Bailey: Pros and Cons (and possible replacements)

[Gamebreaker]

You're right, that was pretty out of character. SonnyJ, I apologize.

I'm still not wrong on this issue, but my response to his post was over-the-top.

[Art]

Fun within.

Originally posted by Gamebreaker

I'm calling bullsh!t on your whole post.

Since I called bullsh!t on each of your posts, I suppose it's only fair you get around to returning the favor.

For one, how can anyone tell me how I FEEL about a player on this team? If anyone knows how I feel, it's going to be me, and not some guy I've never met on a message board. :laugh:

Fascinating, GB. So, are you declaring now that your repeated, constant, unyielding and unending defenses of Champ Bailey are not an insight into your feelings about a player on this team? This is so incredibly inane it goes beyond having to spend much time dismissing it. This is a message board. A measure of how you feel about a player doesn't come from face to face discussions. It comes from reading what you write. I can't seriously believe you don't know this. You are now entering a dangerous spot that many people I debate with enter. You have had your pride tickled. You are being worked, quite badly, and instead of ending the torture, you've decided to simply deny anything. If I say you like and defend Bailey a lot, you now have to deny you do. If I say you added a word to the conversation, you have to deny that you did, even after you admitted that you did. It's a bad, downhill path you're taking.

Ultimately even if Dirk comes here and says everything I've said is correct, you won't admit to being wrong now, such is the damage done to you in your own mind. But, let me help you. I'm not attacking you bubba. I am glad you feel -- so obviously feel -- passionately about Champ's skills and performance that you vocalize those feelings through DOZENS and DOZENS of posts. I just think it's amusing you refuse to believe you do this.

Furthermore, just because I have my own opinion about the situation doesn't mean that I have a bias. Quite possibly, the rest of the board could have a bias. Just because the majority of the board believe one thing, does not mean that it is right.

Well, I'm certainly not one to hold up a majority opinion as absolutely correct. Obviously I think it's likely in many cases that a majority of people can be wrong very frequently. However, such is the level of your bias on Champ you fail to recognize that the MINORITY position is not yours. It's mine and others at varying levels of belief that Champ, while good and at times great, is not the kind of shut down corner he's frequently painted out as. This is YOUR bias that refuses to allow you to recognize a majority of football and Redskin fans agree with you.

You are overexagerating, when you say I can't keep from "attacking" anyone who talks negatively about Bailey. We can go through every thread that talks negatively about Bailey, I've clearly only participated in half of them. If that many. If anyone in this discussion has an overactive imagination, it's clearly shown to be you. Who somehow states I think Champ Bailey is the "greatest player in the history of the world."

I have used a bit of hyperbole in this thread to minimize your positions. So, I won't argue with that statement. See how easy that is? You're right. I'm not going to pretend you're wrong because you've stung my pride. Take a lesson from me. Though, it's not overly hyperbolic to say you go right at anyone who's not overly deferencial to Champ. You've been so for MONTHS.

And another thing, I NEVER admitted to saying I added words to his statement. Adding words to his statement would mean I actually took the words he wrote, and added words into that, then tried to pass them off as his thoughts. You know this, and I know this, do not try to twist this argument around to your liking. You find where I said I added words to his argument, and you cut and paste it into your next post.

Again, you stated somewhere in this thread you know how to admit to being wrong. You should admit it here, because it's clear you're losing your mind. Here is the statement that set you off, "Which brings me to my replacement - Antoine Winfield. I love this guy as Champ-Lite. The only difference is, he can tackle."

These are the VERY words you later quoted in this thread. Your response to these words was a statement that it shows tremendous bias to say Champ can't tackle. You supported your assertion by admitting that's not what it said, but it was implied. Your exact statement was, "You would have to watch ZERO games to say Champ can't tackle."

When pressed to supply how you came to that conclusion, you wrote, "So that isn't implying Champ can't tackle?"

So, I have done as you directed. I have posted your words from this thread that ADD words to what Dirk said. Again, where does the word "can't" exist. Whether you are correct that Dirk MEANT Champ can't tackle or whether I'm right to say that's not what he meant, you had to ADD that word to the sentence to give it meaning. It's not there. The statement that Champ can't tackle isn't made. If it's implied that's great, but you STILL added it. And, as I have outlined a feasible method of reading the statement without adding a single word that means something else, if it does turn out that my impression is correct, then you have added words and tried to pass them off as Dirk's. You know this. Don't you?

Now, as I did what you said to do by posting your words, you get to do as I suggest. Post the word can't as you've stated it exists anywhere in Dirk's post. If you can't find it, you added it. I presume this is just a moment of pride or something because, it can't be more clear, can it?

Now when you say something like this,"Winfield is smaller but the difference between most smaller guys and Winfield is HE can tackle." I begin to wonder who's imagination is really out of control here. He made ZERO reference to smaller guys, but did say Winfield was similar to Champ as,"he's often in great position yet rarely comes down with the picks."

As my intrepretation doesn't add a single word to Dirk's views I am hopeful I have read what he said correctly. He did make reference to smaller guys. Champ-lite. Smaller. Lesser. But, still tastes great.

