TL1961
Well-known member
- Joined:
- Apr 24, 2013
- Posts:
- 32,472
- Liked Posts:
- 18,918
Alex Smith
- Joined:
- May 12, 2010
- Posts:
- 45,637
- Liked Posts:
- 29,769
Football is gay
- Joined:
- Nov 5, 2012
- Posts:
- 4,300
- Liked Posts:
- 2,527
- Location:
- NJ
My favorite teams
Nope. I'm Ollie
- Joined:
- Nov 5, 2012
- Posts:
- 4,300
- Liked Posts:
- 2,527
- Location:
- NJ
My favorite teams
He had 28. Kramer still holds the record at 29.
Interesting that Kramer was 4th in passing TDs in 95 while Cutler was 11th. 29 would have put him at tenth and 30 would have put him tied at 9th with Eli Manning.
Also, Kramer had only 10 INTs while taking every single snap in 95 at QB. Cutler had 18 INTs for a bad 3.2 INT % which was 27th in the league.
- Joined:
- Sep 15, 2012
- Posts:
- 57,892
- Liked Posts:
- 37,871
- Joined:
- Nov 5, 2012
- Posts:
- 4,300
- Liked Posts:
- 2,527
- Location:
- NJ
My favorite teams
Worst Laurel and Hardy video ever. Thumbs down.
anotheridiot
Well-known member
- Joined:
- Jul 15, 2016
- Posts:
- 5,935
- Liked Posts:
- 799
Like I said before, its like the special olympics (no disrespect meant) when you look at the history of bear quarterbacks.
Rory Sparrow
Well-known member
- Joined:
- Aug 14, 2010
- Posts:
- 4,850
- Liked Posts:
- 3,735
You still can't comprehend postings, even when you have no "rooting interest".
You said Cunningham "got close a bunch of times", he didn't. Thats not really 'semantics', thats fact.
Cool.
- Joined:
- Aug 17, 2011
- Posts:
- 41,295
- Liked Posts:
- 23,610
- Location:
- Palatine, IL
My favorite teams
Kramer and McMahon were the most effective QBs I've seen so far. Mitch is actually 3rd. Says more about our QBs than Mitch right now. Anyone want Cutler or Grossman instead? Orton and Miller would have been annihilated by the inside rush last year.
- Joined:
- Sep 15, 2012
- Posts:
- 57,892
- Liked Posts:
- 37,871
Nope Outlaw said you would not argue the semantics of close and then you said this.
This particular part of your post is you arguing semantics of whether 3,800 is close to 4,000. So yeah you did in fact argue something Outlaw said you wouldn't. Wasn't commenting on the other part of your post about how many times he hit 4,000 but the above is most certainly doing what Outlaw claimed you wouldn't which is why I thought it was funny as you contradicted like 2 or 3 posts later.
- Joined:
- Sep 15, 2012
- Posts:
- 57,892
- Liked Posts:
- 37,871
"Close" but not quite.
Rory Sparrow
Well-known member
- Joined:
- Aug 14, 2010
- Posts:
- 4,850
- Liked Posts:
- 3,735
Thanks. Unfortunately for you/your 'argument', what I was actually responding to was Cunningham "got close a bunch of times".
Although I would hate to delve into the world of 'semantics' again, but I think even you would have to allow that one time (1988) does not constitute "a bunch of times" in terms of phrasing. If I say "one time", I mean something diametrically opposed to me saying "a bunch of times". For instance, how many times have you been wrong in this forum? "One time"? Or "a bunch of times"?
- Joined:
- Aug 21, 2012
- Posts:
- 29,193
- Liked Posts:
- 25,142
- Location:
- USA
Remy is going argue the semantics over the word semantics....
Rory explained himself....he didn't argue semantics
Semantics, as it is being used here originally is the generalized urban dictionary term, not the traditional merriam-webster version.
as Rory said......disproving "getting close a bunch of times" is not arguing semantics.....its just stating a fact.
Rory explained himself....he didn't argue semantics
Semantics, as it is being used here originally is the generalized urban dictionary term, not the traditional merriam-webster version.
as Rory said......disproving "getting close a bunch of times" is not arguing semantics.....its just stating a fact.
- Joined:
- Sep 7, 2014
- Posts:
- 16,086
- Liked Posts:
- 12,652
Are you the poster formerly known as "Concise Summary Guy"?
- Joined:
- Aug 21, 2012
- Posts:
- 10,823
- Liked Posts:
- 11,018
I find it interesting that so many threads having little to do with Trubisky evolve into Trubisky threads, and this actually is a Trubisky thread and the topic has moved away from him.
Rory Sparrow
Well-known member
- Joined:
- Aug 14, 2010
- Posts:
- 4,850
- Liked Posts:
- 3,735
Trubisky almost threw for 4000 yards last year, tho
- Joined:
- Aug 21, 2012
- Posts:
- 29,193
- Liked Posts:
- 25,142
- Location:
- USA
no but I'll happily take that mantle if it makes our CCS home happy and healthy
- Joined:
- Aug 21, 2012
- Posts:
- 29,193
- Liked Posts:
- 25,142
- Location:
- USA
This thread has almost consistently stayed on topic.....
Rory Sparrow
Well-known member
- Joined:
- Aug 14, 2010
- Posts:
- 4,850
- Liked Posts:
- 3,735
It got close to going off the rails a bunch of times, but it did not.
Rory Sparrow
Well-known member
- Joined:
- Aug 14, 2010
- Posts:
- 4,850
- Liked Posts:
- 3,735
The part that makes me chuckle is the whole concept is binary to begin with. Cunningham either threw for 4000 yards, or he didn't. To say that Cunningham came close is 'semantics' in itself...but remydat is silent...then when I point out that getting close to 4000 is a semantics argument, remydat chooses that moment in time to come out of the woodwork and complain that I am 'arguing semantics', when I am doing the exact opposite.
Members online NOW
- Member
- Admin
- Mod
- Donor
- HOF
Staff online NOW
-
bamainatlantaYou wake him up, you keep him up -
PrideisBearsBully Mod
