I didn’t but ok

Keep doin you Pete

He didn't contradict himself. You're the one talking about 10 sacks in 3 games.

Read what you said again. He doesn't need to have 10 sacks but they spent a lot of resources to get him and he isn't playing to that level. What level? You never clarified therefore one can only infer a contradiction.

You're the one crying about him after only 3 games. I remember people bitching about Trent Green and Priest Holmes in similar fashion. Something tells me you were among that crowd as well.

Man, it's just such a waste of time to argue anymore. Nothing is going to change there minds, so it's a ****ing lost cause. I'll see how he is this week and if there's no improvement I'll be back lol.

I was against this trade before it happened, but then was able to talk myself into it. I really really want him to play like he is supposed to, because if he becomes the guy he was with the Seahawks, then this defense will be so much better. He's no where close to the player he was when he was with Seattle and if his highlights from last season looked anything like his highlights from this year, then Frank wouldn't have been traded for a 1st, 2nd and given $100 mil. If he was people would have went absolutely nuts.

I'm glad Pete has showed up to be the dramatic bad bitch he is, though. He only knows extremes!

Bye everyone. See you all next week!

How many times are you going to say this? Just curious....:hmmm:

Yeah, no

He’s paid like one of the best defensive players in the league. Players of that caliber aren’t supposed to make impact by “taking chip blocks and getting double teamed to open up others”

Khalil Mack gets doubled. Still is disruptive. Aaron’s Donald is the same

You mean like:

Mack? 1 sack
Donald? 1 sack
Ingram? 1 sack
Bosa? 1.5 sacks

Clark....1 sack




Seems like he is right there with the rest of the big names. And they all have the advantage of playing in the same defense on the same team they played on last year.

Are you really going to talk about someone bitching? Have you ever read some of your many post game word vomit threads? Some of your game day thread posts?

I'm talking about 3 games because that's all we have played. If we go on to play well and Frank Clark becomes a beast the rest of the season, then I'll say he played great. But he had only played 3 games and has failed to live up to the hype in the 3 games. If you want, you can ask AustinChief to shut down the forum until after game 16 to prevent us from criticizing or praising players during the season since you're against that.

Don't get mad because you are being called out for being a bitch after only 3 games. This isn't Madden.

You can criticize him all you want over his first 3 games in a new defense on a new team. Just don't get pissed when people criticize you for doing so.

So can we also not praise a player for playing well after 3 games? Or how does this work? Can I say that Hardman looks great so far? What about Ogbah? Did you go into the thread about him and say it's too early to praise him? Cause I think the two of them have been very good so far.

Or does this rule only apply to underperforming players?

Sometimes its wise to consider your allies when reviewing the strength of your position.

Pete, as is his custom, has resorted to straw men in lieu of reasoned analysis. He hasn't been able to speak intelligently to the criticism of Clark so he's resorted making up stances to rail against.

If you ever find yourself thinking that Pete is being reasonable about something, you need to think reeeeaaaaal hard about where you stand in the discussion.

You're free to do what you want.

Exhibit A, Clay.

This is either willful ignorance or the inane 'victory lap' of the functionally reeruned.

Yeah, it's better to totally rip a guy who is in a completely new system because he hasn't done X in all of 3 games. And then to totally gloss over what he has done because it wasn't X.

That's logical....think hard and stuff