- 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 10:10 pm to shel311
Posted on 2/1/15 at 10:10 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.
But you've come to that premise by using bad logic. A logical leap as the other poster has pointed out. You were arguing your logic earlier in this thread, now it's just an opinion?
1
Posted on 2/1/15 at 10:10 pm to shel311
quote:
It's just another example of many to further my point/opinion that rings are mostly irrelevant.
you just keep using this line, your argument doesn't really work, it has to many holes and logical jumps in it.
Posted on 2/1/15 at 10:11 pm to catholictigerfan
You can't prove who is a better QB. 
quote:I've spent 7 pages answering basically every specific comment in every post. WTF are you talking about?
Note: this opinion thing is just a dodge attempt.
Posted on 2/1/15 at 10:12 pm to rintintin
quote:Tom Brady being the same exact player no better/worse based on that 1 play is about as logical as it gets.
You were arguing your logic earlier in this thread, now it's just an opinion?
Where Tom Brady ranks all time is an opinion.
Posted on 2/1/15 at 10:13 pm to catholictigerfan
quote:My argument is that Brady is the exact QB whether SEA scored there or not, I fail to see where I'm wrong in that logic.
you just keep using this line, your argument doesn't really work, it has to many holes and logical jumps in it
Posted on 2/1/15 at 10:15 pm to shel311
quote:
You realize the 1 play was teh difference in ring/no ring, so the argument is one in the same.
No. That is horrible logic. No one play determines the outcome of a game. And thus, in this case, no one play determines the outcome of a "Super Bowl ring".
quote:
n this specific example, they were the same thing.
So, all the other plays in the game had no bearing on whether the Patriots won the game and thus whether Brady got a Super Bowl ring? His touchdown passes? His moving his team and scoring with little help from a running game?
If you think that one play is synonymous with a Super Bowl ring, it's kind of hard to give your arguments any weight.
Posted on 2/1/15 at 10:15 pm to BlackPawnMartyr
quote:You realize you are helping his point right?
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".
Posted on 2/1/15 at 10:15 pm to shel311
quote:
You can't prove who is a better QB.
prove?
there will be hundreds of opinions on who is a better QB, that is a very subjective opinion.
your premise is very objective. most of the time x = 5
trying to prove a point that is mostly subjective, based on my own criteria I think X players is the best, vs a point that is mostly objective is different.
Let me put it simple, I believe the ball is round, vs the ball is round.
your argument is approaching the ball is round side, not the I believe the ball is round side.
Posted on 2/1/15 at 10:17 pm to Methuselah
quote:All mutually exclusive to my statement.
So, all the other plays in the game had no bearing on whether the Patriots won the game and thus whether Brady got a Super Bowl ring? His touchdown passes? His moving his team and scoring with little help from a running game?
quote:If SEA scores, odds NE wins? If NE gets the INT, odds SEA wins?
No one play determines the outcome of a game
Posted on 2/1/15 at 10:17 pm to Methuselah
quote:
No. That is horrible logic. No one play determines the outcome of a game. And thus, in this case, no one play determines the outcome of a "Super Bowl ring".
yep an entire season determines a Super Bowl ring. A ring tells people this, the team I played on put together the best season in the NFL this year, use luck helped at times, but when it comes down to it, we won because our team won enough to make the playoffs and when it mattered the most.
Having the MVP shows you that you are the main reason your team won the game.
Brady has both.
Posted on 2/1/15 at 10:18 pm to lsupride87
quote:I've responded to that post probably 10 times in this thread. you don't have to agree with me, but if you don't see how that post isn't exactly the point i'm making, right or wrong, I'm not sure what else to say.
You realize you are helping his point right?
Again, agree or not, my stance is rather clear.
Posted on 2/1/15 at 10:21 pm to shel311
quote:
My argument is that Brady is the exact QB whether SEA scored there or not, I fail to see where I'm wrong in that logic.
last time I try to explain this.
you've prove that point a is true
you are taking this and proving that line of best fit b is also true because point a is true.
again that is like saying, because it rained on Tuesday, it must almost always rain on Tuesday.
If you said, Brady's 4th ring doesn't add to his legacy, that has more weight.
but to say that Super Bowl rings are mostly irrelevant, is taking one data point and saying it must always be that way.
Posted on 2/1/15 at 10:22 pm to shel311
quote:
but you can't argue he's played at a higher level than Rodgers, you just can't(other than longevity).
Tom Brady's run from 2006-2012 is better than the run Rodgers is having. At least so far.
Brady is in the twilight of his career while Rodgers is presently in his prime.
Posted on 2/1/15 at 10:22 pm to catholictigerfan
quote:Fwiw, I'm the one using the entire season to formulate my opinion on how good the QB is, not the ring.
yep an entire season determines a Super Bowl ring.
quote:If Brady didn't get the ring this season(based on that last drive/would be TD by SEA), he still would have been the same exact QB, just as good, IMO.
A ring tells people this
quote:And if 1 singular outcome at the end of the game, that Brady had no control over, he wouldn't have either, but he still had the same exact game, however good/bad you thought he was in that game shouldn't change based on that singular outcome, again, IMO.
Having the MVP shows you that you are the main reason your team won the game.
Posted on 2/1/15 at 10:24 pm to shel311
quote:
Brady is no better or worse because Pete Carroll made the biggest coaching gaffe in the history of coaching gaffes.
3 rings, 4 rings, he's literally no different of a QB, no better or worse.
Your argument is that it's really about the stats, meaning, whether or not Butler gets the INT, Brady's stats are the same at the end of the game, therefore he's no better or worse? Right?
Or that because he had no effect on that single moment of the game that he's no better or worse?
Posted on 2/1/15 at 10:26 pm to shel311
quote:
Tom Brady being the same exact player no better/worse based on that 1 play is about as logical as it gets.
Yes that statement is.
The statement in your OP is not, it's an opinion. But you've illogically tried to use one to support the other by making a logical fallacy.
Posted on 2/1/15 at 10:26 pm to RollTide1987
quote:No
Tom Brady's run from 2006-2012 is better than the run Rodgers is having. At least so far.
Rodgers career vs Brady 2006-2012, Rodgers has 15 more TDs, same amount of INTs, higher YPA, higher TD%, lower INT%, higher Passer rating, higher completion%.
Again, no one has ever played the game at a higher level than Rodgers over a relative sample size, I just don't think that can be shown based on the production/efficiency numbers.
This post was edited on 2/1/15 at 10:27 pm
Posted on 2/1/15 at 10:27 pm to Freauxzen
quote:Both, really.
Your argument is that it's really about the stats, meaning, whether or not Butler gets the INT, Brady's stats are the same at the end of the game, therefore he's no better or worse? Right?
Or that because he had no effect on that single moment of the game that he's no better or worse?
His production/efficiency remains unchanged by that last drive, it was out of his hands.
Posted on 2/1/15 at 10:28 pm to catholictigerfan
quote:
that because this one play doesn't make a difference, therefore rings shouldn't make a difference.
I agree with that. As we can clearly see, luck utterly dominates in any single contest. The best way to judge a body of work is on the quality of the decision making and the position the QB puts his team in over time. A QB that consistently puts his team in the SB, is probably great. Full stop. Since we know there is no such thing as "clutch", that pretty much ends it.
Posted on 2/1/15 at 10:29 pm to rintintin
quote:It's an example that supports it.
The statement in your OP is not, it's an opinion. But you've illogically tried to use one to support the other by making a logical fallacy.
I'll ask again, better all time, Marino or Bradhsaw? Choose Marino, then explain how relevant the rings are in that example that you still concluded Marino.
Page 7 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News