BuffaloBillsForever Posted December 5, 2015 Share Posted December 5, 2015 (edited) Who could never have made the kick if Sammy doesn't make that catch. But again, casual fans often miss the finer points of the game. It's okay, football is hard to understand sometimes. For you football is VERY HARD to comprehend that is for sure. A game sustaining catch IS NOT a game winning catch. Edited December 5, 2015 by BuffaloBillsForever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebandit27 Posted December 5, 2015 Share Posted December 5, 2015 For you football is VERY HARD to comprehend that is for sure. A game sustaining catch IS NOT a game winning catch. Doesn't this post fly in total opposition of your point about Chandler/Hogan/Watkins in the Minnesota game? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted December 5, 2015 Share Posted December 5, 2015 For you football is VERY HARD to comprehend that is for sure. A game sustaining catch IS NOT a game winning catch. Now you just want to quibble over semantics because you know your argument is cooked. The last resort of an intellectual coward. I got ya. Doesn't this post fly in total opposition of your point about Chandler/Hogan/Watkins in the Minnesota game? Shhh. Don't point out the hypocrisy. That's something only "casual" fans do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBillsForever Posted December 5, 2015 Share Posted December 5, 2015 Now you just want to quibble over semantics because you know your argument is cooked. The last resort of an intellectual coward. I got ya. Shhh. Don't point out the hypocrisy. That's something only "casual" fans do. What argument is cooked? That you said Sammy Watkins has 3 game winning catches? He doesn't, that is already proven. Doesn't this post fly in total opposition of your point about Chandler/Hogan/Watkins in the Minnesota game? No. It was showing how a few plays made by a player (Chandler/Hogan) in critical times in the game ("clutch") doesn't make that player "clutch". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted December 5, 2015 Share Posted December 5, 2015 What argument is cooked? That you said Sammy Watkins has 3 game winning catches? He doesn't, that is already proven. By any rational definition of people who understand what they're watching, Sammy iced those games with those catches. Or, in your own words: I also remeber the throw from Orton was wild and Chandler made an incredible one handed catch on the run. .Game is over without that play But since you're on a crusade, and are sorely lacking in any sort of logic or desire to have an honest conversation, this statement only applies when people not named Watkins make plays. You're a trip. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBillsForever Posted December 5, 2015 Share Posted December 5, 2015 (edited) By any rational definition of people who understand what they're watching, Sammy iced those games with those catches. Or, in your own words: But since you're on a crusade, and are sorely lacking in any sort of logic or desire to have an honest conversation, this statement only applies when people not named Watkins make plays. You're a trip. It applies to all 3 players being discussed. None of which I would call "clutch". Again as mentioned before "clutch" doesn't mean anything in football. Baseball....then we might have a discussion about "clutch" factor and hitting. Edited December 5, 2015 by BuffaloBillsForever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted December 5, 2015 Share Posted December 5, 2015 (edited) It applies to all 3 players being discussed. So your argument is the Bills would have won all three of those games had Sammy not made the catches he did when he made them? Is that really the argument you want to make? Again as mentioned before "clutch" doesn't mean anything in football. Baseball....then we might have a discussion about "clutch" factor and hitting. If you don't think there's a clutch factor in football you're even more of a casual fan than those you rail against. You would think as a fan of a team in the AFC East you'd understand what clutch looks like, considering we see it with Br*dy twice a year. Edited December 5, 2015 by Deranged Rhino Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBillsForever Posted December 5, 2015 Share Posted December 5, 2015 So your argument is the Bills would have won all three of those games had Sammy not made the catches he did when he made them? Is that really the argument you want to make? Nope. Sammy Watkins is only 1 of 11. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebandit27 Posted December 5, 2015 Share Posted December 5, 2015 It applies to all 3 players being discussed. None of which I would call "clutch". Again as mentioned before "clutch" doesn't mean anything in football. Baseball....then we might have a discussion about "clutch" factor and hitting. Again, if that was the point all along, then why not state that instead of fixating on Sammy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdand12 Posted December 5, 2015 Share Posted December 5, 2015 two on one. someone needs to to step off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebandit27 Posted December 5, 2015 Share Posted December 5, 2015 two on one. someone needs to to step off. Accepted! I'm out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBillsForever Posted December 5, 2015 Share Posted December 5, 2015 (edited) So your argument is the Bills would have won all three of those games had Sammy not made the catches he did when he made them? Is that really the argument you want to make? If you don't think there's a clutch factor in football you're even more of a casual fan than those you rail against. You would think as a fan of a team in the AFC East you'd understand what clutch looks like, considering we see it with Br*dy twice a year. What we see with the Pats every year is consistency in their preparation/coaching and superiority in talent. Clutch has nothing to do with anything regarding the Bills playing the Patriots. Edited December 5, 2015 by BuffaloBillsForever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdand12 Posted December 5, 2015 Share Posted December 5, 2015 Accepted! I'm out A gentlemen are you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted December 5, 2015 Share Posted