something entirely irrelevant.

How did I dodge the argument?

You said 5% is a tiny difference. I said it's not.

Amazing that you could come with that line as your first response.

After your 7th audition with the band, you still can't figure out why you keep playing the meat flute. You refuse to debate the point and stay on the topic of the thread. You pull one line at a time out of context and argue it as if it was intended to stand on its own. You just did it to yourself. At no point in time did you ever make the statement that 5% was significant, nor did I ever state that it was not. You made a completely asinine comment that if Rosier completed 62% rather than 57% we wouldn't have to win games at the end. I correctly pointed out that that 5% difference was only 1.5 additional completions per game. A game being close in the end or not very rarely hinges on 1 or 2 pass attempts. If it's that close, other factors had to have been at play.

Then, true to form, you completely disregarded your original statement and doubled down on your stupidity by suggesting that 5%, the difference between 57 and 62%--you may chose to ignore the context and pretend that your statement of 5% stands on it's own rather than in direct response to my statement, was the difference between being drafted and not, and 10% being the difference between being a first rounder and not being drafted.

I asked you to reinforce that bull**** statement, when I should have just realized that the fact that you were again attempting to derail the argument meant that I had already won. So I offered examples of my own of QB's being drafted with completion percentages between 57 and 61.8, including a first round, no. 3 overall pick.

NOW you've seem to think you have a time machine that would allow you to go back and change your original argument. This is a prime example of you derailing a thread. The theme presented by OP was the statistical similarities between Jackson and Rosier. You tried to hijack the thread and be the smartest guy in the room by pointing to what amounts to a statistical anomaly on a per game basis. 1.5 pass attempts out of a sample size of 30-40 is not going to make or break a game, and that ratio over the course of a few seasons is not going to make or break a career. But you're seeming to suggest that it is the difference between Virginia Tech having an NFL QB and us having a JAG.

Next, you're going to take each line of the above out of context and spam my notification bar with irrelevant nonsense as if each line was presented independently rather than a complete body of work in response to your earlier bull****. Have at it cupcake. Be sure to tell the band director I said hi.

Dude Doppleganger is not worth your time. Cut your losses. He just plays devil's advocate til you give up.

 

[Doppelganger]

You pull one line at a time out of context and argue it as if it was intended to stand on its own.

Explain to me how quoting a specific line and then responding to it is out of context.

You can't.

All you can do is whine about this small point because you can't win on the topic.

56.7% passers don't get drafted a vast majority of the time.

5% is a huge difference.

 

[Doppelganger]

At no point in time did you ever make the statement that 5% was significant, nor did I ever state that it was not.

It's amazing how much dishonesty and just straight up revisionism one person can partake in.

Here's a quick refresher on this current thread:

If he was a 62% passer like Jackson we likely wouldn't have to win games at the end.

You do know that 5%, the difference between 57% and 62%, is only one additional completion in every twenty attempts.

5% is the difference between being drafted and undrafted.

10% is the difference between a first round pick (Winston) and undrafted.

It's a game of thin margins.

So basically I said that if Rosier was 5% better we wouldn't be in these close games (5% is significant) then you said that 5% wasn't much (5% is not significant).

But then you just turned around and lied about it.

 

[Doppelganger]

You made a completely asinine comment that if Rosier completed 62% rather than 57% we wouldn't have to win games at the end. I correctly pointed out that that 5% difference was only 1.5 additional completions per game. A game being close in the end or not very rarely hinges on 1 or 2 pass attempts. If it's that close, other factors had to have been at play.

Then you make this incredible statement.

First you say that you never said that 5% was insignificant (but you actually did) then you say that 5% more completions would be totally insignificant to the outcome of games!

How is it possible that you're this deluded?

 

[Doppelganger]

So I offered examples of my own of QB's being drafted with completion percentages between 57 and 61.8, including a first round, no. 3 overall pick.

Your examples were stupid and I proved it.

Of course you never responded to that post.

Typical.

 

[Doppelganger]

The theme presented by OP was the statistical similarities between Jackson and Rosier. You tried to hijack the thread and be the smartest guy in the room by pointing to what amounts to a statistical anomaly on a per game basis.

