I am from West Virginia and I saw Moss on the late night local news in about a 5 second clip showing him catch a touchdown pass in high school as a Junior. I said , at the time, that he was the greatest football player I had ever seen. I was born in 1951. Nothing that has happened since has ever changed my mind. My only regret is that no football coach ever really knew how to make full use of him in the game of football.
in my opinion randy moss was the best WR to ever play. he made sorry QBs look great (dante Cullpeper and aaron brooks)... Jerry rice had montana and young
I'm a vikings fan. Brad Childress runied my dream season of seeing Randy, Moss, Sidney Rice, Percy Harvin, and Adrian Peterson on the same team! That moron only needed to wait for Sidney rice to get healthy and they still would've had a chance to make the playoffs. Even Travaris Jackson and Joe Webb could've had a good year with that line up! Instead he allowed Brett Farve, as great as he was, play the season with a fractured ankle! What coach does that? Brad Childress! I'm glad that he's gone!
@jaizasnuka ,,, whoooo whoooooo whooooooo whoooooo ,, you hear that, thats the sound of the youtube comment page grammar police,,,, a seriously sad type of human.
@drbayoms if anything the fact that the Defenses tended to allow the same or less points w/o Sanders is completely circumstantial and could stem from other reasons. I want you to realize that it is this kind of logic that you have been using the whole time.... circumstantial, slippery slope logic. There is no way to prove the connection either way because there are simply too many variables. So lets agree to disagree and you can continue to maintain your defense mechanism known as denial
@drbayoms I will man up and admit my sources were wrong on some occasions. I just don't give this the importance that you seem to think it has, however, I did take the time to review the facts about Sanders on the niners being part of their most points allowed by a defense in 6 years, and all the afformentioned in this, the most recent sequence of postings. You really are so dilusional that I suppose you will ignore these, or simply explain them away as unimportant.
@drbayoms you say "don't bite off more than you can chew", sound advice my friend. The saddest part is that you don't possess the cognitive awareness nor scholorly experience to recognize how much more the dicho applies to you more than me. Communication is the means whereby the gears of society mesh and turn. Your gears notches don't seem to line up w/ anyone who has an IQ a shade above that of a houseplant (look at the comments others have left you in reference about your dilussions).
@drbayoms I think maybe you should take a few logic classes at your local community college and then come back and try again to prove, through logic not circumstance, that Sanders is the SOLE reason the 49ers won. Disprove that the offense was not worse w/o Watters (the only difference in the starters offense the next year when they scored less points was Watters...) "You can't argue w/ facts"<--your words. Although, you sure seem to like to try by playing down their importance or ignoring them
@drbayoms 17) you have not made one arguement other than slippery slope, and beating the bush arguements. I do appreciate that you have laid off the Ad Hominems, however, you still have yet to make one logical point. You poor individual. You really are so narcassistic that you believe you have proved something?
@drbayoms I am even more sympathetic towards you as you do not connect the evidence together in any logical order. You simply slippery slope it and pretend there is a connection, then ignore that Sanders had a bad game in '94 against the cowboys in the championship, whereas Watters scored a TD. 15) What is more sad is you think technicalities disprove points. Such as "it is only a 50 point difference in offense". 16)Calling stars Icecream enough doesn't turn them into ice cream.
@drbayoms 14) I really do feel bad for you. Not just for our debate, but also for the others I've seen online. You never seem to realize how grossly dilisional you seem to every person that you are debating w/. I would love to discuss things w/ you face to face when I'm not between appointments, nor holding my 3 month old and attempting to keep her happy as I type. I am sincerely sorry that you have so much time to waste looking up random statistics.
@drbayomss 13) Honestly I get so distracted talking to you, because you make no logical connections and it is difficult me to understand how your brain even functions. Simply saying "Sanders was on the 49ers and they won the super bowl that year, so Sanders was responsible" is so rediculously illogical that I don't even know how to begin to attack it. It's like me saying "stars are made of ice cream". There is simply so much wrong w/ it and it neglects/ignores all evidence to the contrary.
@drrrrbayomsss 11) Again, going back to the NFC championship. Sanders underperformed. Giving up over 120 yards to one player, and another 11 to Harper and another 20+ to the third WR, plus the interference not called (oh and one that was to give a 1st down) 12)If you want to dwell on websites I quote having bad information, then also discuss your saying "darrell green never covered Moss" and "Rice never once caught a pass against Sanders". Otherwise quit being hypocritical and lets move on.
@drbayomsss <---notice I'm mispelling your name now. You still know its you though :D. Maybe I should just assume you know more than Einstein, and that spelling is important? anyways, 10)Falcons had one of the Worst pass defenses in the league from '89 to '93 w/ Sanders. So for Sanders first 4 years in the league he is on one of the worst pass defenses, in '94 his team allows more points than any season in the past 6 years, Then in '95 most points given up by that team in 4 seasons.
@drybayoms 6)49ers offense scored less points after Watters left, although the defense allowed less. 7)Loville, Kirby, Phillips, Garner, and Hearst (RB in the niners during the years that followed Watters leaving) did not make the pro bowl 5 times when you add all their pro bowls as did Watters in 10 years. 8)in '95 Loville did not make the pro bowl, as Watters did the year prior. 9)break it down simplistically to points for vs points against and you see offense was the issue after '94
@drbayoms 1) from '89-'95 the 49ers WORST defensive points given up was the year they had Sanders. 2)Falcons Defense the year before Sanders and the year after points given up are the same. 3)Cowboys worst year from '92-95 in terms of points given up was their year w/ Sanders. 4)Watters made pro bowl in '94, had 3 super bowl TDs and TD vs Cowboys in the championship. 5)Sanders performance in the NFC Championship was lackluster, and he got away w/ an interference.
The same Primetime Rice has caught TD over btw ;) <---red herring... ik, I think your maturity in arguing pure fallacy w/o merits is starting to rub off on me....Primetime had a name that got him poy. Statistically on the falcons the years prior, look at what their pass defense was ranked w/ Sanders, compared to the 49ers D. Another variable than Sanders must thereby be present. Prove he was the ONLY reason they got to the NFC championship, then that he was the reason they won it. Go ahead.
I here Merry Go Round music in the background whenever I read your postings. I have already made quite clear why Deion was the ONLY reason Rice got that 3rd Ring. In the future, do not bite off more than you can chew. For all of your supposed accomplishments. None of them helped you in this "debate".
I also noticed you did not give the name of that video where I supposedly accused Plaxico of raping a woman. Obviously you went back, read it and realized that in fact you ALSO (like so many things) got that wrong too. No need to apologize. Failing to post the name of the video and then going on some long rant (again) was enough for me. I enjoyed our time together. Get back to debate class, you need it. Goodbye.
@drbayoms Whenever I read your debates I wonder if you are really so diliusional that you believe what you say. I sincerley hope, for your sake, that you are not. Like I said if you are going to deny something that happened 1 week ago then there's no point in bringing it up. Lets analyze some real facts in their simplist forms. Although I'm sure you'll have some excuse as to why this happened, or you will simply ignore them and pretend it didn't happen.
@drbayoms Whenever I read your debates I wonder if you are really so diliusional that you believe what you say. I sincerley hope, for your sake, that you are not. Like I said if you are going to deny something that happened 1 week ago then there's no point in bringing it up. Lets analyze some real facts in their simplist forms. Although I'm sure you'll have some excuse as to why this happened, or you will simply ignore them and pretend it didn't happen.
I also noticed you did not give the name of that video where I supposedly accused Plaxico of raping a woman. Obviously you went back, read it and realized that in fact you ALSO (like so many things) got that wrong too. No need to apologize. Failing to post the name of the video and then going on some long rant (again) was enough for me. I enjoyed our time together. Get back to debate class, you need it. Goodbye.
As far as what variables are that keep teams from winning or losing championships, I don't care about what they are, nor will I feign being able to understand, identify and debate all the variables. The reality is they don't matter all that much. A 5mph wind can be the difference between winning and losing a game, or a wet field, or a bad call. Since there are soooo many, instead of debating every one of them, how about you prove your statement "Primetime" got Rice the ring.
That being said, lets jump back to the actual debate things you have ignored
1)Sanders lackluster playoff performance.
2)Original topic of the debate (my position was variables kept Young from winning championships. You then said NO! Then have gone on for days to debate variables that allowed/disallowed Young to win championships, talk about a contradiction)
3) number 2 was the only original point I was trying to make, as you generalized a silly slippery slope Montana quote. Point 2 was proven
I feel pity for you if you feel you need to spend time reviewing various sites before commenting on a youtube video. I also question your ability to write considering your inability to demonstrate, thus far, an emotional maturity above that of the common 5 year old. Seriously, you may as well be saying "I win, because I do, you aren't good at this because I said so, so you are losing and I win!" Simply, childish bud I feel sorry for you
I simply am not going to waste more time trying to prove a point to someone who seems like a hypocritical narcissist who constantly claims I need Maxim to get off.... your the one w/ the bikini girl on your page man, not me. I'm happily married and don't need to pollute my mind w/ such nonsense. With that I bid you farewell
1.)So instead of researching FACTS before debating an issue. You feel it is best to post a bunch of BS that exposes you as an uneducated idiot. No, what I think happened is that you simply are not bright enough to take facts, look at them and make sound opinions based on that information. You were burned and now you are simply backpedaling (not as well as Deion, though) trying to cover your ass.
@drbayoms More beating the bush "sp is important because I said so, I don't care if Einstein didn't spell and I'm ignoring that." When I wrote my paper for Atlantic Magazine on Monte Verde, Kennewick Man, the Spirit cave mummy, and haplogroup x linking many native tribes to Eastern Europeans, and not Asians, then I took the time to make sure stuff was spelled write. Playing mmos and on youtube.com chat videos I'm not wasting the time to do so.
2.)Also, we communicate with words. We are not sitting in front of each other. That means that the words we use MUST be spelled correctly. How in the hell can you communicate effectively if you can’t spell? How can you communicate properly if you have a problem with syntax? WORDS are important. For someone boasting about debate skills, you should know that.
@drbayoms Words are important so far as they can be understood. When is the last time you saw a cx debater even debate? They don't get up to make sure they pronounce everything well, nor is spelling involved in any way shape or form. Again, beat the bush all you want saying spelling is the be all end all, by doing so you claim to be smarter than Einstein. Notice how you ignored the part where I pointed out you spelled things wrong as well.... of course you did
3.)To a larger issue. Where in the hell did you see ANY quote BY ME suggesting that Plaxico Burress (notice my correct spelling of his name) raped some woman? Give me the exact video. This better not be one of your infamous errors. This better not be “oh well I thought you said”. This better not be “the sun was in my eye and I could not read it properly”. Give me the video name. And if I meant that Plaxico raped a woman, I will end this “debate”.
@drbayoms It was only a week ago when you finished commenting on the Burress vid, it shouldn't be that difficult for you to find it. If you are going to deny having commented on that video not more than a week ago then you would be willing to deny anything. Like I said you don't man up when you make mistakes. You simply pretend they don't exist; like sanders still giving up 8 catches for a little over 120 yards to Irvin in the NFC Championship then interferring w/ him and getting away w/ it.
4.)I want the video name. Again, since you are not very skilled in deciphering words typed. Send me the name of the video where I stated that Plaxico undeniably raped a woman. You are reaching. You are reaching because you are getting your ass kicked in this inconsequential Youtube debate. Your hubris has forced you over the desk, time and time again.