December 5, 2015 Nope. Sammy Watkins is only 1 of 11. Just because the game is played 11 on 11 does not mean there is no such thing as a "clutch player" in football, or that clutch players don't make huge plays that decide games. Arguing otherwise belies your agenda, or your lack of understanding of the game itself. Clutch players are players able to consistently perform at the highest levels in the biggest moments of the game. Sammy, as evidenced by those three games in which he was directly responsible for the winning points, is one of those players. You disagree, that's fine. I think we all know where your agenda truly lies. What we see with the Pats every year is consistency in their preparation/coaching and superiority in talent. And yet the Pats are winning with less superior rosters year in and year out because they have one of the most clutch players in NFL history at the most important position in the game. For a guy who claims to watch more than just the Bills, you sure don't know much about the rest of the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBillsForever Posted December 5, 2015 Share Posted December 5, 2015 Just because the game is played 11 on 11 does not mean there is no such thing as a "clutch player" in football, or that clutch players don't make huge plays that decide games. Arguing otherwise belies your agenda, or your lack of understanding of the game itself. Clutch players are players able to consistently perform at the highest levels in the biggest moments of the game. Sammy, as evidenced by those three games in which he was directly responsible for the winning points, is one of those players. You disagree, that's fine. I think we all know where your agenda truly lies. And yet the Pats are winning with less superior rosters year in and year out because they have one of the most clutch players in NFL history at the most important position in the game. For a guy who claims to watch more than just the Bills, you sure don't know much about the rest of the league. You couldn't even properly evaluate the Bills roster this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted December 5, 2015 Share Posted December 5, 2015 You couldn't even properly evaluate the Bills roster this year. I couldn't? Was I asked to? Nice try. When your own argument gets shredded, lash out at me. Again, I understand your agenda here. It's all good. Hilariously inept but all good. Keep on telling us how clutch doesn't exist and the patriots win every year because their rosters are STACKED with talent. That's working well for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBillsForever Posted December 5, 2015 Share Posted December 5, 2015 I couldn't? Was I asked to? Nice try. When your own argument gets shredded, lash out at me. Again, I understand your agenda here. It's all good. Hilariously inept but all good. Keep on telling us how clutch doesn't exist and the patriots win every year because their rosters are STACKED with talent. That's working well for you. The only thing you have shown me is that you judge a roster by flashy names and signings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted December 5, 2015 Share Posted December 5, 2015 The only thing you have shown me is that you judge a roster by flashy names and signings. I'd love an example. You either have me confused with another poster or are just making stuff up in the desperate hope to take attention away from the truly ridiculous things you've said in just this very thread. The only two players I've gone out to defend repeatedly are McCoy and Watkins. Because they're both elite playmakers who make this team better. I get that you don't understand the salary cap in the NFL and have gone on record as saying McCoy's contract is an "albatross", but that doesn't mean he's not an elite player. He's shown that the past few games in case you haven't been paying attention. I mean, I know it's hard for casual fans to keep track of stuff like how well a team's lead RB is doing. So, try again. Or, better yet, instead of making stuff up about my posts, quote me or stick to your own ramblings about how everyone on here is a casual fan compared to your overwhelming knowledge of the sport. Clearly, as you've continually demonstrated with threads like these, your own knowledge of the game is highly suspect or at the very least driven by a sizable agenda. Either one makes for poor football discussion. Step your game up, we'll all thank you for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBillsForever Posted December 5, 2015 Share Posted December 5, 2015 I couldn't? Was I asked to? Nice try. When your own argument gets shredded, lash out at me. Again, I understand your agenda here. It's all good. Hilariously inept but all good. Keep on telling us how clutch doesn't exist and the patriots win every year because their rosters are STACKED with talent. That's working well for you. The patriots certainly have had better rosters than the Bills the past decade. But it's more than that, a competent front office and the best HC in NFL history. This is why they consitently win and the Bills consistently lose. Not because of some imaginery "clutchiness". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted December 5, 2015 Share Posted December 5, 2015 The patriots certainly have had better rosters than the Bills the past decade. But it's more than that, a competent front office and the best HC in NFL history. This is why they consitently win and the Bills consistently lose. Not because of some imaginery "clutchiness". Moving the goal posts again because your argument is weak. I get it, I do. But let's try to stay on point. I never said they beat just the Bills because of clutchness, I said they win (against everyone) despite having less talented rosters (compared to the rest of the league, not just Buffalo) because of the clutchness of Tom Brady. This was in response to your ridiculous statement that clutchness doesn't exist/matter in the NFL -- which is just laughable. Try harder. Someone who thinks of themselves as a hard core fan like yourself should know these things. two on one. someone needs to to step off. Accepted! I'm out Me too since it's clear BuffaloBillsForever has no interest in having an honest conversation about football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts