You are still a wanker. I made that statement as a direct response to your implication that I had a low IQ, due to a typo. You might very well have a higher IQ. I never even called your intelligence into question.MrTwo94 wrote: Hey, if we're getting our final shots in then I'm going to point out that my IQ is above 140 (just now rushed through an online test to confirm that substance abuse has not done too much damage since the last one) . . . .
You are full of it. You are also fond of ignoring arguments that are inconvenient for you. Furthermore, each quote consisted of at least two complete sentences in their original order, and were completely unmodified. I wasn't "improperly conveying" what you were saying, I was quoting what you actually said. Now you are trying to backpeddle out of it.MrTwo94 wrote:I would move on to you arguments but none are really noteworthy. You've tried emphasizing parts of my sentences to improperly convey what I was saying. That was smooth.
The only words I have put in your mouth are your own. Your bet isn't an even-odds bet. 99.9% of the people here have four other backs higher than him. And 90+% expect his numbers to drop slightly from last year. That means that the chances of him putting up top 5 numbers again are unlikely (certainly less than 50%). If 1 other back breaks out, or if he even misses a few games to injury, (both of which are likely to happen) he won't make top 5. It makes even less sense for me to take your bet, since I have NEVER said that he was in my top 5.MrTwo94 wrote:And stop your incessant whining that I won't take your ridiculous bet. 99.9% of the people here predict Tiki to finish in the top 10. [etc.]. . . . So stop trying to put words in my mouth and change my bet. You take the even odds bet or wuss out.
MrTwo94 wrote:And for most of this time, he hasn't even been debating the important issue (that Tiki is overrated). He seems to just be arguing the side of the issue that everyone else agrees with just for the sake of hearing people agree with him.
I have agreed numerous times that Tiki was overrated. For example . . .
So if Tiki IS the consensus top 5 back, then I have been disagreeing with everybody this whole time.ampant wrote:. . . , you are probably correct that Tiki's value will drop this year, but it won't diminish nearly as low as you describe. I'm not sold on him being the #5 consensus back. I think he's still probably in the top 10 though.
What I HAVE been debating your ludicrous assertion that Tiki was not a 1st rounder. You are the one twisting words. The betting terms I offered were based upon the statements that you and I were making, not on what anybody else said. And It wasn't until after I called you out on your blatant exaggerations that you actually started to justify your opinions and tone down your rhetoric.
My primary goal was to force you to admit that Tiki will probably finish in the top 10. I have succeeded in that goal.
Some more food for thought . . .
Over the past two seasons, Tiki has put rushed for 3378 yards, with an average of almost 5 ypc (4.97), and 22 TDs. Add to that the 1108 receiving yards and 4 TDs, with an average of 10.45 ypc.
So over the past two years, that is an average of 2243 total yards and 13 TDs per year. Couple that with the fact that he is healthy, has a good work ethic, a blooming offense with all of the same key position players, and no off-field problems.
If you don't think that is worth a 1st round pick, then you are being disingenuous. I have no problem with concept gambling on another player with more perceived upside. But I think everybody here will agree that taking a back in the 1st round who is one of the safest bets to finish in the top 10 isn't a chump maneuver.