@drbayoms Reaching would be going into something other than what pops up on google when I type in your name. I just used the first few sites to see how EVERY video you declare things to the effect of "you are wrong", "you can't spell", and mock the intelligence of others. Understanding words is all that is important, not necessarily that they are spellt 100% correct, at least on an internet debate. I can understand if I made all my arguments in a language you didn't speak, how that wouldn't
be fair, however, every educated individual I worked w/ (Including when I was at Monte Verde) knew that communication was more understanding based. When one of the individual speaks w/ an accent for example, that doesn't make them less intelligent, we worked to understand them rather than criticize how they spoke. What version of reality do you live in where you feel someone w/o spell check should take extra time to research various sites, and look up every word they type in the dictionary?
5.)I think from the actual FACTS I have posted proved my point. Deion was the difference. Not 178 yds MORE from Watters. Not 5.5 sacks from Dent, Norton and Jackson combined. Not Hanks who had no Pro Bowls before Deion got there. Just so you know. Your constant use of the phrase “slippery slope” seems to pop up EVERY TIME you encounter FACTS you can’t refute. SEND ME THE NAME OF THAT VIDEO. If I said it (which you & I know never happened) I will capitulate.
lets leave it at that. You have been hypocritical in accusing me of presenting false evidence/not spelling correctly when you have done each of the same in the past(darrell green would get destroyed by Moss, but never played him for example).
Please, attempt to prove that I'm wrong and that you do understand how to use logical debate. If you don't I will assume you, yourself, realize w/e position you have is too weak to defend on merits of honesty, and I will consider you culpable of being trolling w/o intent, at very least. Do you really honestly believe that Sanders was the only reason they won in '94 still? Do you believe his leaving was the ONLY reason they lost after? If so prove it... burden is on you
5.)The simple reality here is that you do not know a damn thing about football. That is the issue. What’s the use of a purported 152 IQ if you lack the COMMON SENSE to cross reference information before coming on the internet looking like a buffoon? So the same “Genius Level” intellect, prevents you from spelling correctly and verifying facts? What a waste. The 49ers were 13-3 in 1994, you idiot.
6.)You missed the easily verifiable fact that the Packers won 3 straight over the 49ers. You missed the easily verifiable fact that the 49ers were 13-3 in the regular season. You missed the easily verifiable fact that the 49ers scored 505 points in the regular season. And the whole time you blamed the internet, in a typical impulsive teen fashion. Tell me again HOW MANY REGULAR SEASON GAMES THE 49ers WON IN 94?
7.)My proof is simple. The 49ers were 16th in Total Defense (which supports my earlier claim of them being “ranked around 15th” ) the year BEFORE Deion got there. Looking at the FACT that the other free agents they signed (Dent, Jackson, Norton, etc) had NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT (backed up by there total production). The ONLY variable LEFT is the 94 Def POY. You do know Deion was the Def POY in 94?
9.)8 catches for 160 yards. No, wait it was really 8 catches for 120 yards. Wait, wait I promise to get it right this time. It was really 8 catches for slighty over 120 yards. I gave you all the proof that anyone (even someone with a “Genius Level” IQ could verify. Deion IS THE REASON RICE HAS THAT 3rd Ring. Not Watters, Jackson, Dent, Norton, the Milkman, the Mailman, etc. Stick to Maxim Magazine, and debates on whether or not Lady Gaga was born a man.
9.)8 catches for 160 yards. No, wait it was really 8 catches for 120 yards. Wait, wait I promise to get it right this time. It was really 8 catches for slighty over 120 yards. I gave you all the proof that anyone (even someone with a “Genius Level” IQ could verify. Deion IS THE REASON RICE HAS THAT 3rd Ring. Not Watters, Jackson, Dent, Norton, the Milkman, the Mailman, etc. Stick to Maxim Magazine, and debates on whether or not Lady Gaga was born a man.
I honestly believe you would be unable to prove a point by not using a fallacy. Get over the hypocrisy of pointing out others mistakes which they admit/explain/correct, when you have obvious mistakes "Irvin was Shut down by sanders in the nfc championship" for one. You have had other blatant contradictions to what you have said. I don't point them out because it doesn't progress the conversation. I honestly believe you would be incapable of proving w/e point your trying to prove w/o fallacies
I honestly believe you would be unable to prove a point by not using a fallacy. Get over the hypocrisy of pointing out others mistakes which they admit/explain/correct, when you have obvious mistakes "Irvin was Shut down by sanders in the nfc championship" for one. You have had other blatant contradictions to what you have said. I don't point them out because it doesn't progress the conversation. I honestly believe you would be incapable of proving w/e point your trying to prove w/o fallacies
so some class please* I have been respectful to you, but you continue to try to insult and intimidate and belittle, which I have seen you do to EVERY other person who has had a different opinion than you. Again this doesn't make you right, it simply makes you someone who never learned manners/respect/class and my favorite logic. Showing logical intellectual conversation demonstrates greater wisdom(the application of knowledge) than random 3rd grade level insults.
Now something I say not related to this debate entirely. Ad Hominem is the classic attack used by 3 year olds and IS NEVER a valid arguement. Appeal to Fear fallacy IS NEVER VALID. Slippery slopes CAN BE VALID WHEN CONNECTED LINKS ARE MADE. Everything you have said has been one of these fallacies. Slippery slopes w/o proof to support position/insults are not just illogical they are tacky, so some class
@ElSharkwalker Ad Hominem is never a valid argument when used as you have used it. (classified as an Abusive Ad Hominem). Other form's of Ad hominem are on very rare occasions valid. I just wanted to clarify that the way you have used it IS NEVER VALID.
1.)Davis, Young, Stubblefield DID NOT HAVE 1 SINGLE PRO BOWL prior to that season, you dullard. You implied that the 49ers were stocked with Pro Bowlers. Richard Dent was Super Bowl MVP………IN 1985. Dent was not even a starter in SanFran. He had 2.0 sacks that year. Hanks came into the league in 91. His 1st Pro Bowl was the year Deion got there. Coincidence?
@drbayoms 1) I never said they had pro bowls prior, strawman fallacy. Dent was a starter, just hurt most of the season. Hanks made it to the pro bowl after Sanders left the 49ers. This indicates more of a common trend for young secondary known as maturity. You can live in your fantasy world and pretend it was all Sanders though. However, if you want me to drink the koolaid you are, then you need to prove it was Sanders, and not simple maturation, or the position change from CB to FS.
1) continued in other words..... this is a text book example of slippery slope. "Sanders went to San Fransisco in '94. Merton Hanks made the Pro Bowl in '94." Where is the connection again? Hanks was originally drafted as a FS, so of course after having 2 years to adjust to NFL speed and being back in his natural position he will play better..... Or maybe Sanders waved his magic wand and Hanks magically became better? I get it, like the direct tv commercials Sanders must be magic.....
2.)I am the one who told you that Jackson, McDonald & Norton had previous Pro Bowls. I am also the one who told you that of those 3 players, only 1 (McDonald) made the Pro Bowl that year. I also told you that Rickey Jackson & Norton combining for just over 100 tackes and 3.5 sacks WAS INSIGNIFICANT.
@drbayoms 2) Rickey Jackson had one purpose when he came to San Fransisco, pressure the qb. Watch that '94 NFC championship and tell me Jackson didn't do just that. Jackson was stale in a lot of the blow out games the niners had. In big games though he showed up (he's responsible for 2 of Sanders' picks that year as well). Norton was a run stopper. If he gets 2 tackles for a loss in a row on the RB to lead to a three and out (which he did in the NFC championship then......
@drbayoms 2) Then he gets a potential 2 total tackles that drive as his job was to shadow Half Backs. (not getting tackles on most passes). Obviously every drive isn't a 3 in out, but w/ as many quality defenders as they had there were many short drives. Short drives means less opportunities to get tackles, then you have to divide tackles between players. Of course in these situations tackles between players will be less. As I explained it less defensive playes=less tackles.
@drbayoms 2)Say it is insignificant all you want, it doesn't make it so. I can hit the bush (beat the bush) in my back yard w/ a bat and tell it, that it is an apple tree all day.... reality is, that doesn't make it an apple tree. So keep saying Norton's and Jackson's play is insignificant, however, until you prove it by accounting for less defensive plays/qb hurries/knockdowns/forced picks and everything else you are still just beating a bush.
3.)If I COMBINED the stats of Dent, Jackson & Norton THAT YEAR it totals: 119 Tackles & 5.5 sacks. Really? This is the contribution you are bragging about? Do you really think you are fooling someone? Norton, Jackson NOR Dent had a significant impact on that team. And Merton Hanks & Eric Davis never sniffed a Pro Bowl before Deion got there. You are way out of your league.
@drbayoms 3)Slippery slope saying Deion has any connection to Davis and Hanks again. Prove it? Oh wait... I forgot he used his magic fairy wand... lol. Again, looking at just sacks and tackles...... You neglect how Norton limited HB on other teams, most notably Emmitt Smith and Barry Sanders. You neglect pics that were made as a result of Jacksons pressure. You neglect how doubling Jackson opened it up for Bryant Young. Again too many variables to consider. You also ignore Dana/Bryant combo
@drbayoms 3)Slippery slope saying Deion has any connection to Davis and Hanks again. Prove it? Oh wait... I forgot he used his magic fairy wand... lol. Again, looking at just sacks and tackles...... You neglect how Norton limited HB on other teams, most notably Emmitt Smith and Barry Sanders. You neglect pics that were made as a result of Jacksons pressure. You neglect how doubling Jackson opened it up for Bryant Young. Again too many variables to consider. You also ignore Dana/Bryant combo
4.)Now you are blaming the websites for giving you misinformation. Why is it I get my information from several different places, but you some how can’t do the same? You have an excuse for everything. “I can‘t spell correctly because I have a genius IQ“. “ I got the games confused. “The website did not have the Packers beating the 49ers 3 years in a row” (remember that one). “The website has the wrong number of regular season wins”. Excuse, after excuse, after excuse.
4)I suppose I could double check websites. I'll learn from my mistakes and do that in the future. Since you can't seem to let things go, however, I will bring up some of the things I have seen you say that is blatantly contradictory. a.Buress undoubtebly raped the girl. b.Rice never got even one catch on Sanders!.... Show me the *explative* footage c."Irvin was shutdown in the '94 Championship.. wait He was shutdown w/ Sanders on him.. Sanders didn't give up more than 120 yards to him
4)I suppose I could double check websites. I'll learn from my mistakes and do that in the future. Since you can't seem to let things go, however, I will bring up some of the things I have seen you say that is blatantly contradictory. a.Buress undoubtebly raped the girl. b.Rice never got even one catch on Sanders!.... Show me the *explative* footage c."Irvin was shutdown in the '94 Championship.. wait He was shutdown w/ Sanders on him.. Sanders didn't give up more than 120 yards to him
Lets take some time to look at the spelling issue which you seem so fascinated over. I.This is a generic attack you use on many people to chat w/. Not more than a year ago on a political site, in which you display so much hate for Texas, you used this same generic attack. The response was simply put "you do the same thing, but I'm not so childish to think it has any impact on our conversation"I will simply agree w/ the aforementioned. Also Einstein had an estimated 160+ IQ and couldn't spell
4) In short you don't spell all that great either bud. At least I have the excuse of no spell check. Not that being able to spell has any relevance in any conversation other than providing a good outlet for a red herring, and some abusive ad hominems. Now.... time fore me to point out some of the things you have said in debates that you never even man up to. a. "I will repeat it, Jerry Rice never not once caught a pass against Primetime, show me the @#%@ footage!"
