'He is a great player.....get over it!'

[Shilsu]

By the way, you know how I know you guys are grasping for straws?

You're trying to argue whether you should have been able to understand my post or not in the first place.

Say you're right, and my post was impossible to understand. Now that it IS understandable, my point stands.

Say you're wrong, and my post was ableto be understood. My point still stands.

That's what separates the people who get it and the people who don't get it.

[Shilsu]

The irony of a man indirectly claiming to be literate (through their condescending treatment of other, presumably literate people) not bothering to read through the ES Rules & Guidelines before writing the above post is quite delightful.

But seriously, enough. I know there isn't much to talk about when it comes to JaMarcus Russell, but hey, that's what this topic is for, and it was doing fine for a while.

Yes, this topic was for JaMarcus Russell until Califan007 and self-appointed English scholars such as yourself began crying about whether my post was understandable or not. Good job.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

Key operative word being logged.

But leave it to Califan007 to try to argue semantics to cover up for his big blooper, not unlike some of his other stupid posts about how TO had no effect on the Philadelphia Eagles crappy WR core or how Shawn Springs should put up the same stats whether he plays versus the #27 offense or the #3 offense.

:rotflmao:....wtf does it matter if you said "logged" or not? lol...You said "JaMarcus Russell had only logged stats in eight full games". At the time of YOUR post, Russell HAD logged stats in 9 full games. You thought that actually made your point? lol :doh:...(just in case you didn't know, Russell is not required to "log" his own stats into NFL.com lol...so as soon as he had taken his last snap, he has "logged" in a full game.)

Oh, and in case you've forgotten what your point actually was (lord knows it was asinine enough for you to want to forget it), you said Russell's stats in his first "eight" (should be nine) games were comparable to Campbell's stats in HIS first "eight" (should be nine lol) games. Well, on a simplistic level that is true, yes...but look at how Russell's last 4 games of his first nine games (games 6 through 9) compare to Campbell's last 4 games of his first 9, because it shows how each QB was/is truly developing, and if they are "comparable":

Games 6-9:

Russell: 55.5 QB rating

Campbell: 78.8 QB rating

Russell: 43.6% completion rate

Campbell: 57.9% completion rate

Russell: 5.3 ypa

Campbell: 7.6 ypa

As well as Russell's 9th, um, "full gamed logged", he was an atrocious 6-19 for 31 yards, 0 TDs, 1 INT and an embarrassing loss, his 3rd loss in four games. By contrast, Campbell's 9th "full game logged" he was 16-29 for 209 yards, 1 TD, 1 INT and an impressive road win on MNF, no less, leading his team to a 2-0 start. So wanting to say Russell's and Campbell's stats were "comparable" during their first 8 (should be 9 lol) games is only accurate if you're easily distracted by the simplicity of the surface and don't really have the mental capacity to truly analyze stats and numbers.

And just for ****s and giggles, here's a comparison between Shuler's "Games 6-9" of HIS career compared to Russell's:

Games 6-9:

Russell: 55.5 QB rating

Shuler: 72.6 QB rating

Russell: 43.6% completion rate

Campbell: 49.6% completion rate

Russell: 5.3 ypa

Campbell: 6.8 ypa

So it would appear that Metskins might actually have been onto something when he said Russell was looking worse than Shuler...at least if you go by how each QB looked at this stage in their early careers. But I'm positive you would have known all this if only JaMarcus Russell had logged in his stats for yesterday's game before you posted. :cool:

*Edit: and just to summarize, because I can already see Shilsu not quite "getting" the point of my post above (heh), Russell's level of play is not comparable to Campbell's level of play at the same point in their careers, or even to Shuler's level of play, because both Campbell and Shuler were both improving noticeably as their first 9 games were coming to an end. Russell, in contrast, is regressing signficiantly, not improving.

[Shilsu]

:rotflmao:....wtf does it matter if you said "logged" or not? lol...You said "JaMarcus Russell had only logged stats in eight full games". At the time of YOUR post, Russell HAD logged stats in 9 full games. You thought that actually made your point? lol :doh:...(just in case you didn't know, Russell is not required to "log" his own stats into NFL.com lol...so as soon as he had taken his last snap, he has "logged" in a full game.)

