Jaydon Mickens career has 20 receptions for 190 yards(9.5 YPC)
Jordan Polk career had 16 receptions for 191 yards(11.9 YPC)
What a "horrible" comparison comparing those two 4* WR's who have eerily similar stats.
Sorry, I was laughing too hard to respond to your post.
1st - Jordan Polk was NOT a 4* guy (Scout 3*, Rivals 2*, ESPN 3*)
2nd - Mickens stats = 1 season Polk = career
Stick to calling me a Doog, etc. It is obvious facts are not your friend.
Fact - you accuse HeNeedsMoreTime of calling you president of the Jordan Polk fan club. Fact - he never did.
Fact - you accuse HeNeedsMoreTime of saying that you claimed Jordan Polk was the second coming of Mario Bailey. Fact - he never did.
Fact - you took implications made by HeNeedsMoreTime to create your own "spin," all the while discrediting everything he said by claiming that he is "spinning".
He just trolls it's what he did on dawgboard. He will never give up an argument and just continue to spin more shit to make his point. Just read his spin job on how the Seahawks aren't a run first team despite every statistic showing that they are.
Another classic screenshot.
Can you link where I said the Hawks are not a run 1st team?
Clean the shit off you keyboard before you post.
Can you link where he claimed you said Jordan Polk was the second coming of Mario Bailey?
If you're going to accuse posters of making shit up, it's probably a good idea that you don't do it yourself.
Did you miss the exaggeration post?
Step 1 - he compares Mickens to Polk
Step 2 - I point out Mickens did more in 1 yr than Polk did in his entire career
Step 3 - he changes argument to 20 catches in a year is not good. I use a dash of sarcasm combined with a splash of exaggeration to point out I never claimed 20 catches was good, just better than Polk's entire career.
HTH
I think I understand. When making arguments, all other posters must be 100% factual, otherwise it's Noog (ROFTLMAO!) spin. When you make arguments, you can exaggerate and be sarcastic.
And think a little bit longer about what his argument REALLY is. Everyone else seems to get it except you...as usual.
I know what his argument was since it was the same talking points from another thread.
Jaydon Mickens career has 20 receptions for 190 yards(9.5 YPC)
Jordan Polk career had 16 receptions for 191 yards(11.9 YPC)
What a "horrible" comparison comparing those two 4* WR's who have eerily similar stats.
Sorry, I was laughing too hard to respond to your post.
1st - Jordan Polk was NOT a 4* guy (Scout 3*, Rivals 2*, ESPN 3*)
2nd - Mickens stats = 1 season Polk = career
Stick to calling me a Doog, etc. It is obvious facts are not your friend.
Fact - you accuse HeNeedsMoreTime of calling you president of the Jordan Polk fan club. Fact - he never did.
Fact - you accuse HeNeedsMoreTime of saying that you claimed Jordan Polk was the second coming of Mario Bailey. Fact - he never did.
Fact - you took implications made by HeNeedsMoreTime to create your own "spin," all the while discrediting everything he said by claiming that he is "spinning".
He just trolls it's what he did on dawgboard. He will never give up an argument and just continue to spin more shit to make his point. Just read his spin job on how the Seahawks aren't a run first team despite every statistic showing that they are.
Another classic screenshot.
Can you link where I said the Hawks are not a run 1st team?
Clean the shit off you keyboard before you post.
Can you link where he claimed you said Jordan Polk was the second coming of Mario Bailey?
If you're going to accuse posters of making shit up, it's probably a good idea that you don't do it yourself.
Did you miss the exaggeration post?
Step 1 - he compares Mickens to Polk
Step 2 - I point out Mickens did more in 1 yr than Polk did in his entire career
Step 3 - he changes argument to 20 catches in a year is not good. I use a dash of sarcasm combined with a splash of exaggeration to point out I never claimed 20 catches was good, just better than Polk's entire career.
HTH
I think I understand. When making arguments, all other posters must be 100% factual, otherwise it's Noog (ROFTLMAO!) spin. When you make arguments, you can exaggerate and be sarcastic.
And think a little bit longer about what his argument REALLY is. Everyone else seems to get it except you...as usual.
I know what his argument was since it was the same talking points from another thread.
So, please enlighten me with your thoughts.
Why bother? It's just not worth it - you'll only exaggerate anything I say, and if you don't, you'll just say I'm a Noog who only marches in the direction of everyone else on this board and can't think for himself. That's all you've ever done here with anyone who disagrees with you. Which is pretty hilarious, considering you've bitched non-stop about people here calling you a Doog for disagreeing with them.