4) In short you don't spell all that great either bud. At least I have the excuse of no spell check. Not that being able to spell has any relevance in any conversation other than providing a good outlet for a red herring, and some abusive ad hominems. Now.... time fore me to point out some of the things you have said in debates that you never even man up to. a. "I will repeat it, Jerry Rice never not once caught a pass against Primetime, show me the @#%@ footage!"
@drbayoms finally my wife is done uploading w/e thing she did w/ her name and I can switch to my screen name... anyways, if the website I quote is wrong that's on the website. I'm not so serious as some individuals that spend hours planning debates on youtube. I have other things I have to get done, like work when I'm at work/finishing my basement at home/working out/cleaning and so forth. So I won't spend the time to research for an internet debate w/ someone who I don't know.
Seriously though, EVERY debate you have ever been on over the internet, you insult people, belittle people, never make a legitimate point, say things that are obviously wrong w/o citing where you got your info to throw blame where it belongs, never make on connected argument, and when you have your back against the wall you begin to critique spelling of others. I know Deion is your favorite player. He was a great player, however, I am going to have to agree to disagree as to his '94 impact
4.)Now you are blaming the websites for giving you misinformation. Why is it I get my information from several different places, but you some how can’t do the same? You have an excuse for everything. “I can‘t spell correctly because I have a genius IQ“. “ I got the games confused. “The website did not have the Packers beating the 49ers 3 years in a row” (remember that one). “The website has the wrong number of regular season wins”. Full of excuses.
@drbayoms a. cnt'd after the footage of Rice "Well Sanders was a Rookie" "That was only 4 yards... that one was 30 but not a TD!" b. Plexico undeniably raped that woman! (remember that one?) c. "Packers were the main reason the niners didn't win after 1994"..... followed by "Sanders is the main reason the niners didn't win after 1994" d.Darrell Green never played against Randy Moss..... Here's the thing, like I said before I am a trained debater. I always refer to other sites/games themselves
5.)The simple reality here is that you do not know a damn thing about football. That is the issue. What’s the use of a purported 152 IQ if you lack the COMMON SENSE to cross reference information before coming on the internet looking like a buffoon? So the same “Genius Level” intellect, prevents you from spelling correctly and verifying facts? What a waste. The 49ers were 13-3 in 1994, you idiot.
7.)My proof is simple. The 49ers were 16th in Total Defense (which supports my earlier claim of them being “ranked around 15th” ) the year BEFORE Deion got there. Looking at the FACT that the other free agents they signed (Dent, Jackson, Norton, etc) had NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT (backed up by there total production). The ONLY variable LEFT is the 94 Def POY. You do know Deion was the Def POY in 94?
8.)The year Deion (the Def POY, in case you forgot) got there, they shot up to 6th in the league on Defense. Deion had 6 INTs for 303 yards and 3 Tds. That was the 3rd highest in NFL History. Put ALL those free agents stats up against the Def POY, and then tell me who contributed more. Hanks had 7 INTs and NO TOUCHDOWNS. Deion DIRECTLY generated 21 points.
I did watch defense of some other games I remember. Like the 2nd game against the Rams, where the Rams almost came back because Sanders gave up two late TD's to flipper anderson on fly routes. Although he was still fighting a hamstring injury that game.... just like the whole season. I'll send you a link so you can see how Watters helped win the 1994 Championship and Sanders did not.
Sanders also gave up an 11 yard pass to Harper and a 22 to the 3rd WR that actually played most of the game for Harper... Kevin Williams I think his name was. That being said, it is irrelevant how many catches/yards Irvin got as you made the original claim "Irvin was shutdown by Sanders" "to cease or cause to cease operation" is a dictionary definition of shut down. If Irvin has even 1 catch he didn't cease operation and you are wrong. Go ahead now, ad hominem
Just watched the game again, just on Defense. Here's the funny thing. I put the exact yards/quarter/minutes left for each catch Made on Sanders. It is exactly 8 catches for slighly over 120 yards. Mostly outs/hooks and 1 crossing. Sanders also had two pass interference. One was called, one wasn't, but Madden was mad that it wasn't. Davis on the other hand 2 pics, 1 FF and a Def TD
If you don't read anything else, read this. 99 yards rushing is what the 49ers gave up in the NFC Championship. This is the same game they had made it to the two years before and lost. It is reasonable to assume they would make it to this game again in 1994 w/ or w/o sanders. They gave up 352 yards Passing to the 99 yards rushing. Be it Watters or not(I still maintain Watters is the MAIN reason), it still stands to reason that Sanders had little to do w/ the SB win that year.
Watched the game again last night. It was the week eleven game that sanders gave up the big out and up. The NFC championship Irvin ran outs on him all day. End of the game 8 catches for 120 yards to Sanders in a man to man. Had one Short touchdown on an out out of the zone that is not counted on that, where he split Sanders zone and Merton Hanks.
1.)You have an excuse for everything. “I have a 152 IQ but I spell like a damn 5th grader“. “But, it’s ok because a University did a study showing that my genius level intelligence PREVENTS me from accurately spelling simple words correctly“. Yeah, sure. The long TD Irvin caught WAS NOT on Deion. That touchdown was on Eric Davis #25. BOTH of those Irvin’s Touchdowns were NOT on Deion. If you got that wrong, what the hell else did you get wrong? That long TD was on Eric Davis.
@drbayoms De verdad, aprende 2 idiomas mas y veamos como escribes tu gil. Learn two more languages and see how you spell after that. I have many friends whose ability to write language depreciates w/ each learned language. I'm no exception. Don't blame me if you don't understand that. How is it lying, if I'm the one that catches it and says, "you know I remembered that wrong, and got games confused". The second TD was a zone and not counted in the statistics I gave you after.
@drbayoms google 1994 nfl rankings and most of those sites show a 630 points the earthlink one (The first one shows 505 as the points, but also says they were 13-3 not 14-2. This is one of many sites I've found that show the 600 plus points as the niners points on the season. Lets go back to what you said initiallly. "Sanders shut down Irvin and Irvin had no influence in that game." Your moving the goal post way more than I do.
@drbayoms google 1994 nfl rankings and most of those sites show a 630 points the earthlink one (The first one shows 505 as the points, but also says they were 13-3 not 14-2. This is one of many sites I've found that show the 600 plus points as the niners points on the season. Lets go back to what you said initiallly. "Sanders shut down Irvin and Irvin had no influence in that game." Your moving the goal post way more than I do.
2.)So this means that your ENTIRE argument is based on a lie. Eric Davis is the one who stripped Irvin in the first quarter. Davis is the one who picked off Aikman. However, Davis is also the same guy covering Irvin on that long touchdown. The 2nd Touchdown by Irvin came in the 4th Quarter. Do you really think I would let you get away with that one? I call BS.
3.)And your stats for points scored is BS. You must be including the playoffs? The 1994’ 49ers scored 505 points, with 31.6 ppg. The 1995’ 49ers scored 457 points, with 28.6 ppg. That includes the games Young MISSED that year. Young missed more games in 1995, than he did in 1994. So where in the world did you get this idea that Watters leaving, adversely affected that offense?
4.)I told you before I don’t need to use a “straw man” with you. Because of how dishonest you are. I can just use your own lies. How is it Ricky is the reason that team did not win in 95 when the 49ers in the regular season scored ONLY 48 FEWER points without him? This is with Young MISSING 5 games. 5 Games missed, and ONLY 2 fewer wins and ONLY 48 fewer points.
5.)They went up against a buzz saw of an Offense led by Favre (vomit in my mouth). I think Favre is a jerk. But during a 5 year stretch in the 90s, he was one of the best. And if you are a 49ers fan, you know quite well how good that Packer offense was. 21-28 75% comp, 299 yds 2tds, 0 ints. The next week against Dallas (and Deion) 21-39 54% comp, 307 yds, 3tds, 2 ints for Favre.
6.)You had Watters, in 92 when he had 1,418 total yds and 11 tds, but you did not win. You had Watters in 93 when he had 1,276 total yards and 11 tds, but you did not win. In 94, the difference in Ricky Watters overall production from 92 (his best year) is……..178 YARDS. 178 Yards was the difference for the 49ers that year? No, that defense led by Deion Sanders was the difference.
7.)Myth: the other guys on Defense were Pro Bowlers at one point in their careers & that MUST have helped the overall Defense. 3 of those Starters in the Super Bowl (not named Deion) had previous Pro Bowl appearances. But let’s dig deeper. Ricky Jackson who had the most Pro Bowls of that group in question, had 3.5 sacks that year. McDonald had 4 & Norton had 1.
8.)And in that group the only one to make the Pro Bowl that particular year was McDonald. Ken Norton had less than half the tackles he did the previous year. And like I stated before Rickey Jackson had 3.5 sacks. How did there performance that year influence anything? McDonald, yes. But a MLB & a DE with 112 tackles, and 3.5 sacks COMBINED. I am not buying that.
@drbayoms I never said those players all made the pro bowl that year. I simply said at one point or another in their career they played in a pro bowl. Eric Davis played in 2, Richard Dent in 4, Bryant young 4, Dana Stubblefield went that year, You already Mentioned Ricky Jackson and Tim McDonald, Ken Norton Jr. 3, Merton Hanks 4, and Gary Plummer (never actually made a pro bowl, but had 100 tackles each of his first 10 years in the league). W/ Sanders is 9 Pro Bowlers and a consistant solid LB
@drbayoms Yards not going to drop again on the Irvin stats. I watched both cowboys games back to back. It is easy to confuse games when you watch'm back to back. I corrected that error myself to NOT be dishonest. The reason stats drop for players on a team is the same reason Patrick Willis has less tackles w/ Abrayo Franklin, because Abrayo Franklin gets them. People compete for Tackles when everyone is a star on the team.
Now let me go back to say it again.IMO Ricky Watters was the MAIN reason the niners never were serious contenders again.Sure the defense lost players (not just Sanders, but Davis the next year, Ricky Jackson who pressured qbs even when he didn't sack, and Stubblefield in the middle at DT. They lost coaches. They were plagued by injuries. W/ all the variables, you are left w/ the burden of disproving them all, as you are the one that made the claim for Sanders being the SOLE reason for SB win
Jump back to the websites now that have the 49ers listed at 13-3. Those are the only site that have 505 points listed. If they can't get the score right, then its hard to trust 'm. The ONLY one that has them listed w/ the right regular season record of 14-2 has the 600 plus points listed. Ad hominems w/ the sp bud. Ad hominem all you want. The only reason I pointed out IQ and debate experience was to let you know I'm not going to let someone that is disrespectful effect points made.
@drbayoms We did have Watters in previous years but we did not win, as he did not have 9 pro bowlers on defense. '94 was the Only year we had a complete team w/ a solid defense, running game and passing game. Montana had many years w/ a solid run game, and defense to compliment his passing game. Again to many variables w/ coaches, teammates, and opposition to simply say Montana won more super bowls w/ Rice so Rice's best years are w/ Montana. Its slippery slope logic
How about you try to prove some of what you said now. "Sanders is the Sole reason the 49ers won the SB is my favorite" I'm saying prove your statement that he "Shut down Irvin" and "Shut down every WR he faced". Sanders influenced 1 potential outcome of the whole season. That was the first game against the Saints. Niners won the conference by more than one game that year, so the playoff picture would have been the same. Sanders shut down no one in the playoffs/had no important ints
9.)You rants are so incomprehensible that you can’t sustain your lies. One of your diatribes has Irvin gashing Deion for 8 catches for 160 yds. Because like you said “I just watched the game”. Your last posting suggested that it was 8 catches for 120 yds. I’ll wait a few more days. At this rate those yards are going to drop again and again in 20 yard increments of course. Leave debate class for those ‘less intellectually gifted folks“, who can actually spell. Try the glee club.