Oh, and in case you've forgotten what your point actually was (lord knows it was asinine enough for you to want to forget it), you said Russell's stats in his first "eight" (should be nine) games were comparable to Campbell's stats in HIS first "eight" (should be nine lol) games. Well, on a simplistic level that is true, yes...but look at how Russell's last 4 games of his first nine games (games 6 through 9) compare to Campbell's last 4 games of his first 9, because it shows how each QB was/is truly developing, and if they are "comparable":

Games 6-9:

Russell: 55.5 QB rating

Campbell: 78.8 QB rating

Russell: 43.6% completion rate

Campbell: 57.9% completion rate

Russell: 5.3 ypa

Campbell: 7.6 ypa

As well as Russell's 9th, um, "full gamed logged", he was an atrocious 6-19 for 31 yards, 0 TDs, 1 INT and an embarrassing loss, his 3rd loss in four games. By contrast, Campbell's 9th "full game logged" he was 16-29 for 209 yards, 1 TD, 1 INT and an impressive road win on MNF, no less, leading his team to a 2-0 start. So wanting to say Russell's and Campbell's stats were "comparable" during their first 8 (should be 9 lol) games is only accurate if you're easily distracted by the simplicity of the surface and don't really have the mental capacity to truly analyze stats and numbers.

And just for ****s and giggles, here's a comparison between Shuler's "Games 6-9" of HIS career compared to Russell's:

Games 6-9:

Russell: 55.5 QB rating

Shuler: 72.6 QB rating

Russell: 43.6% completion rate

Campbell: 49.6% completion rate

Russell: 5.3 ypa

Campbell: 6.8 ypa

So it would appear that Metskins might actually have been onto something when he said Russell was looking worse than Shuler...at least if you go by how each QB looked at this stage in their early careers. But I'm positive you would have known all this if only JaMarcus Russell had logged in his stats for yesterday's game before you posted. :cool:

Good job, Califan007! You discovered the magical Game 6-9 identifier that will properly compare quarterbacks! But check this out, let me one up your awesome discovery with this one!

If you look at just of Game 3 and Game 8 of each QB's starts, you get:

Jason Campell - 50.8%, 1 TD - 4 INT, 52.8 Rating, 7.4 YPA

JaMarcus Russell - 65.5%, 2 TD - 1 INT, 90.0 Rating, 7.0 YPA

Heath Shuler - 40.0%, 2 TD - 6 INT, 28.2 Rating, 5.1 YPA

I think we need to do some further analysis to see whether your Game 6-9 stat is more relevant than my Game 3 + Game 8 stat!

[Shilsu]

Oh, and just to summarize, this is more proof of Califan007's inability to grasp numbers properly. You put Califan007's stats on a pure football site, and his lame "analysis" would be revealed.

Just like his claim about how TO had no impact on the rest of the receiving, particularly Pinkston getting two 100 yard games (I'm sorry, one was only a 99-yarder) versus Gregg Williams' #3 defense, because Pinkston had 75 yards against the Redskins' #25 defense in 2003.

Yup, Santana Moss had no impact on the Eagles game this year, either.

Or how about his assertation that Shawn Springs should have been getting 2 interceptions per game because that's what he got against the #27 offense and their backup quarterback.

Thanks Califan007 for blessing this forum with your wonderful football knowledge that can only be rivaled by Dr. Z and his big binder.

[The Caretaker]

Oh, and just to summarize, this is more proof of Califan007's inability to grasp numbers properly. You put Califan007's stats on a pure football site, and his lame "analysis" would be revealed.

Just like his claim about how TO had no impact on the rest of the receiving, particularly Pinkston getting two 100 yard games (I'm sorry, one was only a 99-yarder) versus Gregg Williams' #3 defense, because Pinkston had 75 yards against the Redskins' #25 defense in 2003.

Yup, Santana Moss had no impact on the Eagles game this year, either.

Or how about his assertation that Shawn Springs should have been getting 2 interceptions per game because that's what he got against the #27 offense and their backup quarterback.

Thanks Califan007 for blessing this forum with your wonderful football knowledge that can only be rivaled by Dr. Z and his big binder.

I am with Cali on this one, your completely clueless.

[Tulane Skins Fan]

You're really calling a QB a bust after 1.5 seasons.... he probably played like 4 games last year. I guess Campbell is a bust too.

