wasted football seasons. In each season besides 2016, we were for all intent and purposes out of it by Halloween to mid November. This season is shaping up to the be the same way and after a while it just gets really frustrating. It is one thing to not make the playoffs, it is quite another to be non competitive basically for mid-November and December.
2013- 2-6 by Halloween
2014--3-5 by Nov 3 (that went all the way to 3-8)
2015-- 4-4 on November 1 (in fairness we really tanked in December that year)
2016-comeptitve (but very boring to watch--although I would take that over the other crap).
2017-1-7 by November 5
2018--2-7 by November 12
2019-2-3 most likely going to be 2-4 and its hard to see how we win without Shepard, Engram, and Barkley
I remember Wellington Mara used to say that a successful season is that the team was still in it for the last home game. By that barometer we have been an utter failure for 6 of 7 years.
Sorry just needed to rant because the ineptitude is becoming so frustrating.
I fully understand why people have frustration with the losing seasons, but there are two things at play also:
1) Not enough realization at the effort needed to turn the team around. You can't ignore what Reese did (and I pin it more on Ross). They left a roster devoid of any home-grown talent. It isn't something you just magically erase. It was a historic failure to not have players on the roster from a whole swath of drafts. That isn't hyperbole - the stretch of drafts was unmatched in league history.
2) Expecting perfection in the moves and simplifying things as if there is a blueprint of a model to follow.
So it causes the value of draft picks to be questioned. It causes all FA signings to be considered unecessary and underperforming. Hell, it even leads to comments that cutting bait with an often injured player was an "easy resign". And a lot of the moves in the past two years are judged swiftly and harshly without patience or even trying to figure out what happens in the alternative.
arc was dead on. When Barkley was selected, the overwhelming response was that the Giants simply couldn't afford to not take a QB there. In fact, it has been a situation that some has referred to as being handed to us on a silver platter. a move we had to make. But now that argument is shifting not to the QB discussion - but to the OL or pass rusher discussion. Could that be because the other QB's haven't exactly been fantastic?
Even the signing of Beckham to trade him has been called a fireable offense. But what would the take have been if an unsigned Beckham played the year out and left for aonly a compensatory pick or was attempted to be traded without leverage for a far less package? I'm assuming it wouldn't be a glowing review. Keep in mind, Gettleman took shit for not trading Collins.
Gettleman hasn't been perfect, and even if he had, I'm not sure the results would be vastly different. But what continually is happening that his moves are being called successes or failures immediately and people are going to great lengths to talk about how we are destined to have several years of poor football while other teams are rising quickly (even if those other teams have taken 5-7 years to get to this point too).
On Beckham - my take would have been why wasn't he traded earlier? If we believe what we hear, Shurmur had to convince Gettleman to keep him. "I can work with him" is what we heard. So Gettleman was considering moving Beckham in spring 2018 (rumors were circulating, if you remember), but Shurmur convinced him to make him the richest WR in the NFL? The question shouldn't be what if we didn't sign Beckham...it should be why wasn't he traded between spring 2018 and the trade deadline in fall 2018?
On Collins - Gettleman didn't take any shit from me on that. I stated repeatedly that I wanted all of Beckham, Collins, Vernon, Harrison and others gone. Losers, each and every one. Not a popular view at the time, but generally accepted now that they're no longer Giants.
Fwiw, my take on Gettleman is really the standard account by many fans. His drafts show a lot of promise, his FA/trade signings have been less than stellar (although I do go back and forth on the OBJ trade and do think it might work out for us in the end), but I think overall he has us trending in the right direction. Whether we are, in fact, going in the right direction will be demonstrated over the next year or so and most likely barring major injury to Jones by the end of 2020. Until then, I prefer to give him space to let him rebuild the team as he sees fit.
We don't know why he wasn't traded. Maybe they wanted too much value in him. Maybe they wanted to keep his talent. But in the end, he was moved for fair compensation and only a short-term hit to the cap.
There's a wide gulf between perfection and incompetence, but Gettleman has been directly called incompetent and I don't think he's ever been called perfect. Despite having past results of an above average GM.
Some of that is frustration - but some of that is also rampant stupidity.
They hoped Beckham would grow up and paid him accordingly. He turned out to just be an asshole. $16M in 2019 cap space gone.
They hoped Eli had one more run in him, and they hoped the team around him was good enough to support him. But inexplicably they didn't use the #6 pick overall to help support Eli. Eli turned out to be done. $17M in 2019 cap space gone.
