Sammuels haters! How many sacks did he give up?

[goldenster95]

That's right, and for the right deal, I'd pull the trigger.

And he also got "punked", to borrow from your MTV inspired vocabulary, by him in game 1. What does that demonstrate? Inconsistency.

Where's the post? Waiting.

So what? Your a hypocrite. You can reference "authorities", but I cannot?

Uh sure, you'd pull the trigger, huh? Well, I guess you'd better consult the nurse about the fact that your meds haven't fully curbed your lunatic fringe. No one in their right mind would do that with someone who's ranked as high as Samuels is by reputable scouting reports and now a Pro-Bowl berth as a starter this year.

As for the report, I posted it already. It's from Scouts, Inc. and it's a report this year. If you'd like, do a search on my posts, sonny.

Oh yeah . . . and I guess you think Art's in left field too, right? I'm quoting him because his comments are the perfect embodiment of the Scouts, Inc. report and the Pro-Bowl selection committee this year . . .

Psssst . . . here it is again . . .

Originally Posted by Art

Chris Samuels has had exactly ONE bad game this year, against the Giants. He had another so-so game against the Chiefs. Prior to the Chiefs he was brilliant. Utterly brilliant. After the Giants he's been utterly brilliant, including today, against the Giants. Samuels is athletic and technically sound. Not being able to recognize his skill is a flaw in many[ART'S REFERRING TO MORONS LIKE YOU IN THIS STATEMENT], including foolish sports journalists who have a bit too great an impression of themselves.

Elfin is a tool. A wee balding tool who probably would do well in a Redskins trivia game, but would have little idea what talent evaluation or appreciation consists of.

[goldenster95]

That's fine, Art. But it's just your opinion. I also watched every game either live or on TV, and disagree. I my view, he's been inconsistent. Brilliant at times (like today), and utterly dissappointing at other times. He may possess a tremendous amount of athleticism and skill, but it doesn't translate on the field as consistently as you'd expect for a so-called elite OT. He's inconsistent.

Nonetheless, I respect your opinion and I think that reasonable people can disagree.

Well, Skippy, it's not just Art saying that. It's reputable talent evaluators. It's also people like his peers and talent evaluators from other teams that vote him into the Pro-Bowl.

Of course, you're smarter than them all, right?

HEY -- DING, DING, DING -- OAKTON FOR OUR NEW GM.

[goldenster95]

OSF.

It's ok to admit you are wrong. You missed on Samuels.

I admitted I was wrong about Brunell last year. Of course, it turns out I was actually right so I'm still perfect. You aren't .

Amen.

[OaktonSkins/BushFan]

OSF.

It's ok to admit you are wrong. You missed on Samuels.

I admitted I was wrong about Brunell last year. Of course, it turns out I was actually right so I'm still perfect. You aren't .

At some point during the offseason, I'm going to revisit several games. I'll post more afterwards.

[OaktonSkins/BushFan]

Uh sure, you'd pull the trigger, huh? Well, I guess you'd better consult the nurse about the fact that your meds haven't fully curbed your lunatic fringe. No one in their right mind would do that with someone who's ranked as high as Samuels is by reputable scouting reports and now a Pro-Bowl berth as a starter this year.

As for the report, I posted it already. It's from Scouts, Inc. and it's a report this year. If you'd like, do a search on my posts, sonny.

Oh yeah . . . and I guess you think Art's in left field too, right? I'm quoting him because his comments are the perfect embodiment of the Scouts, Inc. report and the Pro-Bowl selection committee this year . . .

Psssst . . . here it is again . . .

Why don't you reference three of my posts containing direct links to articles in the WP discussing Samuels trade rumours. I guess the Redskins FO and coaching staff must of have been as crazy as I am. :doh:

[Art]

That's fine, Art. But it's just your opinion. I also watched every game either live or on TV, and disagree. I my view, he's been inconsistent. Brilliant at times (like today), and utterly dissappointing at other times. He may possess a tremendous amount of athleticism and skill, but it doesn't translate on the field as consistently as you'd expect for a so-called elite OT. He's inconsistent.

Nonetheless, I respect your opinion and I think that reasonable people can disagree.

OSF,

I'm not saying Samuels is consistent enough to be the game's top left tackle. He isn't. But, he's every bit as consistent as every other left tackle in the game today. Today, all left tackles have inconsistency. All in the Pro Bowl have had a bad game sprinkled in or a couple of bad plays. For the most part Samuels has had a remarkably consistent year. We're LUCKY to have a guy Bugel has gotten a lot out of.