Anyways, I doubt people want to see us go back and forth here in the messages, hit me up w/ a personal message if you want to continue this. Really no need to force anyone to listen to us go back and forth. Also, if you want to keep on going, support what you say and pick a position. Also, man up when you are proven wrong, I did w/ the packers thing and explained why I thought what I did. You could do the same w/ the Sanders. He had some good plays on the '94 Niners, but gave up big plays 2
It is nothing against Sanders. It just doesn't make sense to say one injured CB that played in 12 regular season games while injured for most of them had more influence than the THEN highest scoring offense of all time, and the whole rest of the defense of 8 pro bowl caliber players. Especially when you consider the CB's injuries led to giving up a big TD and over 100 yards to a WR that the aforementioned corner was supposed to lock down in the Championship.
cum hoc ergo propter hoc:Fallacy of composition:Fallacy of Many questions:Kettle Logic:Post hoc ergo propter hoc:accidental Logical:Argumentum ad populum:and the afformentioned Appeal to emotion:Appeal to fear fallacies.That's not to mention your constant slippery slope, occasional strawmen, and Moving the goal post arguements based on beating the bush support evidence.Try to Appeal to my fear all you want bud, I have a 152 IQ and was nationally ranked in debate in HS, you won't intimidate me.
1.)You are telling me the year Deion came to the 49ers, Hanks has a break out year? That must be a coincidence, right? How is it Hanks’ best year came when Deion was teamed with him. How is that possible? Hanks’best year (by any measure) came with Deion.
1.)You are telling me the year Deion came to the 49ers, Hanks has a break out year? That must be a coincidence, right? How is it Hanks’ best year came when Deion was teamed with him. How is that possible? Hanks’best year (by any measure) came with Deion.
2.)Ricky did not even rush for a thousand yards that year. So Ricky was a game changer? But his best stats came after he left the 49ers. That style of play is a trademark for the 49ers. Take a look at Roger Craig. Ricky’s 877 yards rushing and 3.7 yards a carry is not nearly as significant as having Deion Sanders play man coverage (when necessary) on the opponents best WR.
@drbayoms Rickey averaged high rush yards that year bud and being able to catch the ball short out of the backfield and run for 1500 yfs is huge, but sure take a look at Craig who was probably a better HB than Watters. Craig is another variable that favors Montana as to reasons why Montana won more SB than Young was able to. Again, I have the games all on dvd of the '94 season. I don't buy your bs about sanders not playing Man on Irvin, I just watched the game again today.
3.)Ricky’s rushing yards went down each year as a 49er after1992. Why is it the 49ers won the Super Bowl the year when his rushing yards was the lowest as a 49er? When his yards were the lowest the team won MORE games and a Super Bowl. That makes no sense. Actually it does, because Ricky was not the reason they won. Deion was the reason they won.
@drbayoms Irvin gets 8 of his catches w/ Sanders man to man for about 160 of his yards, I just watched the game. Sanders also gives up some big receptions to Harper that game. His pic... it was on a Hail Mary before half time and was nowhere near catchable for any offensive players. Yards from scrimmage is what you are neglecting w/ Watters. Not wasting more time on a strawman. I never said he had more rushing yards, simply that he had high yards per rush and high yards from scrimmage.
4.)Even with Watters and that high powered offense, that group did not win anything. 1994 NFC Championship game Ricky had 33 yards rushing, Rice and Taylor had no Tds. That Defense the year BEFORE Deion got there was ranked 18th in the league. With Deion they were ranked in the Top 10. A Defense that was ranked around 15th in the league against the run moved up to Number 2 against the run. More men in the box. Deion as the shutdown.
5.)In the 1994 game (which you claim to have) tell me how many of the 12 catches for 190+yards Irvin had while being covered by Deion, 2, 3, how many? His touchdowns and big catches came cutting across the zone. Once the 49ers got up 21-0. Deion did not leave his designated side of the field. He simply handed off the receiver to the next man (zone). Deion DID NOT tail Irvin all over the field. What are you talking about?
@drbayoms Sanders never left his designated side of the field the whole game bud. He was man to man on his side the whole game. They never relaxed on the cowboys, and never went into a prevent, not even on the last drive. I own the game dude, I spent 90$ on the whole season off of the ioffer site. I've watched it atleast 3 times since last years football season ended. I never said Deion followed Sanders all over the field <-strawman, you asked for Irvin's stats, I gave them to you.
6.)Once Irvin left his area of responsibility, he had zero to do with Irvin. What was his longest play from scrimmage while being covered by Sanders? They had the lead they knew they were going to throw and they sat back in zone, simple. Rickey average 58 yards rushing in the playoffs that year.
@drbayoms BS that they were in a zone. Watters had 58 rush yards per game, but what are his yards per scrimmage? Also, you neglect the other back, Floyd, who was injured the next year. Floyd played a huge part in the run game (3 td's in the bears game for example). You really feel that I team gaining .8 yards less per run and an offense having 2000 less yards from scrimmage from backs is not a stat supporting that the niners offense suffered w/o Watters.
@drbayoms Also, you feel that the offense going from 630+ points scored in '94 to 474 in '95 (160 points less scored) is a stat that doesn't support the loss of Watters had a huge impact on the niners? The only other players on that offense that weren't the same were 1 OL, and 1 HB. 160 point difference w/ a better OL and a new HB. Seriously, you are going to argue that stat does nothing to support that Watters was the reason the niners succeeded in '94. 2,000 yards and 160 points matter.
7.)The idea that Ricky’s impact on the 49ers was greater than Deion’s is NOT supported by any of the ACTUAL stats. I brought up Ricky’s comment and his perceived (by the media) work ethic to illustrate the misnomer thrown out there by idiots criticizing Moss. To show that there is no way Ricky or someone like Moss could achieve all that they did, being lazy. Or not giving 100%. It is not possible.
@drbayoms Irvin's longest play on Sanders btw was his TD a 44 yard reception, w/ Sanders in man. Sanders bit on an out and up pump fake, and like I said was injured and couldn't get his speed back up to catch Irvin. Being lazy and not giving 100% are two different things as far as Watters and Moss go. Neither was lazy. However, Watters alligator armed one pass.... one pass because he was afraid of a linebacker. Did he give 100%? No.. he could have stretched and taken the hit.
@drbayoms As far as Moss goes, did he rest on plays not coming his direction? Absolutely, he did. If he rests one play, no matter the reason, he did not give 100%. Does this mean either Moss, or Watters are lazy. It does not. It just means they didn't meet their full potential. I never said I showed this to friends in debate class btw.... I haven't been in high school for some time now. I do give debates regularly to the coach so that he can use them as teaching tools.
8.)Also it looks bad when you say “I am on the debate team”. You might as well say “I masturbate to Maxim“. You took this so seriously that you showed your friends in debate class this argument, really? Lastly, you have a purported 152 IQ, BUT YOU CAN’T SPELL argument, erroneous, disregards, Socrates, immediately, etc? Work on the little things first. Don‘t quote Latin, if you have not mastered English. Lay off the Adderall. Sorry (fallacy).
@drbayoms As far as spelling goes, Harvard among others have proven spelling has very little importance so long as the word is understood. That being said, I don't have fancy spell check, as I don't have that plugin installed on the linux os I run. Also, after learning 2 other languages (3 if you count ASL) my spelling in English has depreciated greatly. I don't even speak English in my work, nor in my home anymore, even though it is my native language. Either way bringing sp into this is...
@drbayoms a red herring. As far as latin goes.... that's also the English words for those terms.... They don't have another simpler way to say them in English. Enough b.s.'n dude. Moving the goal post fallacy means you change your position on a point to make it harder to prove. First you say Sanders shut down Irvin. Next you say he shut down Irvin, but only when he was on Irvin. Sanders gets burned by Irvin for 44 yards, period.
@ElSharkwalker The 8 others being in pro bowls at one point in their careers, and 6 of the 8 being new in '94, and 1 in '93 is more evidence that a better DEFENSE AS A WHOLE is what helped them overcome the cowboys. Just look at the first turnovers in the game. NONE were Sanders. Now tell me, what is your base position, so that you cannot move your goalposts anymore. I'm assuming it is Moss is better than Rice? I really don't know though as you have not said.
Back to the spelling thing. Harvard University, La Universidad Austral de Chile, and Oxford worked on Monte Verde together (along with a few other notable universities). At that time, they decided to study if spelling was important in todays society w/ computers and spell check. They learned that the majority of people that have over 142 IQ's that are under 30 cannot spell simple words. The reason the "genius" level individuals gave "it wasn't important" even Einstein didn't spell well.
highlight of his career, mooning the packers.
MunchthatCrunch 1 week ago
Randy Moss is the best receiver without a Montana to throw him the ball in the history of football.
menelith1 1 week ago
I am from West Virginia and I saw Moss on the late night local news in about a 5 second clip showing him catch a touchdown pass in high school as a Junior. I said , at the time, that he was the greatest football player I had ever seen. I was born in 1951. Nothing that has happened since has ever changed my mind. My only regret is that no football coach ever really knew how to make full use of him in the game of football.
gandolph7poet 3 weeks ago
Moss is too sick, best ever
jplongenecker 3 weeks ago
in my opinion randy moss was the best WR to ever play. he made sorry QBs look great (dante Cullpeper and aaron brooks)... Jerry rice had montana and young
LebronTraveled24 1 month ago
I think his career would have been better if it wasn't for the moon... He should've stayed on the Vikings.
Jaccobtw 1 month ago
isnt this copyrighted from nfl network
megaohiostate 1 month ago
Greatest Moss moment ever? Moon over Green Bay!
TRK288 1 month ago
All of you are queers.
melvinsantosownsyou 1 month ago
Why the fuck would you film something that was filmed?
armandoboss91 2 months ago 4
@armandoboss91 I was thinking the same thing!
10litehouse 2 months ago
@armandoboss91 Filmception?
Dashapell 1 month ago
Unbelieveable combo......Calvin Johnson and Randy Moss o.O
Jimmythebarbarian 3 months ago
Best wide reciever in NFL history.
MitchMan136 3 months ago 3
that's why we got rid of childress.
413crossram 3 months ago
WTF no. 1 should have been when he set the NFL record for most td catches in a season
SebastianJsasman 3 months ago
Damn
cheesehead230 4 months ago
the cowboys def shouldnt have ignored him in the 98 draft otherwise what happened at number 1 would not have happened
vadimzdonutube 4 months ago
thats funny theres no raider plays.
mjqsmith2000 4 months ago
fuck
ericrmz3 4 months ago
I'm a vikings fan. Brad Childress runied my dream season of seeing Randy, Moss, Sidney Rice, Percy Harvin, and Adrian Peterson on the same team! That moron only needed to wait for Sidney rice to get healthy and they still would've had a chance to make the playoffs. Even Travaris Jackson and Joe Webb could've had a good year with that line up! Instead he allowed Brett Farve, as great as he was, play the season with a fractured ankle! What coach does that? Brad Childress! I'm glad that he's gone!
poeticjigga 5 months ago
these are top 10 games not moments. fuck all of you also
Somuchbetter123 5 months ago 27
randy moss was awsome wide reciver i will miss watching him play. barry sanders too.
uncelmonkey 5 months ago
i remember when youtube comments were comments....now there paragraphs.
ThAtB0yFaEfiNtRY 5 months ago 45
@ThAtB0yFaEfiNtRY you r right bud I appologize. Its childish to debate online and I'm done here now.