And now the team around Jones isn't good enough to support him in part because $33M in cap space isn't on the field. And yeah, we got Peppers, Lawrence, and Ximenes for Beckham...but we could have had that + $16M in cap space had we just traded him before we signed him.
When I look at this team I don't see a clear and consistent vision or strategy. I see a GM who should probably just be the Director of College Scouting, and I see a head coach who never should have risen above offensive coordinator. The strong leadership that results in a clear overall comprehensive plan is not there.
He wasn't traded because it would've been fairly groundbreaking to trade a player of his talent so early in a career.
It was a Mara directive? Jesus.
Even good GMs get questioned and second guessed, so what the hell do you think is going to happen in the hyper-sensitive world of NYC and a team that has been largely a poor performer for a decade.
Particularly when there is more than enough evidence to show questionable moves and poor timing from a new incoming GM that should have seen a declining QB and a team in need of a deep restructuring before he walked into his office...
He wasn't traded because it would've been fairly groundbreaking to trade a player of his talent so early in a career.
It was a Mara directive? Jesus.
I'm not saying it was a Mara directive. I'm saying that Mara's one of 6 or 7 voices running the team, and Mara unquestionably weighs fan and media reaction on big decisions.
Beckham was a popular player (funny how everyone hates him now when the only thing about him that ever changed was the jersey), and that matters to Mara. That's one of Mara's flaws.
Quote:
Even the signing of Beckham to trade him has been called a fireable offense. But what would the take have been if an unsigned Beckham played the year out and left for aonly a compensatory pick or was attempted to be traded without leverage for a far less package? I'm assuming it wouldn't be a glowing review. Keep in mind, Gettleman took shit for not trading Collins.
On Beckham - my take would have been why wasn't he traded earlier? If we believe what we hear, Shurmur had to convince Gettleman to keep him. "I can work with him" is what we heard. So Gettleman was considering moving Beckham in spring 2018 (rumors were circulating, if you remember), but Shurmur convinced him to make him the richest WR in the NFL? The question shouldn't be what if we didn't sign Beckham...it should be why wasn't he traded between spring 2018 and the trade deadline in fall 2018?
On Collins - Gettleman didn't take any shit from me on that. I stated repeatedly that I wanted all of Beckham, Collins, Vernon, Harrison and others gone. Losers, each and every one. Not a popular view at the time, but generally accepted now that they're no longer Giants.
I never gave DG shit for Collins either.
You referenced my post about "easy resign", which I think Kennard should have been. Yes he'd had some injuries, but he had shown real ability at position where we were devoid of talent, and at the time needed an extra player moving to the 3-4. He would not have been an expensive resign.
You go on to talk about a "shift" in the discussion from a QB to OL. To be clear, I have never shifted, I never wanted any of the QBs that year. I wanted to trade down and target OLs. I am also one of, if not the primary person who has been pushing that narrative. For me it was never a shift...
Jimmy Googs : 12:48 pm : link : reply
around calling DG incompetent
I didn't say everyone is running around calling him incompetent, I said he has been called incompetent. He's also been said to have made "fireable offenses".
But nice try creating hyperbole where none is intimated.
They hoped Beckham would grow up and paid him accordingly. He turned out to just be an asshole. $16M in 2019 cap space gone.
They hoped Eli had one more run in him, and they hoped the team around him was good enough to support him. But inexplicably they didn't use the #6 pick overall to help support Eli. Eli turned out to be done. $17M in 2019 cap space gone.
And now the team around Jones isn't good enough to support him in part because $33M in cap space isn't on the field. And yeah, we got Peppers, Lawrence, and Ximenes for Beckham...but we could have had that + $16M in cap space had we just traded him before we signed him.
When I look at this team I don't see a clear and consistent vision or strategy. I see a GM who should probably just be the Director of College Scouting, and I see a head coach who never should have risen above offensive coordinator. The strong leadership that results in a clear overall comprehensive plan is not there.
I agree with most of this post.
I also think that the Mara/Tisch ownership group won't just take DG/PS word for it all at the jump. There's got to be clear and obvious evidence that it's not working, and in defense of DG and PS - they had to make a deal with the devil to get the job (agree at the start they would do everything they could to win with what they had and promise that they wouldn't just tear it all down and make it an obvious rebuild b/c they could sell tickets with Eli/OBJ).