Disliking him just doesn't make any sense. Unless you're a fan of someone else. They they should hate him.

[OaktonSkins/BushFan]

Well, Skippy, it's not just Art saying that. It's reputable talent evaluators. It's also people like his peers and talent evaluators from other teams that vote him into the Pro-Bowl.

Of course, you're smarter than them all, right?

HEY -- DING, DING, DING -- OAKTON FOR OUR NEW GM.

Yep, and the same folks that voted Mike Vick and Roy Williams in. Why don't you tell iheart that he's an idiot for not worshipping at the altar of the Pro Bowl gods? Check out the link I posted to that ES thread.

Piss off...

[OaktonSkins/BushFan]

OSF,

I'm not saying Samuels is consistent enough to be the game's top left tackle. He isn't. But, he's every bit as consistent as every other left tackle in the game today. Today, all left tackles have inconsistency. All in the Pro Bowl have had a bad game sprinkled in or a couple of bad plays. For the most part Samuels has had a remarkably consistent year. We're LUCKY to have a guy Bugel has gotten a lot out of.

Disliking him just doesn't make any sense. Unless you're a fan of someone else. They they should hate him.

Fair enough. Like I said, I'll review some key games from this season - particularly the losses - as time permits and post again.

[Art]

OSF,

No question the Pro Bowl is not a TRUE measure of the best players in the game as it is generally a HUGE popularity contest. However, Michael Vick and Roy Williams are not the same as Chris Samuels or, really, any offensive lineman. Vick and Williams are tremendously high profile players who are among the most popular in the game. Samuels, like all offensive linemen, work in the shadows. They aren't personalities. It's not about popularity with them.

The flaw of the Pro Bowl is that "popular" players beat out mroe deserving players. On the offensive line this is the case with guys like Larry Allen who has made it on reputation. But, Samuels isn't one of those players. Not after having missed it for a couple of years. He got in because those who make that call respected how he played.

[goldenster95]

Why don't you reference three of my posts containing direct links to articles in the WP discussing Samuels trade rumours. I guess the Redskins FO and coaching staff must of have been as crazy as I am. :doh:

Ummmm hey dude, that's hardly the issue. Just to disgress a little, I'll mention that people are traded for many different reasons (e.g., Coles was traded not because he was perceived as being a poor WR but because of his attitude). At any rate, that has no bearing on the issue of how Samuels has played this year.

Do you ever get a subtle hint that you're an idiot when you see scouting reports, Pro-Bowl berths, and now moderators coming in and telling you've gon off the deep end?

Does it?

Originally Posted by Art

Chris Samuels has had exactly ONE bad game this year, against the Giants. He had another so-so game against the Chiefs. Prior to the Chiefs he was brilliant. Utterly brilliant. After the Giants he's been utterly brilliant, including today, against the Giants. Samuels is athletic and technically sound. Not being able to recognize his skill is a flaw in many[ART'S REFERRING TO MORONS LIKE YOU IN THIS STATEMENT], including foolish sports journalists who have a bit too great an impression of themselves.

Elfin is a tool. A wee balding tool who probably would do well in a Redskins trivia game, but would have little idea what talent evaluation or appreciation consists of.

Oh yeah, just for good measure, here's another clue you might want to take from Ghost . . .

Originally Posted by Ghost of Nibbs McPimpin

Come on guys. I don't want to sound corny but I don't want EITHER of you banned even though I think one guy is right and the other dreadfully wrong[THAT'S YOU BY THE WAY].

[OaktonSkins/BushFan]

OSF,

I'm not saying Samuels is consistent enough to be the game's top left tackle. He isn't. But, he's every bit as consistent as every other left tackle in the game today. Today, all left tackles have inconsistency. All in the Pro Bowl have had a bad game sprinkled in or a couple of bad plays. For the most part Samuels has had a remarkably consistent year. We're LUCKY to have a guy Bugel has gotten a lot out of.

Disliking him just doesn't make any sense. Unless you're a fan of someone else. They they should hate him.

But he's paid far more money than almost every other OT in the NFL. It comes down to value. As previously stated, I wouldn't really ***** too much about CS IF he didn't take up so much cap space.

