Page 11 of 28 FirstFirst ... 91011121321 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 271

Thread: Phil Loadholt

  1. #101
    Infidel is offline Star Spokesman
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    1,947

    Re: Phil Loadholt

    I'm simply saying how people are going to perceive you.
    I'm not the topic and I don't care how you think people are going to perceive me.

    This strayed from Loadholt because people started criticizing Favre instead of discussing the poor blocking.

    I hope Loadholt can get his act together. He's a young man and a good hope for the future. Look at all Michael Vick went through and now he's on top of the world.

    There's hope for Loadholt.
    It's what you learn after you know it all that counts.
    --John Wooden

  2. #102
    CCthebest's Avatar
    CCthebest is offline Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    1,270

    Re: Phil Loadholt

    So missing Rice this year isnt a problem? Since ass Rices catches were perfectly thrown? Your a friggin idiot

  3. #103
    12purplepride28's Avatar
    12purplepride28 is offline Star Spokesman
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Nebraska
    Posts
    1,852
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Phil Loadholt

    Infidel wrote:
    I'm simply saying how people are going to perceive you.
    I'm not the topic and I don't care how you think people are going to perceive me.

    This strayed from Loadholt because people started criticizing Favre instead of discussing the poor blocking.

    I hope Loadholt can get his act together. He's a young man and a good hope for the future. Look at all Michael Vick went through and now he's on top of the world.

    There's hope for Loadholt.
    Another horrible comparison. Vick and Loadholt? What has Loadholt done that even compares to what Vick did? Loadholt has never been in trouble on the Vikings. Not even close to a relative comparison. We are just saying that he is playing like crap, which leads to some forced throws by Favre, then you say that Favre isn't playing bad and that the o-lien/receivers are and we are saying that Favre is playing bad regardless of the o-line troubles.
    I am NOT here to provide good football insight or rational observations. I am an emotional 19 year old Viking fan and I expect you to adjust your expectations from my posts.

  4. #104
    Infidel is offline Star Spokesman
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    1,947

    Re: Phil Loadholt

    I'm done with you.
    It's what you learn after you know it all that counts.
    --John Wooden

  5. #105
    Caine's Avatar
    Caine is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    5,139

    Re: Phil Loadholt

    Infidel wrote:
    Definition:

    "Overthrown:
    3. Sports. To throw an object over and beyond (an intended mark): The infielder overthrew first base."

    This is a fact: If it is caught, it is not overthrown.....slightly or otherwise.

    Now, back to topic or start a new thread.
    Finally, you offer some form of support for your position...too bad it doesn't really support your position.

    Based upon the definition YOU provided, overthrown is to hit a point beyond the intended mark - or a point in space.

    The CORRECT point in space for that throw would have been slightly less distant from Favre than the point in space that the ball actually occupied. Since there were NO defenders anywhere around, the need to throw beyond the space that Harvin was going to naturally occupy at the moment of intersection was nonexistent.

    However, Favre hit a point in space beyond the optimal one. Despite the inaccuracy, Harvin made a good play on the ball and caught it.

    Second, anything can happen in degrees - there are very few absolutes in life, much less football. That's why we have adjectives. Had Favre thrown the ball 10 yards in front of Harvin, the ball would have been greatly overthrown. Instead, Favre was merely slightly off target, but not outside of the range to which Harvin could adjust.

    Therefore, the throw - as pointed out so long ago - was NOT perfect. It was, in fact, slightly overthrown.

    Another example of degrees is how wrong you are. You could be slightly wrong, partially wrong, completely wrong, absolutely wrong, fundamentally wrong, or just wrong...

    And Loadholt's blocking sucked.

    Caine

  6. #106
    Infidel is offline Star Spokesman
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    1,947

    Re: Phil Loadholt

    No, Caine...... your desperate (and silly) attempt to ignore the definition of overthrown falls short.

    Let me refresh your memory:

    3. Sports. To throw an object over and beyond (an intended mark): The infielder overthrew first base.
    Since Favre obviously DID NOT throw the pass over and beyond his intended mark (Percy) he obviously did not overthrow the pass.

    This (like pregnancy as I have noted) is an either/or proposition. Either it is caught or not. It was caught, therefore, by definition, it could not have been overthrown.

    Even your attempts to say it was a bad pass are without merit, because you lack proof that Percy was exactly where he was supposed to be.

    If he was supposed to end up slightly deeper in the end zone, then the pass would have been not bad, but perfect.

    You guys seem to want to butt your heads against the brick wall of fact here and I'm going to allow you to go ahead and do that as long as you want, although I hope you don't get brain damage.

    I think you are constantly taking us off topic with these desperate attempts to save face.

    Better if you accept the inevitable and get back to Loadholt and his recent pass protection problems.

    You are so smart.....maybe you could offer suggestions at how this pass protection issue could be addressed by coaches.
    It's what you learn after you know it all that counts.
    --John Wooden

  7. #107
    Caine's Avatar
    Caine is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    5,139

    Re: Phil Loadholt

    Infidel wrote:
    No, Caine...... your desperate (and silly) attempt to ignore the definition of overthrown falls short.

    Let me refresh your memory:

    3. Sports. To throw an object over and beyond (an intended mark): The infielder overthrew first base.
    Since Favre obviously DID NOT throw the pass over and beyond his intended mark (Percy) he obviously did not overthrow the pass.
    Yeah...I must have missed that definition after I quoted it, then put it directly into my rebuttal...