To be fair to ownership - Eli has been counted out as dead before only to make some magical Super Bowl runs...twice.
And it's hard to just dump talent and OBJ was as talented as they get.
So I get the hope - even though the evidence was pretty glaring that it was time to move on.
Quote:
wasn't traded because the fans loved him????
He wasn't traded because it would've been fairly groundbreaking to trade a player of his talent so early in a career.
It was a Mara directive? Jesus.
I'm not saying it was a Mara directive. I'm saying that Mara's one of 6 or 7 voices running the team, and Mara unquestionably weighs fan and media reaction on big decisions.
Beckham was a popular player (funny how everyone hates him now when the only thing about him that ever changed was the jersey), and that matters to Mara. That's one of Mara's flaws.
You forgot to add the bottom line to his factors on decision making - fan and media reaction in addition to sales and $$$ coming in.
Could have played a part, more likely for OBJ than Eli
- Gettleman is considered "backward thinking" and too tied to the organization.
- But around here - everyone else seems to be doing it right and the Giants aren't, including draft strategy and personnel moves.
- How many season does Gettleman get attributed to him that weren't his fault??
- The vitriol he takes he is way over the top in relation to the effort he's made to rebuild the roster.
- He's been disliked by some since Day 1 because of the way he was hired.
- He's mocked for a flippant comment about analytics
- And there are people here who whole heartedly believe Gettleman should be fired.
- Gettleman has been directly called incompetent and I don't think he's ever been called perfect.
Overwhelming? No. The better debate, in my eyes, was/has been whether investing the 2nd pick in a RB was prudent. And that has branched out into what other positions were wiser investments at #2 - QB, OL, DE, TE, etc.
So I find this narrative a reverse spin move to say Barkley was the right move because we may have landed the QB in Jones a year later. So this affirms the new theory, adopted by the Gettlemanites, that going RB first then QB with high first round picks is reasonable as long as you nail the QB on the back end.
As a single data point it validates the the idea of trading down and targeting OL was possible to foresee and a valid path at the time of the draft.
Overall the Colts are still rebuilding as well. Their defense is as bad as ours (except for the KC game). Somehow bringing them up to show that they handled that particular draft move well, somehow morphed into they are blueprint the Giants should emulate, and that is not a good narrative. Lets just stick to the Trade down and target OL move.
I'll admit I didn't like the SB pick at the time - I wanted one of the QBs. In hindsight, I'm glad they didn't.
There's nothing about Mayfield, Allen, Darnold or Rosen that gives me buyer's remorse.
The other thing I'll tell you is that you have to have a partner to trade back in the draft...who did the Colts make that deal with??? You think that same trade was on the table with the Giants?
He wasn't traded because it would've been fairly groundbreaking to trade a player of his talent so early in a career.
It was a Mara directive? Jesus.
I think it's naive to believe fan (customer) sentiment isn't a big part of Mara's decision making rubric.
There's plenty of circumstantial evidence by way of his own comments about Manning and Beckham to infer Mara's feelings for players resonates in the building.
Mara in that sense is not Gettleman.
Second, I loved the Barkley pick last year and still do. First of all, I wasn't enamored with any of the QBs last year and nothing that has transpired to change my mind. I'd much rather have Barkley/Jones than Darnold/whoever they may have taken this year. I do not see a 10-15 year franchise QB in Darnold. I do think Jones has shown he may be.
Third, I don't know how much better of a market there would have been for OBJ earlier. I'm glad he is gone, and that is coming from a huge fan of his. Hell, 5 games in and Cleveland is rumored to be shopping him now.
I don't love Gettleman or Shurmer, but I do like Shurmer more than his predecessor and I like Gettleman better than the last 4 or 5 years we got from Reese. Thse guys inherited a roster devoid of talent. It wasn't just lack of depth. We had guys starting at some positions who would have had trouble making some other rosters at all. In two years they cleaned house, which is a good thing. They can be judged in another 1-2 years, as the roster takes more shape from their designs.
The bit about the bad FA signings/offseason moves was also directed @ Gettleman moreso than Reese - he's made his share of mistakes.
It's a combination; but I don't think there's much sense in combining regimes and then looking at this as a 7-8 year linear failure. Gettleman was tasked with first cleaning up a large mess left behind, then he had to essentially create a new foundation and build something entirely different from the bottom up.