[SkinsTerps26]

flacco pwns all

dude is a baller

[Big Blue Joe]

LOL. Why are Redskins fans launching into personal attacks against each other over the play of the Raiders second-year quarterback?

[pjfootballer]

You're right, Heath Shuler was much much worse. Seeing as how JaMarcus Russell has pretty comparable stats to Jason Campbell through 8 games with a much worse team and a couple of different coaches, I'd be hard pressed to throw him in the bust category so far.

You started off bad by saying a blanket statement and not providing said stats for their first 8 games. Califan actually brought something to the table even if he misunderstood your post.

I think he meant the first 8 games of their careers

The only one in the thread that knew what you were talking about. Not a bunch of people unless the meaning for "bunch" has changed to one.

Obviously the previous poster gets it. Use some common sense next time before you make yourself out to be an oversensitive fool again.

lol...

Better to stop then to keep talking and remove all doubt.

Ah, so you don't actually have to be accurate when you post and everything's fine...but if I don't read your mind and decipher what you "really" meant, I look like an idiot? lol...Yeah, that makes perfect sense :thumbsup:...

You should be Karmack you know! :doh:

The problem is what I wrote was accurate and was understandable by other people and you are the only one who missed the point, so yes you do look like an idiot, especially when you follow up your research that had no relevance whatsoever with a personal attack. If you don't want to look like an idiot again, try to use common sense. It's not hard.

Common sense is, you brought a stick to a gun fight. Again, where were your stats to back it up. You didn't bring any research.

I am not sure the school yard name calling is necessary...

Actuality i thought exactly the same thing as Calfan when I first read your post . Mostly because you only said though 8 games, I was assuming you meant the 8 games of the season thus far, given we are 8 games into the season... not his first 8 games ...given he is 11 games into his career.

I

2nd one that didn't understand you.

hell i would have agreed at the beginning of the season (i mean look at my signature, but now i refuse to change it i dont want to jinx JC)

3rd person.

Sounds like someone trying to cover their butt. You don't say something like, "through 8 games", and expect people to automatically assume you mean 8 career games (not, you know, the season that is 8 games in).

4th person. Doesn't look good Shilsu.

You think you did, but you didn't make it clear enough for the rest of the class to follow.

5th person misunderstood.

1/3 so far, by my count. I suppose there has to be a multilingual poster or two on ES.

Why is this even being debated? There were several people who couldn't understand what you originally wrote, but because of your trading of words with Califan, you've recoiled into your shell to defend yourself instead of admitting that, "Hey, you know what, maybe these guys aren't complete imbeciles? Perhaps I am in the wrong on this one, and should have taken the time to be more specific." I don't get off on criticizing the way some guy I've never met on the internet chooses to phrase his opinions, though it may appear to the contrary.

He just can't admit a mistake.

I am with Cali on this one, your completely clueless.

6th person who didn't understand your oiginal post. And I make the 7th. Seven people to one. Just don't know why you don't admit you made a mistake and save face. You're just digging yourself a deeper hole all the while insulting people.

[Shilsu]

You started off bad by saying a blanket statement and not providing said stats for their first 8 games. Califan actually brought something to the table even if he misunderstood your post.

The only one in the thread that knew what you were talking about. Not a bunch of people unless the meaning for "bunch" has changed to one.

Better to stop then to keep talking and remove all doubt.

You should be Karmack you know! :doh:

Common sense is, you brought a stick to a gun fight. Again, where were your stats to back it up. You didn't bring any research.

2nd one that didn't understand you.

3rd person.

4th person. Doesn't look good Shilsu.

5th person misunderstood.

He just can't admit a mistake.

6th person who didn't understand your oiginal post. And I make the 7th. Seven people to one. Just don't know why you don't admit you made a mistake and save face. You're just digging yourself a deeper hole all the while insulting people.

All I have to say is, thanks for clearing it up for me. The vocal majority is always right on ExtremeSkins. Especially ones that can't count.

[pjfootballer]

All I have to say is, thanks for clearing it up for me. The vocal majority is always right on ExtremeSkins. Especially ones that can't count.

7 against and 1 for. Well, seems most of us can count. I just don't know why you are trying to hang on. I guess this post was your last gasp. I just don't know what else to say. I've never seen a person more stubborn when admitting they made a mistake. No one is right or wrong here, but to insist that we are wrong because we didn't understand the original intent of your post makes you look like the fool. Sorry dude, but you're 24 now. If you are that stubborn at such a young age, I'd really hate to see you when you are 80. Anyway, hope we blow the Steelers out tonight. I need a game that's easy on my heart.

