Nope, yet again you failed to follow the discussion.Quote:
Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1101484Are you trying to tell me a flanker is NOT an outside receiver?Quote:
Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1101451Nope Bleed and Caine are always hacking on me for not being factual with my discussion points.Quote:
Originally Posted by "12purplepride28" #1101301I believe this is the important part of the post.Quote:
Originally Posted by "kevoncox" #1101286Different people call things differently. I don't think you should be so quick to assume he was trying to purposely skirt the issue. Lighten up man.Quote:
Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1101240Are you telling me the flanker doesn't line up on the outside of the formation?
Drop the technical terms, it's getting old. We know you like to appear more educated in the game then anybody else by referring to receivers by the Y/Z who run 4 routes and 7 routes and 0 tech DT's, we all get it, we just choose not to play along.
Like you say, it's a "Discussion site". If I want to call a flanker an outside receiver (which he is), I damn well will.
Now, when I do it he starts with the "I'm trying to be smarter than everyone" crap.
He can't have it both ways. Either he wants me to play his game or not. Truth of the matter is, one way is just as fun as the other cause he gives me so much material to work with.
You said Rice was an outside guy deep threat. I said he wasn't.