quote:

It's no different than labeling someone a bust because of injury IMO. While it may not be exactly fair it's the truth. When a player comes in and underperforms,for any reason, they are a bust. That's just the way I view it.

So you make no intellectual distinction between someone who just isn't a good pro and someone who is a victim of circumstances? Harsh. I get both are equally useless to their team if they're not on the field, but you might as well call any Pro Bowler who misses a season due to injury a temporary "bust." The difference between actual busts and injured/misused players is that the injured/misused players can actually produce in the future if the problem is fixed.

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by RB10

Member since Nov 2010

44279 posts

Posted on 5/9/14 at 2:36 pm to randomways

quote:
So you make no intellectual distinction between someone who just isn't a good pro and someone who is a victim of circumstances?

Of course I make an intellectual distinction between different types of busts, but it all still falls under the umbrella of "bust".

For example:

1. The "injury" bust. Ex: Bo Jackson

2. The "Could have been great if he weren't a fricking retard" bust. Ex: Rolando McClain

3. The "terrible player" or "pure" bust. Ex: Mark Ingram.

This post was edited on 5/9/14 at 2:40 pm

1 ...

Report Post

SEC Rant - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board