    Sadly, you are now defining Percy HArvin as "the mark"...I am saying that Percy is not the mark. QB's seldom throw to receivers, rather they throw to where the Receiver will be...in short, they throw to a specific point in space.

    In this instance, Brett threw to a point in space that was slightly ahead of where Percy wound up being...therefore, the ball was slightly "over thrown".

    See, even literally broken down, the ball was thrown over the point it was intended for.

    Infidel wrote:
    This (like pregnancy as I have noted) is an either/or proposition. Either it is caught or not. It was caught.
    Yet pregnancy and a point in space are not viable comparisons. Pregnancy is a state of being, whereas accuracy is a measure of ability. One is not measurable in degrees, the other is.

    I understand why you continue to try and use the two as rationale, but they really don't work.

    I suppose this would fall back into the "reading comprehension" element you continue to insist that other lack. Perhaps you should brush up on your own...

    Infidel wrote:
    Even your attempts to say it was a bad pass are without merit, because you lack proof that Percy was exactly where he was supposed to be.
    As do you. You lack the proof that Favre threw to exactly where he intended....which, by your own definition, makes your comments "without merit".

    Infidel wrote:
    If he was supposed to end up slightly deeper in the end zone, then the pass would have been not bad, but perfect.
    Now you lead with an "IF" statement? Really? You're going to suppose a sequence of events that may or may not have happened that you cannot prove, while claiming that everyone else is wrong because they cannot prove their counter points?

    Nope. Doesn't work like that. If you are setting rules of proof for others, then you have to apply them to yourself as well.

    Infidel wrote:
    You guys seem to want to butt your heads against the brick wall of fact here and I'm going to allow you to go ahead and do that as long as you want, although I hope you don't get brain damage.
    Are you the brick wall? Why? Because you continue to insist that only you are correct, despite the fact that you cannot offer any form of proof to support your positions (Despite demanding that others do so)?

    No, that doesn't make you a brick...

    but it does rhyme with brick....

    Infidel wrote:
    I think you are constantly taking us off topic with these desperate attempts to save face.
    Were this an attempt to save face, it would somehow imply that;

    A: I have staked my reputation on the outcome of this thread.

    B: I care in any way, shape, or form about your opinion.

    Fact is, I commented on this topic well AFTER it had already been derailed (By you and Marrdro I believe). And I could give a rip how this turns out.

    I'm just getting a kick out of seeing exactly how deep your ignorance runs...

    Reminds me a lot of David Koresh, Jim Jones, or Marshall Applewhite.

    You remember him, right?

    [img size=400]http://tehresistance.files.wordpress.com/2008/12/marshall_h_applewhite.jpg[/img]

    You should make this your avatar....

    Infidel wrote:
    Better if you accept the inevitable and get back to Loadholt and his recent pass protection problems.
    What's inevitable? That you will continue to insist upon your own correctness, despite all evidence to the contrary? I accepted that a long time ago.

    That you will continue to misapply incorrect analogies and comparison models in order to prove a point that you cannot prove? That's been your hallmark since joining.

    That you will retreat into sarcastic jabs at other peoples intellect after they call you out on your inaccuracies and blatant fallacies? Yup...that's well documented.

    As for the blocking...I already stated that Loadholt looked terrible, and has all season.

    Infidel wrote:
    You are so smart.....maybe you could offer suggestions at how this pass protection issue could be addressed by coaches.
    Now your falling back on this? We were actually in agreement about the poor state of Pass Blocking....are you now taking a position that it was somehow good?

    Too funny....

    Caine

  8. #108
    V4L's Avatar
    V4L
    V4L is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    20,612

    Re: Phil Loadholt

    WR's don't need to lay all the way out if the throw wasn't atleast slightly overthrown

    If it wasn't overthrown he would have been able to stand up and catch the ball

  9. #109
    Webby's Avatar
    Webby is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Aug 1998
    Location
    A, A
    Posts
    8,976
    Blog Entries
    6

    Re: Phil Loadholt

    I smell a battle royale.

  10. #110
    Infidel is offline Star Spokesman
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    1,947

    Re: Phil Loadholt

    There's no battle.

    All I need is the facts.

    If they want to keep banging their heads against reality to save their pride.....all they'll get is a concussion.

    Overthrow
    "3. Sports. To throw an object over and beyond (an intended mark): The infielder overthrew first base."

    As long as the ball can be caught, it's not overthrown.

    End of story.
    It's what you learn after you know it all that counts.
    --John Wooden

Page 11 of 28 FirstFirst ... 91011121321 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. With the 54th Pick the Vikings Select Phil Loadholt
    By SharperImage in forum Vikings Offseason/Draft/FA Forum
    Replies: 257
    Last Post: 02-08-2010, 01:00 PM
  2. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 08-30-2009, 04:04 PM
  3. Phil Loadholt draft diaries:
    By Garland Greene in forum Vikings Offseason/Draft/FA Forum
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 08-02-2009, 01:21 PM
  4. Loadholt playing RT in OTAs.
    By NodakPaul in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 05-21-2009, 03:50 PM
  5. Phil Loadholt is visiting the Vikings today
    By mewario in forum Vikings Offseason/Draft/FA Forum
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 04-10-2009, 03:15 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •