Thomas Brown for Head Coach

[TheEarlofRobin]

The premise of the thread was simple. If and only if Caleb played well for the 8 games Brown would be his HC then the Bears may make him HC.

That is incorrect, because after Game #4/SF/1st half 4 yards, you claimed the Brown was still a 'viable candidate' to be the next Bears HC.

 

[1COBearsfan]

This is CCS. People dont read with a goal of rational discourse. They prefer to **** and twist arguments around to fill whatever void in their lives exists because of the Bears sucking.

The premise of the thread was simple. If and only if Caleb played well for the 8 games Brown would be his HC then the Bears may make him HC.

Caleb played well enough IMO the first 3 games but ever since the Bears caved to the mob and idiot players he has struggled more. Exactly why I said they should have left Flus alone and let Brown focus on Caleb. There was no point in risking the Collapse that is now evident for all to see and have Brown distracted from developing Caleb because he now had to coach the whole team.

BuT aLmOsT iNtErCePtIoNs!

 

[1COBearsfan]

That is incorrect, because after Game #4/SF/1st half 4 yards, you claimed the Brown was still a 'viable candidate' to be the next Bears HC.

That is an opinion of a fan watching the games. For all any of us know Brown could still be at the top of some upper management wish list

 

[TheEarlofRobin]

That is an opinion of a fan watching the games. For all any of us know Brown could still be at the top of some upper management wish list

That is irrelevant. If the premise of the thread is "If and only if Caleb played well for the 8 games Brown would be his HC then the Bears may make him HC", then logically if Game #4 of 8 is a turd, then Brown hasn't met the criteria of "Caleb played well for the 8 games".

 

[1COBearsfan]

That is irrelevant. If the premise of the thread is "If and only if Caleb played well for the 8 games Brown would be his HC then the Bears may make him HC", then logically if Game #4 of 8 is a turd, then Brown hasn't met the criteria of "Caleb played well for the 8 games".

You guys and your battling opinions are fucking killing me. You have no idea what anyone in the front office of the team thinks, just like remy. These are opinions. And I’m not sure if you’ve noticed or not but remy is a tad hard-headed, just like most of the rest of the board

 

[joec231]

You guys and your battling opinions are fucking killing me. You have no idea what anyone in the front office of the team thinks, just like remy. These are opinions. And I’m not sure if you’ve noticed or not but remy is a tad hard-headed, just like most of the rest of the board

What are your opinions on screenshots though?

 

[dbldrew]

If you say you are posting screen shots and then admit you posted 0 screen shots then you are admiting you are lying.

PFF has 9 TWP under Waldron. I dont need to look for any screenshots to know you are lying. PFF is far more credible than you are liar.

If I said there was say 25 "almost INT" in the packers game and then said I posted all the screenshots of them, then posted 0 screenshots, then that would be a lie. the number of screenshots posted does not equal the number of what I said

If I said there is 0 "almost INT" and posted 0 screenshots.. thats not a lie.. those numbers match up perfectly. I understand that Math is not your strong suit but trust me the numbers match.

Also again TWP includes fumbles, something that this debate is not about. they also include actual INT as well. so CW has 5 actual INT and 4 fumbles.. thats your 9TWP so the "almost INT" is 0 like I said.. thanks for once again proving what I said was correct..

Now it is possible that I might of missed one, and PFF did as well, or maybe they found an "almost INT" and didnt count one of the fumbles perhaps?

But as I have asked you several times now, if you want to actually prove me wrong, your going to have to post the screenshots of what I might of missed.. good luck

 

[1COBearsfan]

What are your opinions on screenshots though?

 

[remydat]

That is incorrect, because after Game #4/SF/1st half 4 yards, you claimed the Brown was still a 'viable candidate' to be the next Bears HC.

I claimed it was 3 good games and 1 poor one. If he then had 4 more good games then that would have been 7 good games and 1 bad so yes that likely would keep him in the running. Math seems hard for you.

 

[remydat]

If I said there was say 25 "almost INT" in the packers game and then said I posted all the screenshots of them, then posted 0 screenshots, then that would be a lie. the number of screenshots posted does not equal the number of what I said

If I said there is 0 "almost INT" and posted 0 screenshots.. thats not a lie.. those numbers match up perfectly. I understand that Math is not your strong suit but trust me the numbers match.

Also again TWP includes fumbles, something that this debate is not about. they also include actual INT as well. so CW has 5 actual INT and 4 fumbles.. thats your 9TWP so the "almost INT" is 0 like I said.. thanks for once again proving what I said was correct..

Now it is possible that I might of missed one, and PFF did as well, or maybe they found an "almost INT" and didnt count one of the fumbles perhaps?

But as I have asked you several times now, if you want to actually prove me wrong, your going to have to post the screenshots of what I might of missed.. good luck

It is a lie to say you will post screenshots and then post 0 screen shots. It is also a lie to acknowledge there were 9 TWPs under Waldron and now claim 0 almost ints under Waldron.

You already conceded that not all fumbles are TWPs and I already produced the evidence that the Kramer fumble and the strip sack is not a TWP so no you cant substract all 4 fumbles. You already admitted you were wrong on that.

You are a liar and a very bad one at that.