[fire3fighter4]

Russel sucks....They completely blew it by drafting him instead of Quinn.....Quinn had one bad game and people wrote him off...Russell had a good game against a terrible ND defense, and became over hyped like crazy.....Russell will go absolutely no where in this league, and is proving that the run first QB fad has been a complete fail(vick, russell, young)

[Shilsu]

7 against and 1 for. Well, seems most of us can count. I just don't know why you are trying to hang on. I guess this post was your last gasp. I just don't know what else to say. I've never seen a person more stubborn when admitting they made a mistake. No one is right or wrong here, but to insist that we are wrong because we didn't understand the original intent of your post makes you look like the fool. Sorry dude, but you're 24 now. If you are that stubborn at such a young age, I'd really hate to see you when you are 80. Anyway, hope we blow the Steelers out tonight. I need a game that's easy on my heart.

Unfortunately, your statement "seems most of us can count" does not include you. Go back and tally it up again, as if the final count has any meaning either way. Once you figure out how to count properly, then maybe the rest of your post may have merit.

Nobody insisted that anyone was wrong because they didn't understand my post. I did insist that one is an "oversensitive fool" if they reply to my original post with a waste of effort and an accusation against me of being under the influence. I did insist that one is an "idiot" if they think I would try to cover my butt over something so trivial.

However, it is amusing to see people claim it was "impossible" to understand my original post when multiple people have already understood it. It is amusing to see people claim only "one" person understood it when multiple people have already understood it, then boast about his counting prowess. It is amusing to see people try to ham up eight games versus nine games, when if they really took me to mean nine games through this season, it still wouldn't work because Russell and Campbell have only played eight games.

In the end, Califan007 is left trying to rationalize why Heath Shuler is better than JaMarcus Russell while accusing other people of drugs or being an idiot. Then he backpedals and attributes his overreaction to a "misunderstanding" not unlike another thread where he replied to his own quote and started arguing with himself for a couple of pages, and then claimed it was just a misunderstanding out of embarassment.

I mean, seriously.

One time is okay. But when you have a pattern of "misunderstandings" that actually lead to you arguing with yourself and calling yourself names, or pulling up random numbers trying to prove that Todd Pinkston is a great receiver with or without TO, or how Heath Shuler is better than JaMarcus Russell...

[pjfootballer]

The count was, SEVEN people did not understand which games you were talking about. The first 8 in their "Career" or the first eight "This Season." Please, show us where you said "career." ONE person said they understood which eight games you were talking about. Please show me where a 2nd, 3rd or 4th person understood you.

And you could have been the bigger person to originally say, "my mistake if I confused some people" and then maybe Califan007 would have apoligized. But you added fuel to the fire and it has now turned into a pissing match about how many people understood the post in the first place. I've already quoted your original post and showed how confusing it was to others and how many others have said they had no idea which 8 games you were talking about. But go ahead and tell me I can count again, you are just making yourself look stubborn and foolish.

[Fletch_Lives59]

JR will be out of the league in the next 3 seasons..

[Shilsu]

The count was, SEVEN people did not understand which games you were talking about. The first 8 in their "Career" or the first eight "This Season." Please, show us where you said "career." ONE person said they understood which eight games you were talking about. Please show me where a 2nd, 3rd or 4th person understood you.

And you could have been the bigger person to originally say, "my mistake if I confused some people" and then maybe Califan007 would have apoligized. But you added fuel to the fire and it has now turned into a pissing match about how many people understood the post in the first place. I've already quoted your original post and showed how confusing it was to others and how many others have said they had no idea which 8 games you were talking about. But go ahead and tell me I can count again, you are just making yourself look stubborn and foolish.

Besides the fact that your "survey" lacks merit one way or the other, it's becoming more and more apparent with your constant ramblings about "one", that you are a little too incompetent for this task. Let me help you out.

http://www.extremeskins.com/showpost.php?p=5767064&postcount=13

http://www.extremeskins.com/showpost.php?p=5768077&postcount=39

Just as I did not feel the need to initially explain why you were making what was an obvious mistake, I did not feel the need to explain my original post until you and Califan007 continued wailing in a blind pool of stupidity harping on incessant points. Once it was pointed out what my original post meant, Califan007 did not apologize as you seem resigned to believe, instead he did just the opposite and began to project the blame to others crying about how it's not his fault.