No.

I provided examples where the statistical similarities end and why Jackson was having a better season than Rosier.

That's completely on topic.

The issue is that fanboys don't like it when their players aren't being ceaselessly praised. That's why I get so many down votes by people like you.

 

[QuattroCane]

This is what I don't get about you, you keep mentioning "winning" so you're essentially saying you come here to argue and try to win.
FFS this is supposed to be a place for Miami fans to discuss the team etc., not a debate club.

 

[Doppelganger]

This is what I don't get about you, you keep mentioning "winning" so you're essentially saying you come here to argue and try to win.
FFS this is supposed to be a place for Miami fans to discuss the team etc., not a debate club.

No, I come here to discuss the team.

What happens though is that this board has so much ignorance and stupidity that common sense and advance analytics are seen as some kind of affront to their fandom.

I just don't care about your sensibilities so I just give that side of the debate regardless of whether is hurts your fragile psyche.

 

[Hurracanes]

This is what I don't get about you, you keep mentioning "winning" so you're essentially saying you come here to argue and try to win.
FFS this is supposed to be a place for Miami fans to discuss the team etc., not a debate club.

No, I come here to discuss the team.

What happens though is that this board has so much ignorance and stupidity that common sense and advance analytics are seen as some kind of affront to their fandom.

I just don't care about your sensibilities so I just give that side of the debate regardless of whether is hurts your fragile psyche.

I agree there are many misinformed and idiotic posters on this board; however, are you really here to discuss the team or are you just deliberately looking to argue with any poster you choose? It seems like you’re high jacking every thread and are here just to stir **** with people.

 

[QuattroCane]

This is what I don't get about you, you keep mentioning "winning" so you're essentially saying you come here to argue and try to win.
FFS this is supposed to be a place for Miami fans to discuss the team etc., not a debate club.

No, I come here to discuss the team.

What happens though is that this board has so much ignorance and stupidity that common sense and advance analytics are seen as some kind of affront to their fandom.

I just don't care about your sensibilities so I just give that side of the debate regardless of whether is hurts your fragile psyche.

And your last sentence tells me all I really need to know about you.

 

[Doppelganger]

however, are you really here to discuss the team or are you just deliberately looking to argue with any poster you choose? It seems like you’re high jacking every thread and are here just to stir **** with people.

Again, this is what I'm talking about.

So much softness on this board that people think that bluntness is trolling.

It's as if all of these fanboys were born and raised in glass bubbles and they've never had to defend their statements before.

 

[Doppelganger]

[And your last sentence tells me all I really need to know about you.

And every post you've ever had tells me everything about you.

Zero substance.

A waste of everybody's time.

 

[Loose Cannon]

 

[Loose Cannon]

 

[Doppelganger]

Desperate meme move.....now!

 

[miamicanephins]

At no point in time did you ever make the statement that 5% was significant, nor did I ever state that it was not.

It's amazing how much dishonesty and just straight up revisionism one person can partake in.

Here's a quick refresher on this current thread:

If he was a 62% passer like Jackson we likely wouldn't have to win games at the end.

You do know that 5%, the difference between 57% and 62%, is only one additional completion in every twenty attempts.

5% is the difference between being drafted and undrafted.

10% is the difference between a first round pick (Winston) and undrafted.

It's a game of thin margins.

So basically I said that if Rosier was 5% better we wouldn't be in these close games (5% is significant) then you said that 5% wasn't much (5% is not significant).

But then you just turned around and lied about it.

The 5% difference is likely due to the drops, not badly thrown balls. If those catches are made it is probable that the games wouldn't be as close, but that's pure conjecture. Since this is a team game, the 5% could be attributed to the actions of others, ie., drops, missed blocks, penalties, rather than solely Rosier's "fault". Even if Rosier is at 67%, it doen't mean we score more touchdowns. There could be breakdowns in other areas.

 

[RepTheGables]

And one poster has totally derailed this thread.

We get it, dude- you're just here to discuss Malik Rosier's performance. But you've done that with uninterrupted streams of a half-dozen posts and whole paragraphs about "winning" and the fragile psyches of others. Just make your point and be done with it. You can ********** on your own time.