He's not executing it flawlessly and there are clear errors along the way - mostly in the way of mistake signings and some questionable handling of our cap dollars - but to correct and repair what the state of the roster was following the 2017 season, this was always going to need at least a couple of years.
On one hand, the approach in free agency appears to be suboptimal. On the other, the drafting seems to be vastly improving and is actually now producing some promising young players who can and should be part of a turnaround.
That said, I still think there's a reasonably clear path towards getting this team back in contention. I don't think Gettleman has FUBAR'd this rebuild to a point that will require someone else coming in and doing it all over again. I think he just has to get this next phase correct and it's crucial that he does - otherwise we won't take the next step forward.
Shurmur also may be a better coordinator than coach. As a tactician, he leaves a bit to be desired. So, for him to be the right guy to move forward with, I also think we need to see some real signs the rest of the way. I suspect he's reasonably safe for next year, but if we really struggle down the stretch and look bad/lose a lot of games, he shouldn't be.
What phase is that, and what does "correct" mean? "Correct" can mean different things depending on the perspective. Gettleman is 68 years old and Shurmur might feel his seat getting warm..."correct" to them is whatever can be done to win in 2020. In that scenario, maybe we're paying Shaq Barrett and Jadeveon Clowney each like they're Khalil Mack.
They're not likely to be all that concerned with building anything sustainable following back to back 5 win seasons.
So let's say they spend money on big FAs with the goal of making a push in 2020...is that going to change the fact that Shurmur can't coach his way out of a paper bag? What happens when, after another lousy season in 2020, we have to hire a new head coach (and possibly new GM)? They're going to want to bring in their guys, which means they're going to do with Barrett and Clowney (or whomever the expensive 2020 FA bandaids are) what Gettleman already did with Vernon and Beckham. So that will mean more dead money in '21.
We have got to stop reacting to problems, and start actually building something sustainable. That ain't gonna happen with these two guys.
The bit about the bad FA signings/offseason moves was also directed @ Gettleman moreso than Reese - he's made his share of mistakes.
It's a combination; but I don't think there's much sense in combining regimes and then looking at this as a 7-8 year linear failure. Gettleman was tasked with first cleaning up a large mess left behind, then he had to essentially create a new foundation and build something entirely different from the bottom up.
He's not executing it flawlessly and there are clear errors along the way - mostly in the way of mistake signings and some questionable handling of our cap dollars - but to correct and repair what the state of the roster was following the 2017 season, this was always going to need at least a couple of years.
On one hand, the approach in free agency appears to be suboptimal. On the other, the drafting seems to be vastly improving and is actually now producing some promising young players who can and should be part of a turnaround.
That said, I still think there's a reasonably clear path towards getting this team back in contention. I don't think Gettleman has FUBAR'd this rebuild to a point that will require someone else coming in and doing it all over again. I think he just has to get this next phase correct and it's crucial that he does - otherwise we won't take the next step forward.
Shurmur also may be a better coordinator than coach. As a tactician, he leaves a bit to be desired. So, for him to be the right guy to move forward with, I also think we need to see some real signs the rest of the way. I suspect he's reasonably safe for next year, but if we really struggle down the stretch and look bad/lose a lot of games, he shouldn't be.
Good post arc.
I agree that DG hasn't completely FUBARed the rebuild, but some of his moves have slowed it down. He should get more time but he needs to get better as well. Half of what a GM does are the non-Draft moves.
I agree he will get another year, after that, he is either gone or on very thin ice if he doesn't show significant improvement.
If we've gotten to this point with a coach and/or GM, we should move on. We can't sit around hoping that these guys all of a sudden get better at their jobs for no reason.
Or is it more likely they both go?
Quote:
I think he just has to get this next phase correct and it's crucial that he does - otherwise we won't take the next step forward.
What phase is that, and what does "correct" mean? "Correct" can mean different things depending on the perspective. Gettleman is 68 years old and Shurmur might feel his seat getting warm..."correct" to them is whatever can be done to win in 2020. In that scenario, maybe we're paying Shaq Barrett and Jadeveon Clowney each like they're Khalil Mack.
They're not likely to be all that concerned with building anything sustainable following back to back 5 win seasons.
So let's say they spend money on big FAs with the goal of making a push in 2020...is that going to change the fact that Shurmur can't coach his way out of a paper bag? What happens when, after another lousy season in 2020, we have to hire a new head coach (and possibly new GM)? They're going to want to bring in their guys, which means they're going to do with Barrett and Clowney (or whomever the expensive 2020 FA bandaids are) what Gettleman already did with Vernon and Beckham. So that will mean more dead money in '21.