[goldenster95]

OSF,

No question the Pro Bowl is not a TRUE measure of the best players in the game as it is generally a HUGE popularity contest. However, Michael Vick and Roy Williams are not the same as Chris Samuels or, really, any offensive lineman. Vick and Williams are tremendously high profile players who are among the most popular in the game. Samuels, like all offensive linemen, work in the shadows. They aren't personalities. It's not about popularity with them.

The flaw of the Pro Bowl is that "popular" players beat out mroe deserving players. On the offensive line this is the case with guys like Larry Allen who has made it on reputation. But, Samuels isn't one of those players. Not after having missed it for a couple of years. He got in because those who make that call respected how he played.

Good God, amen Art. This is the EXACT point I was trying to make to Oakton. I stated that while SOME Pro-Bowl selections may be based on reputation, not ALL of them are. One good example of a reputation pick on the o-line is Larry Allen. No way does he deserve to be named to the Pro-Bowl this year or for the past few years for that matter.

However, when you're talking about someone who's going in for the first time or for the first time in a few years, that too isn't a reputation pick. And with that type of a selection, it's foolhardy to think that that player is inconsistent or a poor player, much less one that, in Oakton's lame opinion, should either be traded or cut.

[Art]

But he's paid far more money than almost every other OT in the NFL. It comes down to value. As previously stated, I wouldn't really ***** too much about CS IF he didn't take up so much cap space.

You need not to worry about what the guy makes. He plays well. Bugel loves him. We have a top running game. We have an effective, growing passing game. We're protecting better and better. Samuels is doing his job. That you think he's paid too much is irrelevant. He's paid what WE value his position in this offense. It may be too much. But, for how we value it, it's just the right amount.

And, honestly, there isn't a single left tackle playing today I'd rather have. Every other one has as many warts as Samuels when you break down their play this year. Ogden has been schooled by Freeney. Jones by Osi. Everyone is doing a number on Pace. Maybe the others have fallen some and Samuels has grown some, but, Samuels is playing as well as any left tackle in the game as of this moment. I think he has the talent to legitimately be there on the level Ogden and Pace used to be, though he's never quite gotten there.

[OaktonSkins/BushFan]

Ummmm hey dude, that's hardly the issue. Just to disgress a little, I'll mention that people are traded for many different reasons (e.g., Coles was traded not because he was perceived as being a poor WR but because of his attitude). At any rate, that has no bearing on the issue of how Samuels has played this year.

Do you ever get a subtle hint that you're an idiot when you see scouting reports, Pro-Bowl berths, and now moderators coming in and telling you've gon off the deep end?

Does it?

Oh yeah, just for good measure, here's another clue you might want to take from Ghost . . .

Right. They considered trading him two years in a row. Why? Probably had something to do with perceived value. How he's played this year is not the only issue that's being debated; CS's career - which ultimately is what we're discussing - isn't defined by one year. Idiot.

[goldenster95]

Yep, and the same folks that voted Mike Vick and Roy Williams in. Why don't you tell iheart that he's an idiot for not worshipping at the altar of the Pro Bowl gods? Check out the link I posted to that ES thread.

Piss off...

Hey dummy, you're getting routed . . . will you be telling Art to "piss off" too? . . . maybe you outta (1) understand how to logically parse out two or more concepts and (2) comprehend why they make a difference . . .

OSF,

No question the Pro Bowl is not a TRUE measure of the best players in the game as it is generally a HUGE popularity contest. However, Michael Vick and Roy Williams are not the same as Chris Samuels or, really, any offensive lineman. Vick and Williams are tremendously high profile players who are among the most popular in the game. Samuels, like all offensive linemen, work in the shadows. They aren't personalities. It's not about popularity with them.

The flaw of the Pro Bowl is that "popular" players beat out mroe deserving players. On the offensive line this is the case with guys like Larry Allen who has made it on reputation. But, Samuels isn't one of those players. Not after having missed it for a couple of years. He got in because those who make that call respected how he played.

Sorry, son, but you, like Osi, just got owned. Again.

[goldenster95]

Right. They considered trading him two years in a row. Why? Probably had something to do with perceived value. How he's played this year is not the only issue that's being debated; CS's career - which ultimately is what we're discussing - isn't defined by one year. Idiot.

