Brandon Lloyd is not a bust!

you know what dick
your just to fu--king stupid to understand my points

Heck of a rebuttal. :Smoker:

Come up with something better. If you have nothing to add I'll lock down this ridiculous thread

you know what dick
your just to fu--king stupid to understand my points

what points? you have no points. it's not my fault you made a stupid thread and and took a position you can't defend.

guess what? lloyd is a bust, BECAUSE I SAID SO. that's the only point you've made, and it's pretty obvious why it's bullsh**. you can't debate on opinions, cause it's an instant stalemate, and you've provided no proof at all.

and it's nice that you're frustrated because and can't come up with a better response, but i assure you, if anyone in this thread is stupid, it's definitely not me.

i don't see lloyd there either. wtf is your point? those are the top 5 in yardage, not ypc, which is what you kept quoting.

and again, you're arguing opinions against facts, stats, and first hand accounts. a "because i said so" argument isn't going to change anyone's mind.

lloyd is a game breaker? since when and what do you have to smoke to think that? when has he ever broken a game? on those loser 49er teams? or how about on that great 5-11 skins team we suffered through last year?

I mean, come on. your arguments don't even make sense, and they run counter to actual facts.

bledsoe and TO? last year they were on pace for 1150 yards and 15 TDs before he got benched. and even with all the problems the raider's horrific offense had, randy moss still had a lot more production (200 more yards in 4 less games) than lloyd.

chad johnson is the best receiver in the league. he averages less yards per catch than Brandon Lloyd
how hard is that to understand.

I never claimed he had the highest yards per catch
I said his YPC is in line with the best receivers in the league
like chad johnson.

Sorry that is to hard for you to understand.

I have no clue where this thread is going. My own two cents Brandon Lloyd was a huge disappointment in 2006, especially after we gave up so much for him and he seemed to endear himself to fans with his cool blog in the summer. Furthermore, as BSB pointed out earlier in this thread we have seen what he's capable of so it even furthers the extent to which most fans should rightfully be disappointed in his performance.

However, by that same token and because he will be working (I hope) all offseason with Jason Campbell I will give him the benefit of the doubt that he can bounce back with a strong 2007

what points? you have no points. it's not my fault you made a stupid thread and and took a position you can't defend.

guess what? lloyd is a bust, BECAUSE I SAID SO. that's the only point you've made, and it's pretty obvious why it's bullsh**. you can't debate on opinions, cause it's an instant stalemate, and you've provided no proof at all.

and it's nice that you're frustrated because and can't come up with a better response, but i assure you, if anyone in this thread is stupid, it's definitely not me.

I'm frustrated because I apologized about me attacking you, and tried to be civil . But you continue to attacking the way I portray my points.

Just stick to the points and quit attacking me .

to me you sound like a know it all

I have no clue where this thread is going. My own two cents Brandon Lloyd was a huge disappointment in 2006, especially after we gave up so much for him and he seemed to endear himself to fans with his cool blog in the summer. Furthermore, as BSB pointed out earlier in this thread we have seen what he's capable of so it even furthers the extent to which most fans should rightfully be disappointed in his performance.

However, by that same token and because he will be working (I hope) all offseason with Jason Campbell I will give him the benefit of the doubt that he can bounce back with a strong 2007

I agree ,the redskins in a whole were disappointing
but they show promise in 2007.

*worst stats for any starting WR in the super bowl era - response

Ike Hilliard Tampa's # 2
2006 16 games 339 yds 10 ypc

Billy McMullen Vikings #2

2006 16 games 307 yds 13.3 ypc

Troy Brown
16 games 384yds 8.9 ypc

Brandan Jones
16 games 384 yds 14.2 yds per catch

Peerless price Buffalo bills #2
16 games 402 yds 8.2 yds per catch


Lloyd had only 15 games with 365 yds 15.9 yds per catch

These are just 2006 stats not since the super bowl era

math.
peerless price - 402 > 365.
troy brown 384 > 365 (and in only 9 starts).
brandon jones 384 > 365 (only 10 starts)

ike hillard was NOT the bucs #2, he had 0 starts.
clayton was the #2, but he got hurt after putting up 356yards in 9 starts (12 games) while on pace for 480 yards.

vikings - mcmullen had 0 starts. their starters were travis taylor (651 yards) and troy williamson (14 games, 455 yards) both of which beat lloyd.

you're going to have to keep looking.

chad johnson is the best receiver in the league. he averages less yards per catch than Brandon Lloyd
how hard is that to understand.

I never claimed he had the highest yards per catch
I said his YPC is in line with the best receivers in the league
like chad johnson.

Sorry that is to hard for you to understand.

and what exactly does that prove? there's 100+ WRs with crappy numbers and 15.9+ypc. i have no idea why that should mean anything at all. please enlighten me, why does it matter that a crappy WR with 350yards on the year happens to have 15.9ypc? there's guys with 700 yards and 22ypc and there are guys with 200 yards with 18ypc. that seems like a totally random and meaningless point.

so, again, why does it matter and why is it good that he has the same ypc as chad johnson when he only has 25% of the yardage, and why would it also NOT matter that other WRs with various amounts of yardage (lesser and greater) have a higher ypc?

its hard to understand cause you seem to think this is somehow important and never explain why it's significant. if he had 50 more catches, there's no guarantee at all it wouldn't drop to 8 or 9ypc.

I'm frustrated because I apologized about me attacking you, and tried to be civil . But you continue to attacking the way I portray my points.

Just stick to the points and quit attacking me .

to me you sound like a know it all

yeah okay, you continue calling me names and you're the one being civil :P

I'm sorry you can't take criticism and seem to be confused and think that by asking if you can back up your claims with something other than opinion that you consider it as a personal attack.

see, if you're allowed to respond to my posts, i'm allowed to respond to yours. but you're the only one that's made personal attacks and can't "stick to the points" as you say.

oh yeah, apologizing then turning around and calling me a dick and ****ing stupid in no way qualify as being civil. just fyi.

math.
peerless price - 402 > 365.
troy brown 384 > 365 (and in only 9 starts).
brandon jones 384 > 365 (only 10 starts)

ike hillard was NOT the bucs #2, he had 0 starts.
clayton was the #2, but he got hurt after putting up 356yards in 9 starts (12 games) while on pace for 480 yards.


vikings - mcmullen had 0 starts. their starters were travis taylor (651 yards) and troy williamson (14 games, 455 yards) both of which beat lloyd.
[COLOR="Red"]

you're going to have to keep looking.

All of the above receivers are listed as #2 on there teams rosters
they all played in 16 games each

Lloyd had only 12 starts but played in 15 games