This is another case of you picking an argument to fight, just for the sake of arguing. Yet this time, you don't even have a leg to stand on. The only reason you called in question my objectivity in this whole Bailey issue, is to keep attention away from the fact you were wrong about Dirk's statement.

I have several legs to stand on. I'm a centipede in this argument. First, I have the possibility of Dirk declaring this a total knock out. Second, I have proven you added the word can't to what Dirk said and I have you denying you have. Third I have you suggesting you know when to stop or to admit right from wrong but that I don't, yet, in this thread, I'M the guy who tried to end the conversation by suggesting we wait for Dirk.

Fourth, I've got you posting compulsively that this is a worthless conversation that shouldn't even be had, and I've agreed that we should wait for Dirk, but you can't stop posting. Fifth, you now have gone to the level of dismissing anyone who disagrees with you as a jockey for my fabulous stallion. At this point whether Dirk agrees with my view or yours I've got you beaten badly on points. Though, I suspect you don't see that .

[Art]

Originally posted by Gamebreaker

You're right, that was pretty out of character. SonnyJ, I apologize.

I'm still not wrong on this issue, but my response to his post was over-the-top.

Nice post GB. You're a good man.

[SonnyJ]

Originally posted by Gamebreaker

You're right, that was pretty out of character. SonnyJ, I apologize.

I'm still not wrong on this issue, but my response to his post was over-the-top.

Hey, no problem, man. I did provoke you, to some extent, probably at a time when you were a little worked up over your conversation with Art. Just having a little fun with you.

Thanks for the apology, and I accept it.

[Dirk Diggler]

Wow - what a mess this thing has turned into. Let me just say that you're both right.

My phrase was definitely ambiguous and I could see how it could have referred to both Champ and Champ-lite. When I say "tackle" I meant like a linebacker. That's why I went on to say that he hits like a "ton of bricks." For a Champ-lite he's an all-time great and compared to Champ he's Ray Lewis.

My personal feeling that was not made clear on this (and it doesn't really effect the argument at this point) was that Champ is an OK tackler but more of a drag-the-man-down after 5 yards type of player while Antoine Winfield is a mini-linebacker. Tackling is not Champ's forte while it's Winfield's best skill and he's arguably the best in the league at it - perhaps at any position. Go to a Bills message board and they will back me up on it.

So I could say (and what I sort of implied) was "compared to Winfield, Champ can't tackle worth $hit." That may not necessarily mean that Champ misses a lot of tackles, because he most certainly doesn't. Just that he tends to get taken for a ride while Winfield will straight up hurt you.

I think the guy is a modern-day Pat Fischer. Though I am too young to have seen him live, I saw NFL Films do a show on him and he's an ex-Redskin who was the original Mighty Mouse. Now you older gentleman can see why I think he'd be such a great addition.

While the size will always be an issue from a jump ball perspective, it will never, ever be an issue in his ability to make tackles. You won't get a lot of picks from Winfield but you will get great fundamental CB play.

I think he should be tops on our list.

[method man]

lets get back to topic here.

no bobby taylor please. that guy has been a no. 2 Cb. smoot is prob better than him.

why is no one talking about fernando bryant who is a top 10 CB in this league?

[Dirk Diggler]

Bryant has been good from time to time.

He had a very promising rookie year that led many to believe that he'd only be a notch below the Baileys and McCallisters. But since then, he's been quite inconsistent. While the aforementioned "studs" have gone on to be PB regulars, Bryant has kind of sputtered up until this year. I don't see too much of J-ville but from what I've heard, he was solid practically all year.

He's an interesting player. I could see him getting anywhere between 4 and 8 mill up front which is a pretty wide margin.

If he came out in any other free agent year he could have been this year's Dre Bly who shocked the world with a big $$ deal. Still, I wouldn't be surprised to see someone scoop him up quickly. He's just not a Plummer or Winfield who's done it year in and year out so I wouldn't like to see the Skins throw much coin his way.

[method man]

Alright then guys.

I would fully support signing winfield if he does not eat up too much cap. I guess a production to probable salary ratio of Plummer is the best availabe. NO SHAWN SPRINGS PLEASE. the man is washed up. maybe to compete for nickel back but thats it. with the armstead release, no FA replacement is needed. We should go sign the best UFA OLB available after the draft. There will be at least one good one availabe. and have him, pierce, and clifton smith, who may be ready to take over, compete for the starting job at strongside linebacker while lavar moves over to weakside.

[RedskinsFanInTX]

I like Vincent, if we can't get him, Winfield would work!

[ArmchairRedskin]

While the size will always be an issue from a jump ball perspective, it will never, ever be an issue in his ability to make tackles. You won't get a lot of picks from Winfield but you will get great fundamental CB play.

Jump balls in the verticle pass game and end zone is where CB skills are needed the most. It's nice that he can tackle and all, but being able to make a play on the ball to deny the reciever the catch is more important than the CB being able to tackle him after the catch is made.

What about Plummer?