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
@ThAtB0yFaEfiNtRY no now they are full of really bad nuck chorris masterbaiting and piss jokes
MrDwtime70 5 months ago
@ThAtB0yFaEfiNtRY
*they're
trojan16 4 months ago
@trojan16 haha sad but true
ThAtB0yFaEfiNtRY 4 months ago
@trojan16 whoooo whoooo whoooo whoooo ..you hear that? thats the sound of the youtube spelling and grammar police...get a life you fucking queer!
ThAtB0yFaEfiNtRY 2 months ago
@ThAtB0yFaEfiNtRY They're
Slambertmilam11 2 months ago
@ThAtB0yFaEfiNtRY "they're"
jaizasnuka 3 weeks ago
@jaizasnuka ,,, whoooo whoooooo whooooooo whoooooo ,, you hear that, thats the sound of the youtube comment page grammar police,,,, a seriously sad type of human.
ThAtB0yFaEfiNtRY 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
Comment removed
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
Comment removed
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
Comment removed
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
@drbayoms if anything the fact that the Defenses tended to allow the same or less points w/o Sanders is completely circumstantial and could stem from other reasons. I want you to realize that it is this kind of logic that you have been using the whole time.... circumstantial, slippery slope logic. There is no way to prove the connection either way because there are simply too many variables. So lets agree to disagree and you can continue to maintain your defense mechanism known as denial
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
Comment removed
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
Comment removed
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
Comment removed
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
Comment removed
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
@drbayoms I will man up and admit my sources were wrong on some occasions. I just don't give this the importance that you seem to think it has, however, I did take the time to review the facts about Sanders on the niners being part of their most points allowed by a defense in 6 years, and all the afformentioned in this, the most recent sequence of postings. You really are so dilusional that I suppose you will ignore these, or simply explain them away as unimportant.
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
@drbayoms you say "don't bite off more than you can chew", sound advice my friend. The saddest part is that you don't possess the cognitive awareness nor scholorly experience to recognize how much more the dicho applies to you more than me. Communication is the means whereby the gears of society mesh and turn. Your gears notches don't seem to line up w/ anyone who has an IQ a shade above that of a houseplant (look at the comments others have left you in reference about your dilussions).
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
@drbayoms I think maybe you should take a few logic classes at your local community college and then come back and try again to prove, through logic not circumstance, that Sanders is the SOLE reason the 49ers won. Disprove that the offense was not worse w/o Watters (the only difference in the starters offense the next year when they scored less points was Watters...) "You can't argue w/ facts"<--your words. Although, you sure seem to like to try by playing down their importance or ignoring them
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
@drbayoms 17) you have not made one arguement other than slippery slope, and beating the bush arguements. I do appreciate that you have laid off the Ad Hominems, however, you still have yet to make one logical point. You poor individual. You really are so narcassistic that you believe you have proved something?
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
@drbayoms I am even more sympathetic towards you as you do not connect the evidence together in any logical order. You simply slippery slope it and pretend there is a connection, then ignore that Sanders had a bad game in '94 against the cowboys in the championship, whereas Watters scored a TD. 15) What is more sad is you think technicalities disprove points. Such as "it is only a 50 point difference in offense". 16)Calling stars Icecream enough doesn't turn them into ice cream.
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
@drbayoms 14) I really do feel bad for you. Not just for our debate, but also for the others I've seen online. You never seem to realize how grossly dilisional you seem to every person that you are debating w/. I would love to discuss things w/ you face to face when I'm not between appointments, nor holding my 3 month old and attempting to keep her happy as I type. I am sincerely sorry that you have so much time to waste looking up random statistics.
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
@drbayomss 13) Honestly I get so distracted talking to you, because you make no logical connections and it is difficult me to understand how your brain even functions. Simply saying "Sanders was on the 49ers and they won the super bowl that year, so Sanders was responsible" is so rediculously illogical that I don't even know how to begin to attack it. It's like me saying "stars are made of ice cream". There is simply so much wrong w/ it and it neglects/ignores all evidence to the contrary.
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
@drrrrbayomsss 11) Again, going back to the NFC championship. Sanders underperformed. Giving up over 120 yards to one player, and another 11 to Harper and another 20+ to the third WR, plus the interference not called (oh and one that was to give a 1st down) 12)If you want to dwell on websites I quote having bad information, then also discuss your saying "darrell green never covered Moss" and "Rice never once caught a pass against Sanders". Otherwise quit being hypocritical and lets move on.
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
@drbayomsss <---notice I'm mispelling your name now. You still know its you though :D. Maybe I should just assume you know more than Einstein, and that spelling is important? anyways, 10)Falcons had one of the Worst pass defenses in the league from '89 to '93 w/ Sanders. So for Sanders first 4 years in the league he is on one of the worst pass defenses, in '94 his team allows more points than any season in the past 6 years, Then in '95 most points given up by that team in 4 seasons.
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
@drybayoms 6)49ers offense scored less points after Watters left, although the defense allowed less. 7)Loville, Kirby, Phillips, Garner, and Hearst (RB in the niners during the years that followed Watters leaving) did not make the pro bowl 5 times when you add all their pro bowls as did Watters in 10 years. 8)in '95 Loville did not make the pro bowl, as Watters did the year prior. 9)break it down simplistically to points for vs points against and you see offense was the issue after '94
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
@drbayoms 1) from '89-'95 the 49ers WORST defensive points given up was the year they had Sanders. 2)Falcons Defense the year before Sanders and the year after points given up are the same. 3)Cowboys worst year from '92-95 in terms of points given up was their year w/ Sanders. 4)Watters made pro bowl in '94, had 3 super bowl TDs and TD vs Cowboys in the championship. 5)Sanders performance in the NFC Championship was lackluster, and he got away w/ an interference.
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
The same Primetime Rice has caught TD over btw ;) <---red herring... ik, I think your maturity in arguing pure fallacy w/o merits is starting to rub off on me....Primetime had a name that got him poy. Statistically on the falcons the years prior, look at what their pass defense was ranked w/ Sanders, compared to the 49ers D. Another variable than Sanders must thereby be present. Prove he was the ONLY reason they got to the NFC championship, then that he was the reason they won it. Go ahead.
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
@ElSharkwalker
I here Merry Go Round music in the background whenever I read your postings. I have already made quite clear why Deion was the ONLY reason Rice got that 3rd Ring. In the future, do not bite off more than you can chew. For all of your supposed accomplishments. None of them helped you in this "debate".
drbayoms 5 months ago
@ElSharkwalker
I also noticed you did not give the name of that video where I supposedly accused Plaxico of raping a woman. Obviously you went back, read it and realized that in fact you ALSO (like so many things) got that wrong too. No need to apologize. Failing to post the name of the video and then going on some long rant (again) was enough for me. I enjoyed our time together. Get back to debate class, you need it. Goodbye.
drbayoms 5 months ago
@drbayoms Whenever I read your debates I wonder if you are really so diliusional that you believe what you say. I sincerley hope, for your sake, that you are not. Like I said if you are going to deny something that happened 1 week ago then there's no point in bringing it up. Lets analyze some real facts in their simplist forms. Although I'm sure you'll have some excuse as to why this happened, or you will simply ignore them and pretend it didn't happen.
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@drbayoms Whenever I read your debates I wonder if you are really so diliusional that you believe what you say. I sincerley hope, for your sake, that you are not. Like I said if you are going to deny something that happened 1 week ago then there's no point in bringing it up. Lets analyze some real facts in their simplist forms. Although I'm sure you'll have some excuse as to why this happened, or you will simply ignore them and pretend it didn't happen.
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ElSharkwalker
I also noticed you did not give the name of that video where I supposedly accused Plaxico of raping a woman. Obviously you went back, read it and realized that in fact you ALSO (like so many things) got that wrong too. No need to apologize. Failing to post the name of the video and then going on some long rant (again) was enough for me. I enjoyed our time together. Get back to debate class, you need it. Goodbye.
drbayoms 5 months ago
As far as what variables are that keep teams from winning or losing championships, I don't care about what they are, nor will I feign being able to understand, identify and debate all the variables. The reality is they don't matter all that much. A 5mph wind can be the difference between winning and losing a game, or a wet field, or a bad call. Since there are soooo many, instead of debating every one of them, how about you prove your statement "Primetime" got Rice the ring.
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
That being said, lets jump back to the actual debate things you have ignored
1)Sanders lackluster playoff performance.
2)Original topic of the debate (my position was variables kept Young from winning championships. You then said NO! Then have gone on for days to debate variables that allowed/disallowed Young to win championships, talk about a contradiction)
3) number 2 was the only original point I was trying to make, as you generalized a silly slippery slope Montana quote. Point 2 was proven
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
I feel pity for you if you feel you need to spend time reviewing various sites before commenting on a youtube video. I also question your ability to write considering your inability to demonstrate, thus far, an emotional maturity above that of the common 5 year old. Seriously, you may as well be saying "I win, because I do, you aren't good at this because I said so, so you are losing and I win!" Simply, childish bud I feel sorry for you
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
I simply am not going to waste more time trying to prove a point to someone who seems like a hypocritical narcissist who constantly claims I need Maxim to get off.... your the one w/ the bikini girl on your page man, not me. I'm happily married and don't need to pollute my mind w/ such nonsense. With that I bid you farewell
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
@ElSharkwalker
1.)So instead of researching FACTS before debating an issue. You feel it is best to post a bunch of BS that exposes you as an uneducated idiot. No, what I think happened is that you simply are not bright enough to take facts, look at them and make sound opinions based on that information. You were burned and now you are simply backpedaling (not as well as Deion, though) trying to cover your ass.
drbayoms 5 months ago
@drbayoms More beating the bush "sp is important because I said so, I don't care if Einstein didn't spell and I'm ignoring that." When I wrote my paper for Atlantic Magazine on Monte Verde, Kennewick Man, the Spirit cave mummy, and haplogroup x linking many native tribes to Eastern Europeans, and not Asians, then I took the time to make sure stuff was spelled write. Playing mmos and on youtube.com chat videos I'm not wasting the time to do so.
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
@ElSharkwalker
2.)Also, we communicate with words. We are not sitting in front of each other. That means that the words we use MUST be spelled correctly. How in the hell can you communicate effectively if you can’t spell? How can you communicate properly if you have a problem with syntax? WORDS are important. For someone boasting about debate skills, you should know that.
drbayoms 5 months ago
@drbayoms Words are important so far as they can be understood. When is the last time you saw a cx debater even debate? They don't get up to make sure they pronounce everything well, nor is spelling involved in any way shape or form. Again, beat the bush all you want saying spelling is the be all end all, by doing so you claim to be smarter than Einstein. Notice how you ignored the part where I pointed out you spelled things wrong as well.... of course you did
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
@ElSharkwalker
3.)To a larger issue. Where in the hell did you see ANY quote BY ME suggesting that Plaxico Burress (notice my correct spelling of his name) raped some woman? Give me the exact video. This better not be one of your infamous errors. This better not be “oh well I thought you said”. This better not be “the sun was in my eye and I could not read it properly”. Give me the video name. And if I meant that Plaxico raped a woman, I will end this “debate”.
drbayoms 5 months ago
@drbayoms It was only a week ago when you finished commenting on the Burress vid, it shouldn't be that difficult for you to find it. If you are going to deny having commented on that video not more than a week ago then you would be willing to deny anything. Like I said you don't man up when you make mistakes. You simply pretend they don't exist; like sanders still giving up 8 catches for a little over 120 yards to Irvin in the NFC Championship then interferring w/ him and getting away w/ it.