If Sark & Kiffin were really ambitious, they would have soaked up everything Chow had to offer, instead of pushing him out.
Yeah, both guys have been fast risers but neither has a great future at this point.
I think it shows that Sark has always been a politician. Kiffin is cut from the same cloth as well. The fact that Chow won't even speak to Sark is very interesting, and proves Sark likely played a large role in the whole situation.
Jaydon Mickens career has 20 receptions for 190 yards(9.5 YPC)
Jordan Polk career had 16 receptions for 191 yards(11.9 YPC)
What a "horrible" comparison comparing those two 4* WR's who have eerily similar stats.
Sorry, I was laughing too hard to respond to your post.
1st - Jordan Polk was NOT a 4* guy (Scout 3*, Rivals 2*, ESPN 3*)
2nd - Mickens stats = 1 season Polk = career
Stick to calling me a Doog, etc. It is obvious facts are not your friend.
Fact - you accuse HeNeedsMoreTime of calling you president of the Jordan Polk fan club. Fact - he never did.
Fact - you accuse HeNeedsMoreTime of saying that you claimed Jordan Polk was the second coming of Mario Bailey. Fact - he never did.
Fact - you took implications made by HeNeedsMoreTime to create your own "spin," all the while discrediting everything he said by claiming that he is "spinning".
He just trolls it's what he did on dawgboard. He will never give up an argument and just continue to spin more shit to make his point. Just read his spin job on how the Seahawks aren't a run first team despite every statistic showing that they are.
Another classic screenshot.
Can you link where I said the Hawks are not a run 1st team?
Clean the shit off you keyboard before you post.
Can you link where he claimed you said Jordan Polk was the second coming of Mario Bailey?
If you're going to accuse posters of making shit up, it's probably a good idea that you don't do it yourself.
Did you miss the exaggeration post?
Step 1 - he compares Mickens to Polk
Step 2 - I point out Mickens did more in 1 yr than Polk did in his entire career
Step 3 - he changes argument to 20 catches in a year is not good. I use a dash of sarcasm combined with a splash of exaggeration to point out I never claimed 20 catches was good, just better than Polk's entire career.
HTH
I think I understand. When making arguments, all other posters must be 100% factual, otherwise it's Noog (ROFTLMAO!) spin. When you make arguments, you can exaggerate and be sarcastic.
And think a little bit longer about what his argument REALLY is. Everyone else seems to get it except you...as usual.
I know what his argument was since it was the same talking points from another thread.
So, please enlighten me with your thoughts.
Why bother? It's just not worth it - you'll only exaggerate anything I say, and if you don't, you'll just say I'm a Noog who only marches in the direction of everyone else on this board and can't think for himself. That's all you've ever done here with anyone who disagrees with you. Which is pretty hilarious, considering you've bitched non-stop about people here calling you a Doog for disagreeing with them.
Exaggerate what I say? Is that like if you make a valid, positive post about the program you are automatically a Sark lover and a Doog?
In my strange world, I think you can be critical of the coach, program, etc., but still be able to find some positives in the program.
Actually I think there are only a few Noogs on here. And based on your post that I have seen, I would not lump you into that category. And where have I bitched about being called a Doog? I actually laugh at it because if you make a valid point, then the only response from a couple of guys on here is to play the Doog card. I actually find it pretty hilarious.
I could care less about stars and rankings. I look at the offer list. This is why I have a little bit more hope for Ross than Mickens. Oregon, Michigan, Wisconsin, Miami all wanted him whereas Mickens was basically Oklahoma State and thats it.
I could care less about stars and rankings. I look at the offer list. This is why I have a little bit more hope for Ross than Mickens. Oregon, Michigan, Wisconsin, Miami all wanted him whereas Mickens was basically Oklahoma State and thats it.
Comments
So, please enlighten me with your thoughts.
Yeah, both guys have been fast risers but neither has a great future at this point.
In my strange world, I think you can be critical of the coach, program, etc., but still be able to find some positives in the program.
Actually I think there are only a few Noogs on here. And based on your post that I have seen, I would not lump you into that category. And where have I bitched about being called a Doog? I actually laugh at it because if you make a valid point, then the only response from a couple of guys on here is to play the Doog card. I actually find it pretty hilarious.