- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: This is why Super Bowl rings are mostly irrelevant
Posted on 2/1/15 at 9:59 pm to catholictigerfan
Posted on 2/1/15 at 9:59 pm to catholictigerfan
quote:He's had better team success, but you can't argue he's played at a higher level than Rodgers, you just can't(other than longevity).
It's hard to argue that anyone in the NFL has a better body of work than brady, or even a better QB. Yes his talent has fallen off, he isn't the brady of old. But he has 4 super bowl rings, played in 6. He is clearly the best QB of this generation if not all time.
2
Posted on 2/1/15 at 9:59 pm to shel311
quote:
quote:
I think the flaw in your logic is that you are concentrating on one play.
No, the 1 play is my exact logic
Except you didn't say the one play is irrelevant, you said Super Bowl Rings are "mostly" irrelevant. It is a completely different thing to say that that one play is irrelevant to his greatness as a quarterback than it is to say super bowl rings are irrelevant to his greatness.
quote:
WHy do you take my entire premise as a knock on Brady? I'm saying I'd think just as highly of him if he had 3 titles compared to 4 or even 6? Isn't that me being pro-Brady?
??? I don't think I said anything about your premise being a knock on Brady. I didn't even think along those lines. I just think you are conflating whether one play matters with whether a Superbowl ring matters. They are different things entirely.
Posted on 2/1/15 at 9:59 pm to kbro
quote:That's my point.
Pete Carroll only had an opportunity to completely frick the play call up b/c Kearse had a flukey, lucky as shite catch to get Seattle near the goal line.
Brady led NE to the go ahead score and has 4 rings.
Posted on 2/1/15 at 10:00 pm to shel311
Your premises and arguments work really well, I just think your logical conclusion is stupid.
Rings matter they are relevant.
Rodgers Manning and Brees have much more talent than Brady. But why do you think Brady gets more recognition as the best QB? He has rings. Why is he going to get into the NFL HOF, he has rings and he is one of the main reason they won them. Rings aren't the most important thing when judging a QBs success, but they are still a big factor.
Rings matter they are relevant.
Rodgers Manning and Brees have much more talent than Brady. But why do you think Brady gets more recognition as the best QB? He has rings. Why is he going to get into the NFL HOF, he has rings and he is one of the main reason they won them. Rings aren't the most important thing when judging a QBs success, but they are still a big factor.
Posted on 2/1/15 at 10:00 pm to shel311
quote:
Isn't that what I've said for 6 pages?
Your thread title reads:
quote:
This is why Superbowl rings are mostly irrelevant
which is not true.
Posted on 2/1/15 at 10:00 pm to Methuselah
quote:You realize the 1 play was teh difference in ring/no ring, so the argument is one in the same.
Except you didn't say the one play is irrelevant, you said Super Bowl Rings are "mostly" irrelevant. It is a completely different thing to say that that one play is irrelevant to his greatness as a quarterback than it is to say super bowl rings are irrelevant to his greatness.
quote:In this specific example, they were the same thing.
I just think you are conflating whether one play matters with whether a Superbowl ring matters. They are different things entirely.
Posted on 2/1/15 at 10:01 pm to shel311
quote:
He's had better team success, but you can't argue he's played at a higher level than Rodgers, you just can't(other than longevity).
Talent
Rodgers > Brady
Success
Brady > Rodgers.
What matters more, Success.
Posted on 2/1/15 at 10:02 pm to catholictigerfan
quote:That doesn't make those people correct.
Rodgers Manning and Brees have much more talent than Brady. But why do you think Brady gets more recognition as the best QB? He has rings
quote:This is actually incorrect. If Brady lost all 6 Super Bowls, he's still be a 1st ballot HOF lock, no?
Why is he going to get into the NFL HOF, he has rings and he is one of the main reason they won them
Posted on 2/1/15 at 10:02 pm to rintintin
quote:Opinions can't be true or false, so your statement is incorrectly, factually speaking.
which is not true
Posted on 2/1/15 at 10:02 pm to shel311
quote:
You realize the 1 play was teh difference in ring/no ring, so the argument is one in the same.
this is bad logic.