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
@ElSharkwalker
4.)I want the video name. Again, since you are not very skilled in deciphering words typed. Send me the name of the video where I stated that Plaxico undeniably raped a woman. You are reaching. You are reaching because you are getting your ass kicked in this inconsequential Youtube debate. Your hubris has forced you over the desk, time and time again.
drbayoms 5 months ago
@drbayoms Reaching would be going into something other than what pops up on google when I type in your name. I just used the first few sites to see how EVERY video you declare things to the effect of "you are wrong", "you can't spell", and mock the intelligence of others. Understanding words is all that is important, not necessarily that they are spellt 100% correct, at least on an internet debate. I can understand if I made all my arguments in a language you didn't speak, how that wouldn't
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
be fair, however, every educated individual I worked w/ (Including when I was at Monte Verde) knew that communication was more understanding based. When one of the individual speaks w/ an accent for example, that doesn't make them less intelligent, we worked to understand them rather than criticize how they spoke. What version of reality do you live in where you feel someone w/o spell check should take extra time to research various sites, and look up every word they type in the dictionary?
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
Comment removed
drbayoms 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ElSharkwalker
5.)I think from the actual FACTS I have posted proved my point. Deion was the difference. Not 178 yds MORE from Watters. Not 5.5 sacks from Dent, Norton and Jackson combined. Not Hanks who had no Pro Bowls before Deion got there. Just so you know. Your constant use of the phrase “slippery slope” seems to pop up EVERY TIME you encounter FACTS you can’t refute. SEND ME THE NAME OF THAT VIDEO. If I said it (which you & I know never happened) I will capitulate.
drbayoms 5 months ago
lets leave it at that. You have been hypocritical in accusing me of presenting false evidence/not spelling correctly when you have done each of the same in the past(darrell green would get destroyed by Moss, but never played him for example).
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
Please, attempt to prove that I'm wrong and that you do understand how to use logical debate. If you don't I will assume you, yourself, realize w/e position you have is too weak to defend on merits of honesty, and I will consider you culpable of being trolling w/o intent, at very least. Do you really honestly believe that Sanders was the only reason they won in '94 still? Do you believe his leaving was the ONLY reason they lost after? If so prove it... burden is on you
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ElSharkwalker
5.)The simple reality here is that you do not know a damn thing about football. That is the issue. What’s the use of a purported 152 IQ if you lack the COMMON SENSE to cross reference information before coming on the internet looking like a buffoon? So the same “Genius Level” intellect, prevents you from spelling correctly and verifying facts? What a waste. The 49ers were 13-3 in 1994, you idiot.
drbayoms 5 months ago
@ElSharkwalker
6.)You missed the easily verifiable fact that the Packers won 3 straight over the 49ers. You missed the easily verifiable fact that the 49ers were 13-3 in the regular season. You missed the easily verifiable fact that the 49ers scored 505 points in the regular season. And the whole time you blamed the internet, in a typical impulsive teen fashion. Tell me again HOW MANY REGULAR SEASON GAMES THE 49ers WON IN 94?
drbayoms 5 months ago
@ElSharkwalker
7.)My proof is simple. The 49ers were 16th in Total Defense (which supports my earlier claim of them being “ranked around 15th” ) the year BEFORE Deion got there. Looking at the FACT that the other free agents they signed (Dent, Jackson, Norton, etc) had NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT (backed up by there total production). The ONLY variable LEFT is the 94 Def POY. You do know Deion was the Def POY in 94?
drbayoms 5 months ago
@ElSharkwalker
9.)8 catches for 160 yards. No, wait it was really 8 catches for 120 yards. Wait, wait I promise to get it right this time. It was really 8 catches for slighty over 120 yards. I gave you all the proof that anyone (even someone with a “Genius Level” IQ could verify. Deion IS THE REASON RICE HAS THAT 3rd Ring. Not Watters, Jackson, Dent, Norton, the Milkman, the Mailman, etc. Stick to Maxim Magazine, and debates on whether or not Lady Gaga was born a man.
drbayoms 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ElSharkwalker
9.)8 catches for 160 yards. No, wait it was really 8 catches for 120 yards. Wait, wait I promise to get it right this time. It was really 8 catches for slighty over 120 yards. I gave you all the proof that anyone (even someone with a “Genius Level” IQ could verify. Deion IS THE REASON RICE HAS THAT 3rd Ring. Not Watters, Jackson, Dent, Norton, the Milkman, the Mailman, etc. Stick to Maxim Magazine, and debates on whether or not Lady Gaga was born a man.
drbayoms 5 months ago
@ElSharkwalker
10.)Lastly, I personally would rather speak one language correctly, than to speak more than one language poorly.
drbayoms 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I honestly believe you would be unable to prove a point by not using a fallacy. Get over the hypocrisy of pointing out others mistakes which they admit/explain/correct, when you have obvious mistakes "Irvin was Shut down by sanders in the nfc championship" for one. You have had other blatant contradictions to what you have said. I don't point them out because it doesn't progress the conversation. I honestly believe you would be incapable of proving w/e point your trying to prove w/o fallacies
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
I honestly believe you would be unable to prove a point by not using a fallacy. Get over the hypocrisy of pointing out others mistakes which they admit/explain/correct, when you have obvious mistakes "Irvin was Shut down by sanders in the nfc championship" for one. You have had other blatant contradictions to what you have said. I don't point them out because it doesn't progress the conversation. I honestly believe you would be incapable of proving w/e point your trying to prove w/o fallacies
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
so some class please* I have been respectful to you, but you continue to try to insult and intimidate and belittle, which I have seen you do to EVERY other person who has had a different opinion than you. Again this doesn't make you right, it simply makes you someone who never learned manners/respect/class and my favorite logic. Showing logical intellectual conversation demonstrates greater wisdom(the application of knowledge) than random 3rd grade level insults.
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
Now something I say not related to this debate entirely. Ad Hominem is the classic attack used by 3 year olds and IS NEVER a valid arguement. Appeal to Fear fallacy IS NEVER VALID. Slippery slopes CAN BE VALID WHEN CONNECTED LINKS ARE MADE. Everything you have said has been one of these fallacies. Slippery slopes w/o proof to support position/insults are not just illogical they are tacky, so some class
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
@ElSharkwalker Ad Hominem is never a valid argument when used as you have used it. (classified as an Abusive Ad Hominem). Other form's of Ad hominem are on very rare occasions valid. I just wanted to clarify that the way you have used it IS NEVER VALID.
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
@ElSharkwalker
1.)Davis, Young, Stubblefield DID NOT HAVE 1 SINGLE PRO BOWL prior to that season, you dullard. You implied that the 49ers were stocked with Pro Bowlers. Richard Dent was Super Bowl MVP………IN 1985. Dent was not even a starter in SanFran. He had 2.0 sacks that year. Hanks came into the league in 91. His 1st Pro Bowl was the year Deion got there. Coincidence?
drbayoms 5 months ago
@drbayoms 1) I never said they had pro bowls prior, strawman fallacy. Dent was a starter, just hurt most of the season. Hanks made it to the pro bowl after Sanders left the 49ers. This indicates more of a common trend for young secondary known as maturity. You can live in your fantasy world and pretend it was all Sanders though. However, if you want me to drink the koolaid you are, then you need to prove it was Sanders, and not simple maturation, or the position change from CB to FS.
m4kita 5 months ago
1) continued in other words..... this is a text book example of slippery slope. "Sanders went to San Fransisco in '94. Merton Hanks made the Pro Bowl in '94." Where is the connection again? Hanks was originally drafted as a FS, so of course after having 2 years to adjust to NFL speed and being back in his natural position he will play better..... Or maybe Sanders waved his magic wand and Hanks magically became better? I get it, like the direct tv commercials Sanders must be magic.....
m4kita 5 months ago
@ElSharkwalker
2.)I am the one who told you that Jackson, McDonald & Norton had previous Pro Bowls. I am also the one who told you that of those 3 players, only 1 (McDonald) made the Pro Bowl that year. I also told you that Rickey Jackson & Norton combining for just over 100 tackes and 3.5 sacks WAS INSIGNIFICANT.
drbayoms 5 months ago
@drbayoms 2) Rickey Jackson had one purpose when he came to San Fransisco, pressure the qb. Watch that '94 NFC championship and tell me Jackson didn't do just that. Jackson was stale in a lot of the blow out games the niners had. In big games though he showed up (he's responsible for 2 of Sanders' picks that year as well). Norton was a run stopper. If he gets 2 tackles for a loss in a row on the RB to lead to a three and out (which he did in the NFC championship then......
m4kita 5 months ago
@drbayoms 2) Then he gets a potential 2 total tackles that drive as his job was to shadow Half Backs. (not getting tackles on most passes). Obviously every drive isn't a 3 in out, but w/ as many quality defenders as they had there were many short drives. Short drives means less opportunities to get tackles, then you have to divide tackles between players. Of course in these situations tackles between players will be less. As I explained it less defensive playes=less tackles.
m4kita 5 months ago
@drbayoms 2)Say it is insignificant all you want, it doesn't make it so. I can hit the bush (beat the bush) in my back yard w/ a bat and tell it, that it is an apple tree all day.... reality is, that doesn't make it an apple tree. So keep saying Norton's and Jackson's play is insignificant, however, until you prove it by accounting for less defensive plays/qb hurries/knockdowns/forced picks and everything else you are still just beating a bush.
m4kita 5 months ago
@ElSharkwalker
3.)If I COMBINED the stats of Dent, Jackson & Norton THAT YEAR it totals: 119 Tackles & 5.5 sacks. Really? This is the contribution you are bragging about? Do you really think you are fooling someone? Norton, Jackson NOR Dent had a significant impact on that team. And Merton Hanks & Eric Davis never sniffed a Pro Bowl before Deion got there. You are way out of your league.
drbayoms 5 months ago
@drbayoms 3)Slippery slope saying Deion has any connection to Davis and Hanks again. Prove it? Oh wait... I forgot he used his magic fairy wand... lol. Again, looking at just sacks and tackles...... You neglect how Norton limited HB on other teams, most notably Emmitt Smith and Barry Sanders. You neglect pics that were made as a result of Jacksons pressure. You neglect how doubling Jackson opened it up for Bryant Young. Again too many variables to consider. You also ignore Dana/Bryant combo
m4kita 5 months ago
@drbayoms 3)Slippery slope saying Deion has any connection to Davis and Hanks again. Prove it? Oh wait... I forgot he used his magic fairy wand... lol. Again, looking at just sacks and tackles...... You neglect how Norton limited HB on other teams, most notably Emmitt Smith and Barry Sanders. You neglect pics that were made as a result of Jacksons pressure. You neglect how doubling Jackson opened it up for Bryant Young. Again too many variables to consider. You also ignore Dana/Bryant combo
m4kita 5 months ago
@ElSharkwalker
4.)Now you are blaming the websites for giving you misinformation. Why is it I get my information from several different places, but you some how can’t do the same? You have an excuse for everything. “I can‘t spell correctly because I have a genius IQ“. “ I got the games confused. “The website did not have the Packers beating the 49ers 3 years in a row” (remember that one). “The website has the wrong number of regular season wins”. Excuse, after excuse, after excuse.