We have got to stop reacting to problems, and start actually building something sustainable. That ain't gonna happen with these two guys.
If Gettleman goes on a spending spree like Reese did in 2016, he should be fired on the spot. The Giants have a league average amount of cap space next year. They should be looking for younger vets who they can sign to reasonable contracts that don't mortgage the future. Anything else, you're right, it would be a sign of desperation.
Or is it more likely they both go?
I don't think he should, but I could live with Gettleman being around after Shurmur. Gettleman at least is good at identifying college talent.
Shurmur on the other hand is incompetent. If the Giants fired him today I'd be fine with it. He should absolutely not be back in 2020.
The next key point was to get the QB here.
Now we need to actually accumulate talent and build the rest of the team without mortgaging the entire future to do it.
To get that 'correct', I'd say Gettleman needs to do a better job with the cap dollars. We have to stop handing out deals that turn into dead money. Almost all of these recent contracts are becoming that. We have space clearing out. It'd be good if we could learn from some past mistakes.
Smart contract - Markus Golden
Stupid contract - Nate Solder
More of the former, less of the latter.
Another strong draft goes without saying, that's another key component. I like the two drafts so far for the most part, so I have a little more confidence in this area.
I will also continue to hammer home the importance of finding not one, but two OT's as soon as humanly possible. Replacements for Solder and Remmers are urgently needed before we wind up spending 3-5 more years with horrendous tackle play.
Continue to pour resources into the offensive line, address the pass rush. That's a simple blueprint that has this team winning 10 games in the near future.
The time to move on is before they make those big moves.
Quote:
I agree he will get another year, after that, he is either gone or on very thin ice if he doesn't show significant improvement.
If we've gotten to this point with a coach and/or GM, we should move on. We can't sit around hoping that these guys all of a sudden get better at their jobs for no reason.
Well DG is 68, its true that expecting significant improvement on his own would be foolish.
Managing a group of people is a bit of an art. You need to use people for their strengths ans supplement their weaknesses. Perhaps the Giants should put some others around DG when it comes to FA and review these moves. More of a committee approach.
I certainly don't want a GM who feels like he is on the hot seat and making desperation moves. Plus, I think its worse to go back and churn the roster all over again. The odds of competing for a SB in the next 5 years is greater just moving forward (with DG at least), than rebooting again. I am not a big fan of DG as you know, but we are on the clock now with the SB and DJ picks.
Plus, I am being realistic. There is 0 chance DG is fired this year. And unless he completely loses the team, PS isn't getting fired this year either.
Quote:
DG would survive a PS firing if it happened in the next year?
Or is it more likely they both go?
I don't think he should, but I could live with Gettleman being around after Shurmur. Gettleman at least is good at identifying college talent.
Shurmur on the other hand is incompetent. If the Giants fired him today I'd be fine with it. He should absolutely not be back in 2020.
I agree Shurmur's seat should be a lot warmer than DGs right now, and I wouldn't mind moving on from this coaching staff either. Moving on from DG would be more problematic.
Shurmur shouldn't get the same pass, though. If the coaching chops aren't there and he's not helping this team get better, we should be looking elsewhere.
Jimmy Googs : 1:25 pm : link : reply
- Reading this board makes it sound like Gettleman caused most of the issues and is making no good moves to fix the mess he was given.
- Gettleman is considered "backward thinking" and too tied to the organization.
- But around here - everyone else seems to be doing it right and the Giants aren't, including draft strategy and personnel moves.
- How many season does Gettleman get attributed to him that weren't his fault??
- The vitriol he takes he is way over the top in relation to the effort he's made to rebuild the roster.
- He's been disliked by some since Day 1 because of the way he was hired.
- He's mocked for a flippant comment about analytics
- And there are people here who whole heartedly believe Gettleman should be fired.
- Gettleman has been directly called incompetent and I don't think he's ever been called perfect.
You respond back that you didn't say "everybody" and I shouldn't intimate that.
Then I show you all the comments you posted intimating that very position on this thread alone.
Now you want me to agree that these opinions of yours are indeed the sentiments of an entire fan board?
Which is it man...do you think everybody hates DG or do you just hate everybody else that doesn't see it your way?
I never said everyone hates Gettleman which you seem to somehow think those quotes indicate (why, I have no fucking clue), but you have people here calling him incompetent regularly.
