Recent content by Oski

underwent arthroscopic surgery to repair the cartilage and “just clean up the ACL.” Doesn't sound like major reconstructive surgery to me which is what longtimefan is pissed I refuse to admit he had.

I've countered directly to your posts and have attempted to take it back to the original topics only to have you attempt to provoke me. I don't get it. Not only have I responded directly to you, but I've done so in great detail explaining my positions only for you to soley focus on parsing...

Once again. My original reply was to the comment he was injury prone. Why do I have to repeat myself over and over again? I tell you what. I'm taking a break from the board. Hopefully your anger will subside and we can start anew.

The original post that mentioned said surgery said they were worried he was injury prone. Which is why I mentioned it. Why the attitude? http://m.espn.go.com/ncf/story?storyId=1760494&src=desktop Doesn t sound like major "reconstruction" surgery to me, but I'm sure this will be another...

First off, I can't see how he played an entire season, let alone 3, at an elite level with a torn acl. Nor did he miss a single day of fall practice after the surgery, unlike what all of us think as acl surgery. And let's not forget that he never missed a single game in his entire cal...

How the hell was he undersized and raw? The whole negative story on rodgers was that he was coached up too much by tedford and had limited upside because a qb guru had already gotten ahold of him. As for the comment about his arm strength, the article you posted said the two things he...

ok you are done. I've already explained to you 50 times what I meant. And I have already responded to his comments that you posted multiple times. No one is more sick of arguing semantics than I. I'm rather sick of repeating myself. Obviously we aren't getting anywhere here.

I was talking about the article. Not what you posted.

That's a good point. that argues his scheme is good rather than him developing qbs. otherwise brooks and Flynn would be successful elsewhere. but obviously you could make the point that his scheme is making Rodgers look better than he would elsewhere. shrug

even worse. I agree with you about cassell. I already called him serviceable.

I'd say it's a pretty dumb argument to say we can't say he isn't good because he couldn't beat out aaron Rodgers despite the fact he couldn't beat out the likes of Terrell pryor. You know a guy who isn't even in the league anymore?

he was cut by the cardinals and raiders. Not exactly aaron Rodgers in front of him. Not sure why you find this so complicated to understand. There is a reason why he was available to be picked up by the packers in the first place and it's not because he's generally regarded as a capable...

Agreed. But he was cut by the seahawks (beaten out by a rookie. a great rookie, but still a rookie) and two other teams with terrible qbs. I don't think he's anywhere close to cassel. and to be clear, I don't think cassel is great. simply serviceable. but he's still earned the starting...

Sorry. Jeff Garcia is what I meant. As for mallet, do you think we could get a draft pick for Flynn? Flynn would be rated higher than matt cassell, alex smith, or colin kaepernick?

No. I'm not saying he sucks. I'm suggesting he's mediocre which frankly I'm shocked anyone here disagrees with me about. I'm suggesting if McCarthy was some sort of qb guru that he would have developed some other qbs other than Rodgers. Like the patriots with matt cassel and ryan mallett...