drbayoms 5 months ago
4)I suppose I could double check websites. I'll learn from my mistakes and do that in the future. Since you can't seem to let things go, however, I will bring up some of the things I have seen you say that is blatantly contradictory. a.Buress undoubtebly raped the girl. b.Rice never got even one catch on Sanders!.... Show me the *explative* footage c."Irvin was shutdown in the '94 Championship.. wait He was shutdown w/ Sanders on him.. Sanders didn't give up more than 120 yards to him
m4kita 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
4)I suppose I could double check websites. I'll learn from my mistakes and do that in the future. Since you can't seem to let things go, however, I will bring up some of the things I have seen you say that is blatantly contradictory. a.Buress undoubtebly raped the girl. b.Rice never got even one catch on Sanders!.... Show me the *explative* footage c."Irvin was shutdown in the '94 Championship.. wait He was shutdown w/ Sanders on him.. Sanders didn't give up more than 120 yards to him
m4kita 5 months ago
Lets take some time to look at the spelling issue which you seem so fascinated over. I.This is a generic attack you use on many people to chat w/. Not more than a year ago on a political site, in which you display so much hate for Texas, you used this same generic attack. The response was simply put "you do the same thing, but I'm not so childish to think it has any impact on our conversation"I will simply agree w/ the aforementioned. Also Einstein had an estimated 160+ IQ and couldn't spell
m4kita 5 months ago
4) In short you don't spell all that great either bud. At least I have the excuse of no spell check. Not that being able to spell has any relevance in any conversation other than providing a good outlet for a red herring, and some abusive ad hominems. Now.... time fore me to point out some of the things you have said in debates that you never even man up to. a. "I will repeat it, Jerry Rice never not once caught a pass against Primetime, show me the @#%@ footage!"
m4kita 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
4) In short you don't spell all that great either bud. At least I have the excuse of no spell check. Not that being able to spell has any relevance in any conversation other than providing a good outlet for a red herring, and some abusive ad hominems. Now.... time fore me to point out some of the things you have said in debates that you never even man up to. a. "I will repeat it, Jerry Rice never not once caught a pass against Primetime, show me the @#%@ footage!"
m4kita 5 months ago
@drbayoms finally my wife is done uploading w/e thing she did w/ her name and I can switch to my screen name... anyways, if the website I quote is wrong that's on the website. I'm not so serious as some individuals that spend hours planning debates on youtube. I have other things I have to get done, like work when I'm at work/finishing my basement at home/working out/cleaning and so forth. So I won't spend the time to research for an internet debate w/ someone who I don't know.
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
Seriously though, EVERY debate you have ever been on over the internet, you insult people, belittle people, never make a legitimate point, say things that are obviously wrong w/o citing where you got your info to throw blame where it belongs, never make on connected argument, and when you have your back against the wall you begin to critique spelling of others. I know Deion is your favorite player. He was a great player, however, I am going to have to agree to disagree as to his '94 impact
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
Comment removed
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
Comment removed
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
@ElSharkwalker
@ElSharkwalker
4.)Now you are blaming the websites for giving you misinformation. Why is it I get my information from several different places, but you some how can’t do the same? You have an excuse for everything. “I can‘t spell correctly because I have a genius IQ“. “ I got the games confused. “The website did not have the Packers beating the 49ers 3 years in a row” (remember that one). “The website has the wrong number of regular season wins”. Full of excuses.
drbayoms 5 months ago
@drbayoms a. cnt'd after the footage of Rice "Well Sanders was a Rookie" "That was only 4 yards... that one was 30 but not a TD!" b. Plexico undeniably raped that woman! (remember that one?) c. "Packers were the main reason the niners didn't win after 1994"..... followed by "Sanders is the main reason the niners didn't win after 1994" d.Darrell Green never played against Randy Moss..... Here's the thing, like I said before I am a trained debater. I always refer to other sites/games themselves
m4kita 5 months ago
@ElSharkwalker
5.)The simple reality here is that you do not know a damn thing about football. That is the issue. What’s the use of a purported 152 IQ if you lack the COMMON SENSE to cross reference information before coming on the internet looking like a buffoon? So the same “Genius Level” intellect, prevents you from spelling correctly and verifying facts? What a waste. The 49ers were 13-3 in 1994, you idiot.
drbayoms 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ElSharkwalker
7.)My proof is simple. The 49ers were 16th in Total Defense (which supports my earlier claim of them being “ranked around 15th” ) the year BEFORE Deion got there. Looking at the FACT that the other free agents they signed (Dent, Jackson, Norton, etc) had NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT (backed up by there total production). The ONLY variable LEFT is the 94 Def POY. You do know Deion was the Def POY in 94?
drbayoms 5 months ago
@ElSharkwalker
8.)The year Deion (the Def POY, in case you forgot) got there, they shot up to 6th in the league on Defense. Deion had 6 INTs for 303 yards and 3 Tds. That was the 3rd highest in NFL History. Put ALL those free agents stats up against the Def POY, and then tell me who contributed more. Hanks had 7 INTs and NO TOUCHDOWNS. Deion DIRECTLY generated 21 points.
drbayoms 5 months ago
@ElSharkwalker
Read each posting twice. Sometimes Geniuses need to slow down and allow the information to sink deeply into their highly advanced neural pathways.
drbayoms 5 months ago
I did watch defense of some other games I remember. Like the 2nd game against the Rams, where the Rams almost came back because Sanders gave up two late TD's to flipper anderson on fly routes. Although he was still fighting a hamstring injury that game.... just like the whole season. I'll send you a link so you can see how Watters helped win the 1994 Championship and Sanders did not.
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
Sanders also gave up an 11 yard pass to Harper and a 22 to the 3rd WR that actually played most of the game for Harper... Kevin Williams I think his name was. That being said, it is irrelevant how many catches/yards Irvin got as you made the original claim "Irvin was shutdown by Sanders" "to cease or cause to cease operation" is a dictionary definition of shut down. If Irvin has even 1 catch he didn't cease operation and you are wrong. Go ahead now, ad hominem
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
Just watched the game again, just on Defense. Here's the funny thing. I put the exact yards/quarter/minutes left for each catch Made on Sanders. It is exactly 8 catches for slighly over 120 yards. Mostly outs/hooks and 1 crossing. Sanders also had two pass interference. One was called, one wasn't, but Madden was mad that it wasn't. Davis on the other hand 2 pics, 1 FF and a Def TD
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
If you don't read anything else, read this. 99 yards rushing is what the 49ers gave up in the NFC Championship. This is the same game they had made it to the two years before and lost. It is reasonable to assume they would make it to this game again in 1994 w/ or w/o sanders. They gave up 352 yards Passing to the 99 yards rushing. Be it Watters or not(I still maintain Watters is the MAIN reason), it still stands to reason that Sanders had little to do w/ the SB win that year.
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
Watched the game again last night. It was the week eleven game that sanders gave up the big out and up. The NFC championship Irvin ran outs on him all day. End of the game 8 catches for 120 yards to Sanders in a man to man. Had one Short touchdown on an out out of the zone that is not counted on that, where he split Sanders zone and Merton Hanks.
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
@ElSharkwalker
1.)You have an excuse for everything. “I have a 152 IQ but I spell like a damn 5th grader“. “But, it’s ok because a University did a study showing that my genius level intelligence PREVENTS me from accurately spelling simple words correctly“. Yeah, sure. The long TD Irvin caught WAS NOT on Deion. That touchdown was on Eric Davis #25. BOTH of those Irvin’s Touchdowns were NOT on Deion. If you got that wrong, what the hell else did you get wrong? That long TD was on Eric Davis.
drbayoms 5 months ago
@drbayoms De verdad, aprende 2 idiomas mas y veamos como escribes tu gil. Learn two more languages and see how you spell after that. I have many friends whose ability to write language depreciates w/ each learned language. I'm no exception. Don't blame me if you don't understand that. How is it lying, if I'm the one that catches it and says, "you know I remembered that wrong, and got games confused". The second TD was a zone and not counted in the statistics I gave you after.
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
@drbayoms google 1994 nfl rankings and most of those sites show a 630 points the earthlink one (The first one shows 505 as the points, but also says they were 13-3 not 14-2. This is one of many sites I've found that show the 600 plus points as the niners points on the season. Lets go back to what you said initiallly. "Sanders shut down Irvin and Irvin had no influence in that game." Your moving the goal post way more than I do.
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@drbayoms google 1994 nfl rankings and most of those sites show a 630 points the earthlink one (The first one shows 505 as the points, but also says they were 13-3 not 14-2. This is one of many sites I've found that show the 600 plus points as the niners points on the season. Lets go back to what you said initiallly. "Sanders shut down Irvin and Irvin had no influence in that game." Your moving the goal post way more than I do.
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
@ElSharkwalker
2.)So this means that your ENTIRE argument is based on a lie. Eric Davis is the one who stripped Irvin in the first quarter. Davis is the one who picked off Aikman. However, Davis is also the same guy covering Irvin on that long touchdown. The 2nd Touchdown by Irvin came in the 4th Quarter. Do you really think I would let you get away with that one? I call BS.
drbayoms 5 months ago
@ElSharkwalker
3.)And your stats for points scored is BS. You must be including the playoffs? The 1994’ 49ers scored 505 points, with 31.6 ppg. The 1995’ 49ers scored 457 points, with 28.6 ppg. That includes the games Young MISSED that year. Young missed more games in 1995, than he did in 1994. So where in the world did you get this idea that Watters leaving, adversely affected that offense?
drbayoms 5 months ago
@ElSharkwalker
4.)I told you before I don’t need to use a “straw man” with you. Because of how dishonest you are. I can just use your own lies. How is it Ricky is the reason that team did not win in 95 when the 49ers in the regular season scored ONLY 48 FEWER points without him? This is with Young MISSING 5 games. 5 Games missed, and ONLY 2 fewer wins and ONLY 48 fewer points.
drbayoms 5 months ago
@ElSharkwalker
5.)They went up against a buzz saw of an Offense led by Favre (vomit in my mouth). I think Favre is a jerk. But during a 5 year stretch in the 90s, he was one of the best. And if you are a 49ers fan, you know quite well how good that Packer offense was. 21-28 75% comp, 299 yds 2tds, 0 ints. The next week against Dallas (and Deion) 21-39 54% comp, 307 yds, 3tds, 2 ints for Favre.
drbayoms 5 months ago
@ElSharkwalker
6.)You had Watters, in 92 when he had 1,418 total yds and 11 tds, but you did not win. You had Watters in 93 when he had 1,276 total yards and 11 tds, but you did not win. In 94, the difference in Ricky Watters overall production from 92 (his best year) is……..178 YARDS. 178 Yards was the difference for the 49ers that year? No, that defense led by Deion Sanders was the difference.
drbayoms 5 months ago
@ElSharkwalker
7.)Myth: the other guys on Defense were Pro Bowlers at one point in their careers & that MUST have helped the overall Defense. 3 of those Starters in the Super Bowl (not named Deion) had previous Pro Bowl appearances. But let’s dig deeper. Ricky Jackson who had the most Pro Bowls of that group in question, had 3.5 sacks that year. McDonald had 4 & Norton had 1.
drbayoms 5 months ago
@ElSharkwalker
8.)And in that group the only one to make the Pro Bowl that particular year was McDonald. Ken Norton had less than half the tackles he did the previous year. And like I stated before Rickey Jackson had 3.5 sacks. How did there performance that year influence anything? McDonald, yes. But a MLB & a DE with 112 tackles, and 3.5 sacks COMBINED. I am not buying that.
drbayoms 5 months ago
@drbayoms I never said those players all made the pro bowl that year. I simply said at one point or another in their career they played in a pro bowl. Eric Davis played in 2, Richard Dent in 4, Bryant young 4, Dana Stubblefield went that year, You already Mentioned Ricky Jackson and Tim McDonald, Ken Norton Jr. 3, Merton Hanks 4, and Gary Plummer (never actually made a pro bowl, but had 100 tackles each of his first 10 years in the league). W/ Sanders is 9 Pro Bowlers and a consistant solid LB
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
@drbayoms Yards not going to drop again on the Irvin stats. I watched both cowboys games back to back. It is easy to confuse games when you watch'm back to back. I corrected that error myself to NOT be dishonest. The reason stats drop for players on a team is the same reason Patrick Willis has less tackles w/ Abrayo Franklin, because Abrayo Franklin gets them. People compete for Tackles when everyone is a star on the team.