Ummm, hey dummy, the 'Skins wanted to trade him because Samuels didn't want to renegotiate his contract. Why? Because he wasn't doing well under Spurrier and Helton and to renegotiate his contract then would be doing so from a position of weakness. This was a widely publicized stance of Samuels, something you completely missed. Meanwhile, while Samuels was sticking to his rookie contract (after people like Lavar re-did his), the 'Skins got pissed. This is similar to what happened with Stephen Davis, who signed a big 10 year deal with the notion of renegotiating it the year after. When Spurrier came in and he didn't want to re-do his contract, he was dumped not because he wasn't any good, but because of other reasons.

Oh yeah, and I'll refer to Art once again.

Like I said, you're being clowned.

Idiot.

[goldenster95]

One more thing. This isn't a debate about how Samuels is this season? LMFAO! Rookie year: he was considered someone who met his hype. 2001: Pro-Bowl. 2002: Pro-Bowl. 2003: Slipped under Helton. 2004: Dramatically improved. 2005: Pro-Bowl.

Yeah, what a horrendous record he's had here.

[OaktonSkins/BushFan]

I think he has the talent to legitimately be there on the level Ogden and Pace used to be, though he's never quite gotten there.

Yep, he hasn't gotten there but he's also he second highest paid OT in the NFL behind Ogden.

Now, I think you are correct in stating that thers IS value in having someone that knows the system this well and is growing within that system. In other words, there's always a learning curve for new guys - i.e. a newly acquired OT - and that does need to be considered.

I wonder how another solid OT - not great -would have faired, and how that cap savings could have helped us in other positions of great need like a top flight DE.

[OaktonSkins/BushFan]

One more thing. This isn't a debate about how Samuels is this season? QUOTE]

My dog has a higher IQ that you do. I said this discussion isn't defined by only one season - this season.

[goldenster95]

That's fine, Art. But it's just your opinion. I also watched every game either live or on TV, and disagree. I my view, he's been inconsistent. Brilliant at times (like today), and utterly dissappointing at other times. He may possess a tremendous amount of athleticism and skill, but it doesn't translate on the field as consistently as you'd expect for a so-called elite OT. He's inconsistent.

Nonetheless, I respect your opinion and I think that reasonable people can disagree.

Ummm, the only difference between Art's opinion and yours is that Art's opinion is actually backed up by reputable talent evaluators and Pro-Bowl selection committees.

You, on the other hand, have all but your own moronic view of things. Fortunately for you, the Supreme Court has held that there can't be such a thing as a "false idea." That means you can't be held civilly or criminally liable for uttering idiotic opinions like you have here. If that ever changes, you might think about joining Roman Polanski in France to avoid the lethal injection seat.

Knock yourself out, skippy.

:stupid:

[goldenster95]

One more thing. This isn't a debate about how Samuels is this season? QUOTE]

My dog has a higher IQ that you do. I said this discussion isn't defined by only one season - this season.

Well that still makes us higher intellectual beings than you, huh?

You're really pathetic and sad.

After getting routed -- especially by Art -- you still drivel on to salvage the last shred of pride you have.

I'd allow that to happen if you just admit you're wrong, just like Art suggested for you to do, but it'll be fun taking that one last shred of pride away from you.

Keep at it, moron.

[OaktonSkins/BushFan]

Hey dummy, you're getting routed . . . will you be telling Art to "piss off" too? . . . maybe you outta (1) understand how to logically parse out two or more concepts and (2) comprehend why they make a difference . . .

Sorry, son, but you, like Osi, just got owned. Again.

For someone that constantly employs logical fallacies, you've got some nerve to lecture me - incorrectly - about the use of logic.

[Monkart]

That's right, and for the right deal, I'd pull the trigger.

I'll tell you what, just pull my finger

just couldn't resist! suggesting he had a part of the blame for Brunells sack is just

[goldenster95]

For someone that constantly employs logical fallacies, you've got some nerve to lecture me - incorrectly - about the use of logic.

Ah yes, the use of evidence and things like that to support my point. How "illogical" of me.

I know who you are now. You're the Iraqi Information Minister (or went to his school of speech and debate). There's no idiotic point you can make that can ever be contradicted by the most probative or conclusive of evidence.

Example: you say one thing, and Art nukes it. Yet, you come back to me with some other lame response on the point Art nuked.

Hey, Mr. Sahaf, has the Republican Guard taken Baghdad from the infidels?

LMFAO!!!!!!!!!

[goldenster95]

I'll tell you what, just pull my finger

just couldn't resist! suggesting he had a part of the blame for Brunells sack is just

Nahhhhh . . . that sack really should've been credited to Samuels. LMFAO!!!!!!