 

[TheEarlofRobin]

I claimed it was 3 good games and 1 poor one. If he then had 4 more good games then that would have been 7 good games and 1 bad so yes that likely would keep him in the running. Math seems hard for you.

So when you said "If and only if Caleb played well for the 8 games Brown would be his HC then the Bears may make him HC", you meant 7 good games and 1 bad game. Thanks for the clarification.

 

[remydat]

So when you said "If and only if Caleb played well for the 8 games Brown would be his HC then the Bears may make him HC", you meant 7 good games and 1 bad game. Thanks for the clarification.

I was paraphrasing the OP.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1743048617751904550

Let's say Caleb looks good to close out the season and Brown's play calling looks legit.

Would be the most Bears move ever for Bears to fire Flus and just make Brown Head Coach for the sake of continuity and Caleb having a 2nd year in the offense.

The original comment said if he looks good to close out the season. So 7 good games and 1 bad game would qualify.

 

[dbldrew]

It is a lie to say you will post screenshots and then post 0 screen shots. It is also a lie to acknowledge there were 9 TWPs under Waldron and now claim 0 almost ints under Waldron.

You already conceded that not all fumbles are TWPs and I already produced the evidence that the Kramer fumble and the strip sack is not a TWP so no you cant substract all 4 fumbles. You already admitted you were wrong on that.

You are a liar and a very bad one at that.

its not lie to say I will post screenshots of all the "almost INT" and then post 0 when I found 0.. you seriously must be ret@rded

here will this help? here is all the screenshots of all the "almostINT" I found from the Waldron games..


you can see from the screenshot above this is a great example of a "almostINT" that never happened



this is a great example of another one that never happened but its GOLD!



now I know you are probably thinking that this example might be of a been a fumble that never happened.. and you would be correct not only is this NOT a "almost INT" this is also NOT a "fumble" good JOB REMY you are learning



the above cound be confused as an example of you, and thats true, but it also a great example of the "almost INT" that never happened as well

does the visual aids help that simple mind of your understand?

Now lets do the math whats 4 x 0 = ? if you said 347 then good job Remy.. now go get your snack and get ready for bed.

 

[dbldrew]

You already conceded that not all fumbles are TWPs and I already produced the evidence that the Kramer fumble and the strip sack is not a TWP so no you cant substract all 4 fumbles. You already admitted you were wrong on that.

Remy you are getting confused again, this is not a debate on Fumbles, stats that include fumbles would be a pretty stupid stat to bring up about passing.. how was your snack?

Have a good night, hope you have sweet dreams of your JV college career, or you big game hunting. Dream BIG Remy!

 

[remydat]

Screenshots are visual data that everyone can then see. And I did all the games from Waldron as well and posted all the "almost INT" screenshots from those games as well.

You did not make a future statement. This is past tense. You claimed you had already posted screenshots of almost Ints. So again you lied. I repeat you posted 0 almost int so you lied.

You are lying now about 0 as well. We already agreed he has 9 TWP under Waldron. We are agreed you were wrong and not all fumbles are TWP. I also showed you 2 of the fumbles that clearly are not TWP and the other 2 fumbles are unknown. So at a minimum you should have found 2 almost inst (9 TWP - 5 ints - 2 unknown fumbles if we assume they are in the 9).

So the fact you claim 0 just proves you are an idiot and your judgment is flawed.

 

[dbldrew]

You did not make a future statement. This is past tense. You claimed you had already posted screenshots of almost Ints. So again you lied. I repeat you posted 0 almost int so you lied.

You are lying now about 0 as well. We already agreed he has 9 TWP under Waldron. We are agreed you were wrong and not all fumbles are TWP. I also showed you 2 of the fumbles that clearly are not TWP and the other 2 fumbles are unknown. So at a minimum you should have found 2 almost inst (9 TWP - 5 ints - 2 unknown fumbles if we assume they are in the 9).

So the fact you claim 0 just proves you are an idiot and your judgment is flawed.

Correct I went through all the games and posted the ones I found.. this is another past statement on what I did in the past. I posted all the "almost INT" I could find..

Now go count them and tell me how many I posted

 

[dbldrew]

We agreed he has 9 TWP under Waldron. We are agreed you were wrong and not all fumbles are TWP. I also showed you 2 of the fumbles that clearly are not TWP and the other 2 fumbles are unknown. So at a minimum you should have found 2 almost inst

So you think I might of missed 2? It's possible I have asked you to double check and post screenshots.. so find them and post them.

EDIT if you are correct then 7 passing TWP = 2.3% (294 passing attempts) and that skyrocketed up almost 50% more under Brown with 3.4%

So thats 40 pages of vortex all to prove that I was correct all along? well done Remy well done..

Now you have no choice but to find your own screenshots to try and increase the number under the waldron games or accept that you where wrong! good luck

 

[TheEarlofRobin]

I need another viability update on Thomas Brown becoming the next Bears HC or OC. Enthralling offensive action in the Lions game thus far.

 

[1COBearsfan]

I need another viability update on Thomas Brown becoming the next Bears HC or OC. Enthralling offensive action in the Lions game thus far.

You’ll have to track down someone from upper management but I’d wager they’re busy right now

 

[cameronkrazie86]

Another fast start!