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
Now let me go back to say it again.IMO Ricky Watters was the MAIN reason the niners never were serious contenders again.Sure the defense lost players (not just Sanders, but Davis the next year, Ricky Jackson who pressured qbs even when he didn't sack, and Stubblefield in the middle at DT. They lost coaches. They were plagued by injuries. W/ all the variables, you are left w/ the burden of disproving them all, as you are the one that made the claim for Sanders being the SOLE reason for SB win
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
Jump back to the websites now that have the 49ers listed at 13-3. Those are the only site that have 505 points listed. If they can't get the score right, then its hard to trust 'm. The ONLY one that has them listed w/ the right regular season record of 14-2 has the 600 plus points listed. Ad hominems w/ the sp bud. Ad hominem all you want. The only reason I pointed out IQ and debate experience was to let you know I'm not going to let someone that is disrespectful effect points made.
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
@drbayoms We did have Watters in previous years but we did not win, as he did not have 9 pro bowlers on defense. '94 was the Only year we had a complete team w/ a solid defense, running game and passing game. Montana had many years w/ a solid run game, and defense to compliment his passing game. Again to many variables w/ coaches, teammates, and opposition to simply say Montana won more super bowls w/ Rice so Rice's best years are w/ Montana. Its slippery slope logic
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
How about you try to prove some of what you said now. "Sanders is the Sole reason the 49ers won the SB is my favorite" I'm saying prove your statement that he "Shut down Irvin" and "Shut down every WR he faced". Sanders influenced 1 potential outcome of the whole season. That was the first game against the Saints. Niners won the conference by more than one game that year, so the playoff picture would have been the same. Sanders shut down no one in the playoffs/had no important ints
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
@ElSharkwalker
9.)You rants are so incomprehensible that you can’t sustain your lies. One of your diatribes has Irvin gashing Deion for 8 catches for 160 yds. Because like you said “I just watched the game”. Your last posting suggested that it was 8 catches for 120 yds. I’ll wait a few more days. At this rate those yards are going to drop again and again in 20 yard increments of course. Leave debate class for those ‘less intellectually gifted folks“, who can actually spell. Try the glee club.
drbayoms 5 months ago
Anyways, I doubt people want to see us go back and forth here in the messages, hit me up w/ a personal message if you want to continue this. Really no need to force anyone to listen to us go back and forth. Also, if you want to keep on going, support what you say and pick a position. Also, man up when you are proven wrong, I did w/ the packers thing and explained why I thought what I did. You could do the same w/ the Sanders. He had some good plays on the '94 Niners, but gave up big plays 2
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
It is nothing against Sanders. It just doesn't make sense to say one injured CB that played in 12 regular season games while injured for most of them had more influence than the THEN highest scoring offense of all time, and the whole rest of the defense of 8 pro bowl caliber players. Especially when you consider the CB's injuries led to giving up a big TD and over 100 yards to a WR that the aforementioned corner was supposed to lock down in the Championship.
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
cum hoc ergo propter hoc:Fallacy of composition:Fallacy of Many questions:Kettle Logic:Post hoc ergo propter hoc:accidental Logical:Argumentum ad populum:and the afformentioned Appeal to emotion:Appeal to fear fallacies.That's not to mention your constant slippery slope, occasional strawmen, and Moving the goal post arguements based on beating the bush support evidence.Try to Appeal to my fear all you want bud, I have a 152 IQ and was nationally ranked in debate in HS, you won't intimidate me.
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
@ElSharkwalker
1.)You are telling me the year Deion came to the 49ers, Hanks has a break out year? That must be a coincidence, right? How is it Hanks’ best year came when Deion was teamed with him. How is that possible? Hanks’best year (by any measure) came with Deion.
drbayoms 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ElSharkwalker
1.)You are telling me the year Deion came to the 49ers, Hanks has a break out year? That must be a coincidence, right? How is it Hanks’ best year came when Deion was teamed with him. How is that possible? Hanks’best year (by any measure) came with Deion.
drbayoms 5 months ago
@ElSharkwalker
2.)Ricky did not even rush for a thousand yards that year. So Ricky was a game changer? But his best stats came after he left the 49ers. That style of play is a trademark for the 49ers. Take a look at Roger Craig. Ricky’s 877 yards rushing and 3.7 yards a carry is not nearly as significant as having Deion Sanders play man coverage (when necessary) on the opponents best WR.
drbayoms 5 months ago
@drbayoms Rickey averaged high rush yards that year bud and being able to catch the ball short out of the backfield and run for 1500 yfs is huge, but sure take a look at Craig who was probably a better HB than Watters. Craig is another variable that favors Montana as to reasons why Montana won more SB than Young was able to. Again, I have the games all on dvd of the '94 season. I don't buy your bs about sanders not playing Man on Irvin, I just watched the game again today.
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
@ElSharkwalker
3.)Ricky’s rushing yards went down each year as a 49er after1992. Why is it the 49ers won the Super Bowl the year when his rushing yards was the lowest as a 49er? When his yards were the lowest the team won MORE games and a Super Bowl. That makes no sense. Actually it does, because Ricky was not the reason they won. Deion was the reason they won.
drbayoms 5 months ago
@drbayoms Irvin gets 8 of his catches w/ Sanders man to man for about 160 of his yards, I just watched the game. Sanders also gives up some big receptions to Harper that game. His pic... it was on a Hail Mary before half time and was nowhere near catchable for any offensive players. Yards from scrimmage is what you are neglecting w/ Watters. Not wasting more time on a strawman. I never said he had more rushing yards, simply that he had high yards per rush and high yards from scrimmage.
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
@ElSharkwalker
4.)Even with Watters and that high powered offense, that group did not win anything. 1994 NFC Championship game Ricky had 33 yards rushing, Rice and Taylor had no Tds. That Defense the year BEFORE Deion got there was ranked 18th in the league. With Deion they were ranked in the Top 10. A Defense that was ranked around 15th in the league against the run moved up to Number 2 against the run. More men in the box. Deion as the shutdown.
drbayoms 5 months ago
@ElSharkwalker
5.)In the 1994 game (which you claim to have) tell me how many of the 12 catches for 190+yards Irvin had while being covered by Deion, 2, 3, how many? His touchdowns and big catches came cutting across the zone. Once the 49ers got up 21-0. Deion did not leave his designated side of the field. He simply handed off the receiver to the next man (zone). Deion DID NOT tail Irvin all over the field. What are you talking about?
drbayoms 5 months ago
@drbayoms Sanders never left his designated side of the field the whole game bud. He was man to man on his side the whole game. They never relaxed on the cowboys, and never went into a prevent, not even on the last drive. I own the game dude, I spent 90$ on the whole season off of the ioffer site. I've watched it atleast 3 times since last years football season ended. I never said Deion followed Sanders all over the field <-strawman, you asked for Irvin's stats, I gave them to you.
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
@ElSharkwalker
6.)Once Irvin left his area of responsibility, he had zero to do with Irvin. What was his longest play from scrimmage while being covered by Sanders? They had the lead they knew they were going to throw and they sat back in zone, simple. Rickey average 58 yards rushing in the playoffs that year.
drbayoms 5 months ago
@drbayoms BS that they were in a zone. Watters had 58 rush yards per game, but what are his yards per scrimmage? Also, you neglect the other back, Floyd, who was injured the next year. Floyd played a huge part in the run game (3 td's in the bears game for example). You really feel that I team gaining .8 yards less per run and an offense having 2000 less yards from scrimmage from backs is not a stat supporting that the niners offense suffered w/o Watters.
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
@drbayoms Also, you feel that the offense going from 630+ points scored in '94 to 474 in '95 (160 points less scored) is a stat that doesn't support the loss of Watters had a huge impact on the niners? The only other players on that offense that weren't the same were 1 OL, and 1 HB. 160 point difference w/ a better OL and a new HB. Seriously, you are going to argue that stat does nothing to support that Watters was the reason the niners succeeded in '94. 2,000 yards and 160 points matter.
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
@ElSharkwalker
7.)The idea that Ricky’s impact on the 49ers was greater than Deion’s is NOT supported by any of the ACTUAL stats. I brought up Ricky’s comment and his perceived (by the media) work ethic to illustrate the misnomer thrown out there by idiots criticizing Moss. To show that there is no way Ricky or someone like Moss could achieve all that they did, being lazy. Or not giving 100%. It is not possible.
drbayoms 5 months ago
@drbayoms Irvin's longest play on Sanders btw was his TD a 44 yard reception, w/ Sanders in man. Sanders bit on an out and up pump fake, and like I said was injured and couldn't get his speed back up to catch Irvin. Being lazy and not giving 100% are two different things as far as Watters and Moss go. Neither was lazy. However, Watters alligator armed one pass.... one pass because he was afraid of a linebacker. Did he give 100%? No.. he could have stretched and taken the hit.
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
@drbayoms As far as Moss goes, did he rest on plays not coming his direction? Absolutely, he did. If he rests one play, no matter the reason, he did not give 100%. Does this mean either Moss, or Watters are lazy. It does not. It just means they didn't meet their full potential. I never said I showed this to friends in debate class btw.... I haven't been in high school for some time now. I do give debates regularly to the coach so that he can use them as teaching tools.
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
@ElSharkwalker
8.)Also it looks bad when you say “I am on the debate team”. You might as well say “I masturbate to Maxim“. You took this so seriously that you showed your friends in debate class this argument, really? Lastly, you have a purported 152 IQ, BUT YOU CAN’T SPELL argument, erroneous, disregards, Socrates, immediately, etc? Work on the little things first. Don‘t quote Latin, if you have not mastered English. Lay off the Adderall. Sorry (fallacy).
drbayoms 5 months ago
@drbayoms As far as spelling goes, Harvard among others have proven spelling has very little importance so long as the word is understood. That being said, I don't have fancy spell check, as I don't have that plugin installed on the linux os I run. Also, after learning 2 other languages (3 if you count ASL) my spelling in English has depreciated greatly. I don't even speak English in my work, nor in my home anymore, even though it is my native language. Either way bringing sp into this is...
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
@drbayoms a red herring. As far as latin goes.... that's also the English words for those terms.... They don't have another simpler way to say them in English. Enough b.s.'n dude. Moving the goal post fallacy means you change your position on a point to make it harder to prove. First you say Sanders shut down Irvin. Next you say he shut down Irvin, but only when he was on Irvin. Sanders gets burned by Irvin for 44 yards, period.
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
Comment removed
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
@ElSharkwalker The 8 others being in pro bowls at one point in their careers, and 6 of the 8 being new in '94, and 1 in '93 is more evidence that a better DEFENSE AS A WHOLE is what helped them overcome the cowboys. Just look at the first turnovers in the game. NONE were Sanders. Now tell me, what is your base position, so that you cannot move your goalposts anymore. I'm assuming it is Moss is better than Rice? I really don't know though as you have not said.
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
Back to the spelling thing. Harvard University, La Universidad Austral de Chile, and Oxford worked on Monte Verde together (along with a few other notable universities). At that time, they decided to study if spelling was important in todays society w/ computers and spell check. They learned that the majority of people that have over 142 IQ's that are under 30 cannot spell simple words. The reason the "genius" level individuals gave "it wasn't important" even Einstein didn't spell well.
ElSharkwalker 5 months ago
Back to the spellin