You really can't be denying that.
And you really shouldn't wonder why I've defended Gettleman. It is the same premise as with Eli or any other person that the board piles onto. It's mostly one-sided and somehow frowned upon to take the pro-Giants position.
That why the cute little "Gettlemanite" comment is made, while that same poster uses Jints Central with regularity. It is why when Gettleman took the job, one jackass referred to him as DSG repeatedly. It is why people are called the Eli Fan Club.
You seem to portray that you have a balanced and objective view - but you don't. It's just pessimistic which is the warped perspective of many here believing that is the only way to portray things.
It seems obvious now that the answer is both...
I think we are going to get killed, but it is the NFL after all and anything is possible!
I never said everyone hates Gettleman which you seem to somehow think those quotes indicate (why, I have no fucking clue), but you have people here calling him incompetent regularly.
You really can't be denying that.
And you really shouldn't wonder why I've defended Gettleman. It is the same premise as with Eli or any other person that the board piles onto. It's mostly one-sided and somehow frowned upon to take the pro-Giants position.
That why the cute little "Gettlemanite" comment is made, while that same poster uses Jints Central with regularity. It is why when Gettleman took the job, one jackass referred to him as DSG repeatedly. It is why people are called the Eli Fan Club.
You seem to portray that you have a balanced and objective view - but you don't. It's just pessimistic which is the warped perspective of many here believing that is the only way to portray things.
Oh wait, i’m in the “Eli Fan Club” and that’s without the Kool-Aid..
Quote:
Which is it man...do you think everybody hates DG or do you just hate everybody else that doesn't see it your way?
It seems obvious now that the answer is both...
Ironically - you keep trying to corner me into saying I'm talking about "everybody", but you consistently do the same thing. Trolling does make one hypocritical, though.
This is what we're reduced to...hoping the unlikely occurs.
That's what happens when organizational decisions are made based on hoping the unlikely occurs.
Quote:
Quote:
Which is it man...do you think everybody hates DG or do you just hate everybody else that doesn't see it your way?
It seems obvious now that the answer is both...
Ironically - you keep trying to corner me into saying I'm talking about "everybody", but you consistently do the same thing. Trolling does make one hypocritical, though.
FMiC, the problem you have is that you take things that people say, twist them into a different context, make them more extreme than they were intended. Then you attack that twisted more extreme position with vengeance, often foul language, and filled with hyperbole.
Look at arc, he can see that there are valid criticisms of DG, PS and ownership. He may have a more forgiving perspective than some others, but he sees and generally agrees with the criticism. A reaction that is 180 degrees different from yours.
What's more is that you will stake out a position, taking such a hard stance against anybody who disagrees with you in the slightest, and is it any wonder that people describe you position with words like "everyone spews vitriol", or "they say it all the time", etc... Then you will claim innocence because you didn't use a specific word, when the force of your assertions belies you true position.
You are doing it now with Googs, you did it with me regarding the referees, and you do it all the time.
It forces more polarization in discussions than there should be.
Googs twists my words to say "everyone" hates Gettleman. You twisted my words to say that I claimed the referees cost us the game.
So it is likely we both use the same tactic.
The only way to avoid not generalizing positions to apply them to the collective is to single people out. I'm sure that would go over well. There is no consensus on BBI other than Ereck Flowers sucking
Googs twists my words to say "everyone" hates Gettleman. You twisted my words to say that I claimed the referees cost us the game.
So it is likely we both use the same tactic.
The only way to avoid not generalizing positions to apply them to the collective is to single people out. I'm sure that would go over well. There is no consensus on BBI other than Ereck Flowers sucking
Let me put it this way...
You fight with a lot of posters... Alot...
I can speak for myself, I don't interact with other posters the way I interact with you, and you certainly initiated it.
From what I see, it seems to be the same for Googs, and a number of other posters with whom you regularly fight.
You reap what you sow.
Quote:
Quote:
Which is it man...do you think everybody hates DG or do you just hate everybody else that doesn't see it your way?
It seems obvious now that the answer is both...
Ironically - you keep trying to corner me into saying I'm talking about "everybody", but you consistently do the same thing. Trolling does make one hypocritical, though.
Childish reply. So let me respond in kind...
I know you are but what am I?
The only way to avoid not generalizing positions to apply them to the collective is to single people out. I'm sure that would go over well.
No, there is another way...just don’t do it