re: James Cook

Are you going on the record, right now, to say that Cook will be getting as many touches [in 2018] as Swift did [in 2017]through week 6?

quote:

---

RIt’s certainly valid if it hits you square in the hands, which didn’t happen.

---

You don’t catch with your hands, you catch with your fingers. Please talk about brownies. You don’t know a goddam thing about football.

Are you going on the record, right now, to say that Cook will be getting as many touches [in 2018] as Swift did [in 2017]through week 6?

quote:

---

Are you going on the record, right now, to say that Cook will be getting as many touches [in 2018] as Swift did [in 2017]through week 6?

---

Nope, and thats besides the point, which is the numerous flaws of your reasoning you refuse to acknowledge.

quote:

---

Thanks captain obvious. If you of all people know that, I am pretty sure we all do.

---

Derp

quote:

---

Derp

---

Stick to what you know best, which seems to consist of brownies and OL.

No... If we're getting to the core of this little short dick measuring contest, it was about Cook and his possible utilization in 2018... That it has evolved into this nonsense does nothing to change the fact that this is as close to "back on topic" as we've been in a while.

If you don't think that by week 6 that he will have as many touches as Swift did, I'd say an explanation for why might be in order... Specifically distinguishing your position from rig's...

Just my two cents...

This whole thread is like watching a bunch of monkeys fighting over a grape.

All Rig said was that Cook would’ve been in a better position had he enrolled early. He may walk out there and go nuts but it doesn’t change the fact that he would’ve been in a better spot with the extra practice. That’s it.

quote:

---

This is like playing cards with Cracker's sister's kids.

---

You are a patient man, deep.

quote:

---

He puts himself at a disadvantage coming in late

---

Can you quantify the disadvantage for Gurley or Swift?
Is there anything factual?

I get the common sense. I really do. 8 months is greater than 1 month.

But there isn't anything provable that Gurley would have done more with an extra 7 months. There isn't anything provable that Swift would have a better ypc with 7 more months.

There is nothing wrong with looking at history and questioning the common sense that 7 months is greater than 1.
There is nothing wrong with looking for quantifiable data to support an argument. Or lack thereof.

Was this an argument worth having? All you have is a "want" that cook enrolled early and "common sense" that 7 is greater than 1.

Is it worth hashing out common ground here?

Fib, I appreciate the assist about Peter's misinterpretation of "hitting you in your hands", which he totally avoided.

With that said, digging into the reasoning Rig used to support his opinion is well within the confines of this topic. Why matters. There are certainly reasons why I think Cook wouldnt get early touches, but that doesnt mean Rig has provided them.

You may disagree, but its important to note that the same reasoning Rig is using for Cook 2018 could have been applied to Swift 2017. Since it didnt hold up then, why would it now? Its a fair question.