So now that we've established you are either unable to count, unable to read, unable to think, or any combination of the three, what makes you think I should take your opinion on "understanding" posts seriously? Especially from a faceless Internet user listed as 40 years old that seems to lack basic academic skills that are taught in grade school?

Oops, isn't that ironic. Had you taken your own advice about "adding fuel to the fire" and "making yourself look foolish and stubborn", you wouldn't have made yourself look stupid with your constant infatuation with the number "one" in your last series of posts.

I think it's time for you to invest in some Sesame Street DVDs as they go through the whole gamut of numbers. Letters, too.

Let me know how it goes.

[terpskins10]

];5766583']I don't understand what made anyone think he was worth a top 15 pick. Quinn may have been over hyped pre-draft' date=' but by the end, he was underhyped. Russell was just another Culpepper- big, immobile QB with an arm.

You know that if it was any other team than a team owned by Al Davis, that Russell would not have been the choice.[/quote']

Immobile? Both Russell and Culpepper have above-average scrambling ability for their size.

[pjfootballer]

Besides the fact that your "survey" lacks merit one way or the other, it's becoming more and more apparent with your constant ramblings about "one", that you are a little too incompetent for this task. Let me help you out.

http://www.extremeskins.com/showpost.php?p=5767064&postcount=13

http://www.extremeskins.com/showpost.php?p=5768077&postcount=39

Just as I did not feel the need to initially explain why you were making what was an obvious mistake, I did not feel the need to explain my original post until you and Califan007 continued wailing in a blind pool of stupidity harping on incessant points. Once it was pointed out what my original post meant, Califan007 did not apologize as you seem resigned to believe, instead he did just the opposite and began to project the blame to others crying about how it's not his fault.

So now that we've established you are either unable to count, unable to read, unable to think, or any combination of the three, what makes you think I should take your opinion on "understanding" posts seriously? Especially from a faceless Internet user listed as 40 years old that seems to lack basic academic skills that are taught in grade school?

Oops, isn't that ironic. Had you taken your own advice about "adding fuel to the fire" and "making yourself look foolish and stubborn", you wouldn't have made yourself look stupid with your constant infatuation with the number "one" in your last series of posts.

I think it's time for you to invest in some Sesame Street DVDs as they go through the whole gamut of numbers. Letters, too.

Let me know how it goes.

I was going to reply with something else, but I just decided all you want to do is insult me and act childish with your Sesame Street jokes, so if you'd like to debate fine, but I guess I'm done here. I'll never change your stance on the subject and you'll never change mine, so this is pretty much the end for me. At this point I don't really care how many people understood you or not, nor is it really relavant in my life anymore. Have a nice day.

[OWUeagleMD]

Immobile? Both Russell and Culpepper have above-average scrambling ability for their size.

Russel isn't a very mobile guy, but Daunte Culpepper definitely was, especially during his second year in the league.

The idea that Culpepper was ever immobile (prior to tearing everything in his knee) is patently absurd.

[Shilsu]

I was going to reply with something else, but I just decided all you want to do is insult me and act childish with your Sesame Street jokes, so if you'd like to debate fine, but I guess I'm done here. I'll never change your stance on the subject and you'll never change mine, so this is pretty much the end for me. At this point I don't really care how many people understood you or not, nor is it really relavant in my life anymore. Have a nice day.

???

You are the one who put it upon yourself to miscount this "poll" and make a big deal over it... Now that I've counted it properly for you, your stance on the subject won't change and you don't care about the numbers? Okay then.

[TheREALJBird]

Ahh who cares about Shilsu, he's a negative nancy that always thinks he knows his ****. He should just go back to his threads about living alone and not knowing how to cook a hamburger

[Shilsu]

Ahh who cares about Shilsu, he's a negative nancy that always thinks he knows his ****. He should just go back to his threads about living alone and not knowing how to cook a hamburger

Never really considered myself a "negative nancy" but I fail to see how even if I was, that or cooking hamburgers has anything to do with this thread. Thanks for your lack of input, though.