Your saying that Brady is a great player no matter what happened on that play.
your making a logical jump, which shouldn't be made, that because this one play doesn't make a difference, therefore rings shouldn't make a difference.
Posted on 2/1/15 at 10:03 pm to catholictigerfan
quote:Team success goes to Brady. individually speaking, Rodgers is definitely better, longevity withstanding.
Talent
Rodgers > Brady
Success
Brady > Rodgers.
What matters more, Success.
Those are 2 completely separate entities.
Posted on 2/1/15 at 10:04 pm to catholictigerfan
quote:Not if the 1 play actually decided whether he was getting a ring or not.
your making a logical jump, which shouldn't be made, that because this one play doesn't make a difference, therefore rings shouldn't make a difference.
And again, I said mostly irrelevant.
Posted on 2/1/15 at 10:04 pm to shel311
quote:
In this specific example, they were the same thing.
Don't make such a broad statement for a specific example. That's what we're arguing.
Posted on 2/1/15 at 10:04 pm to shel311
quote:
Opinions can't be true or false, so your statement is incorrectly, factually speaking.
you're right, but this is kinda a silly argument, because your premise can be true or false it's not just an opinion.
Posted on 2/1/15 at 10:05 pm to shel311
Have to love how your typical stupid fan thinks. Ball thrown up into coverage gets defended and deflected and as the WR falls back on his arse the ball falls into lap after bouncing off his leg. However, when the CB jumps the route and makes a play on the ball its called "a gift", "a lucky play" or a "gaffe".
Excuses are like assholes, great play by the CB.
Excuses are like assholes, great play by the CB.
Posted on 2/1/15 at 10:06 pm to catholictigerfan
quote:My premise is SB rings are mostly irrelevant, that cant be proven true or false, not sure what you're talking about here.
because your premise can be true or false it's not just an opinion.
It is pretty textbook, an opinion.
Posted on 2/1/15 at 10:07 pm to shel311
quote:
Not if the 1 play actually decided whether he was getting a ring or not.
your making a common logical fallacy.
you are taking one instance. one play determining an outcome of a game, and applying it to a general comment.
That is like saying.
point a, proves that line b is true. Well that is absurd, you need at-least 2 points to prove that a line is true. If you can't prove two points than you can't prove that the line is real.
That would be like saying, it rained on Tuesday, it must always or almost always rain on Tuesday.
Posted on 2/1/15 at 10:07 pm to BlackPawnMartyr
quote:Wow, that was tough to read, made no sense at all.
Have to love how your typical stupid fan thinks. Ball thrown up into coverage gets defended and deflected and as the WR falls back on his arse the ball falls into lap after bouncing off his leg. However, when the CB jumps the route and makes a play on the ball its called "a gift", "a lucky play" or a "gaffe".
Excuses are like a-holes, great play by the CB.
Posted on 2/1/15 at 10:08 pm to catholictigerfan
quote:It's just another example of many to further my point/opinion that rings are mostly irrelevant.
your making a common logical fallacy.
you are taking one instance. one play determining an outcome of a game, and applying it to a general comment.
Posted on 2/1/15 at 10:09 pm to shel311
quote:
My premise is SB rings are mostly irrelevant, that cant be proven true or false, not sure what you're talking about here.
yes it can, you don't understand basic logic.
you gave a premise, and use logic (mainly interception in Super Bowl, to prove that premise) Even opinions can be held as true or false. If you just say, well it's my option and never test the validity of that opinion than you will never progress in intellect, and we will just be people who have a bunch of opinions and never really go anywhere as a society. Most people gain knowledge by coming up with an opinion of something, testing it and seeing if it is true or not.
I believe God exists is an opinion
logical arguments try to prove this opinion is a true and therefore a fact.
same goes with your premise.
Note: this opinion thing is just a dodge attempt.
Page 6 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News