What does one have to do with the other?  I'm not discussing Brady, for reasons I've mentioned earlier.  

Will you not discuss other topics I bring up because I stopped discussing Brady? Or just this one?

You obviously aren't discussing Rodgers because you don't have the ability to combat my bulletproof argument. 

Posted by bistiza on 3/25/2013 4:44:00 PM (view original):
This isn't great for you, nomar - I've issued a challenge against the supposed greatness of your hero, and despite all of his staunch defenders - including you - no one has been able to answer that challenge.

If Brady were so **** good, surely you should be able to easily find plenty of examples of him showcasing his amazing skills. Yet strangely enough, no one has done it, including you, so you don't have any more ground to stand on than burnsy or anyone else.

Its pointless for me to describe a single play. I also find it hysterical that this is your argument now. You want us to describe one play to show how great Brady has been for 10+ years.

Your "challenge" is a joke. Just like your argument.

Keep running in circles chasing your tail. I enjoy laughing.

I'm not discussing Rodgers until someone answers the challenge regarding Brady. Since you're the one so determined to have the Rodgers discussion, I"m suggesting that someone should be you - unless you don't ever care for me to refute your ridiculous Rodgers argument, which is probably your goal anyway. It serves that purpose perfectly, since I'm sure you're aware I could easily provide multiple examples of Rodgers' skills. That's how things are when a player actually does have skills, unlike with Brady where it's difficult to find those kinds of plays to describe.

nomar,

If the challenge is such a joke and Brady has been so great for ten years, then answer the challenge and show me how wrong I am. If it's that easy to do, why haven't you done it?

You are running in circles and chasing your tail instead of answering the challenge.

Posted by bistiza on 3/26/2013 8:34:00 AM (view original):
nomar,

If the challenge is such a joke and Brady has been so great for ten years, then answer the challenge and show me how wrong I am. If it's that easy to do, why haven't you done it?

You are running in circles and chasing your tail instead of answering the challenge.

I have....you fail to understand or want to acknowledge it.  You have some all mighty power of telling how overrated Brady is.

Your argument is a joke.  We get it....you hate Brady and the Pats.  Next please.

Posted by bistiza on 3/26/2013 8:32:00 AM (view original):
I'm not discussing Rodgers until someone answers the challenge regarding Brady. Since you're the one so determined to have the Rodgers discussion, I"m suggesting that someone should be you - unless you don't ever care for me to refute your ridiculous Rodgers argument, which is probably your goal anyway. It serves that purpose perfectly, since I'm sure you're aware I could easily provide multiple examples of Rodgers' skills. That's how things are when a player actually does have skills, unlike with Brady where it's difficult to find those kinds of plays to describe.

I don't care if you attempt (unsuccessfully for sure) to refute my Rodgers argument.  I assume you don't because you can't.

I have....you fail to understand or want to acknowledge it. 

No, you haven't.  You posted a few videos in the thread, then went on to describe things that weren't even in them. When I pointed that out you had no further response.

In other words, if that was your best attempt to find a play showing what I asked for, then you failed miserably and will need to try again if you want to take a shot at it.

If my argument is a joke, it must feel pretty bad to have your *** handed to you by a joke of an argument you apparently can't do anything about.

I don't care if you attempt (unsuccessfully for sure) to refute my Rodgers argument.  I assume you don't because you can't.

I can refute your Rodgers argument and will do so as soon as you refute my Brady argument, which was presented to you first.

No, you can't, or you would have done so already.  I know you're not afraid to share your opinion about things.

I'm not afraid to share my opinion on this either - I'm just waiting for you to go first. So go ahead, step up, and refute my claim about Brady. I've already promised I will then do so for Rodgers.

I've stated several times why, after 3 months, I'm done arguing about Brady.  They're legitimate reasons.  Your reason for not discussing my topic, yet continuing to discuss that you won't discuss my topic, is asinine and makes no sense.  Which leads me to believe that you can't successfully make a valid argument against my bulletproof case against Rodgers.  Which is fine, but you should just admit that and we can move on.  <rolls eyes>

My reason for refusing to discuss Rodgers is to make sure I give you every chance to refute my point about Brady so you can't later come back and say you didn't get the chance.

The reason you don't do it is the same reason no one does it - because it's proven a lot more difficult to do than you thought it would be. See, you all think it's so easy to display Brady's skills, but when you actually try to do it, they just aren't there often enough to make it an easy job.

And that's just the point - while I'm sure there are plays Brady has made which are above average, I want you all to realize they don't occur as often as you seem to think they do.

Your ridiculous attempts to argue about Rodgers don't concern me at all either way - but I will indulge you if you first respond to my request about Brady. Those are the terms. If you can't handle it, then you should just admit you can't find a play to showcase Brady's skills and we can move on.

The reason you don't argue is the same reason no one does it - because it's proven a lot more difficult to do than you thought it would be. See, you all think it's so easy to display Rodgers's skills, but when you actually try to do it, they just aren't there often enough to make it an easy job. 

And that's just the point - while I'm sure there are plays Rodgers has made which are above average, I want you all to realize they don't occur as often as you seem to think they do.

See, my argument is bulletproof.

Actually it's proven quite easy to find materials to defend the skills of Rodgers. I'm just waiting for you to do the same for Brady before I show those materials to you. Then again, I'm not sure why I bothered, because you'll never even make an attempt.

Actually it's proven quite easy to find materials to defend the skills of Brady, but I don't know what that has to do with anything, as I told you I'm done arguing about that after 3 months. But you obviously can't find the materials for Rodgers, otherwise you would have shown them to me already.  

Actually it's proven quite easy to find materials to defend the skills of Brady, but I don't know what that has to do with anything, as I told you I'm done arguing about that after 3 months.

It's been quite easy, but instead of just offering it up, you give the excuse of being done arguing about it. Just put up the evidence, and then I'll put up mine for Rodgers. Unless you don't have any evidence, and then it doesn't matter.