There are 561 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Battle vs. Zeigler - Finish The Fight!

Battle vs. Zeigler - Finish The Fight!

Originally posted by oldman9er:
Even though I agree with your stance on Battle, MD? You are still coming off as an egotistical fellow. As was pretty much alluded to, you are really no more important on here than anyone, including myself. I say this not to "attack" you at all. As I said, I agree with your point of view on this topic. However, even you can read back and see that your post drips of unwarranted arrogance. ... and then you may very well get the appreciation you clearly seek.

I only come down on those who follow around attacking me. If you can point out an instance where you feel I have stepped on someone else's shoes, who was not attacking me, I'd be happy to apologize.

So, if someone wants to join in with the punk who follows me around the board, attempting to pick a fight, they are fair game as well. "PWNED!!!" Argh! I are a funnnee guiy!

The bottom line is that the drumbeat to kick Battle off this team for three years running now by many on the board is really, really old. It is the same old, old recycled thread. We spent all of the offseason in 2006 and 2007 and 2008 arguing about how Battle should be removed from this team.

The clock is ticking for the next anti-Battle thread. Somebody rally and post a new one soon.

Cheers.

[ Edited by MadDog49er on May 15, 2009 at 6:11 PM ]
Originally posted by MadDog49er:
Originally posted by oldman9er:
Even though I agree with your stance on Battle, MD? You are still coming off as an egotistical fellow. As was pretty much alluded to, you are really no more important on here than anyone, including myself. I say this not to "attack" you at all. As I said, I agree with your point of view on this topic. However, even you can read back and see that your post drips of unwarranted arrogance. ... and then you may very well get the appreciation you clearly seek.

I only come down on those who follow around attacking me. If you can point out an instance where you feel I have stepped on someone else's shoes, who was not attacking me, I'd be happy to apologize.

Well, I admit, I don't go around following and reading every post on here. All the same, what do you imagine it makes you look like when you speak of personal grudges? It just makes you seem bitter about past grievances. You have been around long enough to know that this never comes over in any positive light. And you do seek positive light... whether you admit that or not. What I am saying is that you show every bit of what it takes to get what you want... and that is to be regarded as a good poster, good fan, and someone worth reading from. So to achieve that, you may first have to work on a few things. Really sorry if this comes off as patronizing... it is not meant to, and I wouldn't waste my carpel on someone who didn't have flashes of being a very worthwhile poster.

Originally posted by MadDog49er:
Originally posted by NickSh49:
Originally posted by MadDog49er:
Wow! Away for one day, and my favorite "shadow" emerges to attack me.

These shadows love hiding out in the weeds until the moment I post, don't they? Maybe I should be flattered. Maybe I should thank these people for taking interest in my responses. I certainly don't hunt them down, when they post. I guess they feel inferior. So be it.

Once again, I know this is challenging to conceptualize for my "shadows",

Ahem.

MadDog, no one cares. You think you and your little rivalries on this board are important. They aren't.

Rather, some people just don't agree with you, and your expressed ire of "being in the know" is grating.

You're just another poster on a message board. Welcome. Take a number, and jump into the pit.


The problem is that no one cares what you think. So, they don't follow you around the board attempting to harrass you. If you emerge to be in that position someday, where people harrass you, you will understand.

LOL man. You don't get it still.

I have posters that I disagree with and have harassed me in the past. Billbonka & NinerFan818, though we get along better now. Back in the day, 49erJohnny used to harass me all the time, on my blog and on these boards. I've been there.

The problem is, you don't realize that a lot of the problem has to do with yourself. Perception is eventually reality man.
Originally posted by NickSh49:
Originally posted by MadDog49er:
Originally posted by NickSh49:
Originally posted by MadDog49er:
Wow! Away for one day, and my favorite "shadow" emerges to attack me.

These shadows love hiding out in the weeds until the moment I post, don't they? Maybe I should be flattered. Maybe I should thank these people for taking interest in my responses. I certainly don't hunt them down, when they post. I guess they feel inferior. So be it.

Once again, I know this is challenging to conceptualize for my "shadows",

Ahem.

MadDog, no one cares. You think you and your little rivalries on this board are important. They aren't.

Rather, some people just don't agree with you, and your expressed ire of "being in the know" is grating.

You're just another poster on a message board. Welcome. Take a number, and jump into the pit.


The problem is that no one cares what you think. So, they don't follow you around the board attempting to harrass you. If you emerge to be in that position someday, where people harrass you, you will understand.

LOL man. You don't get it still.

I have posters that I disagree with and have harassed me in the past. Billbonka & NinerFan818, though we get along better now. Back in the day, 49erJohnny used to harass me all the time, on my blog and on these boards. I've been there.

The problem is, you don't realize that a lot of the problem has to do with yourself. Perception is eventually reality man.

My problem is not with you, but the one guy who follows me around. This guy has a 65% warning on his record. I have a 0% warning.

I want to argue the issues on this board, not engage in a personality conflict.

I may come across as arrogant from time to time, but you have to admit, if you have honestly tracked my record on the board, I am almost always right on issues related to the team. I am unashamedly opinionated, and I also have no problem admitting when I am wrong. If anyone wants a list, I'd be happy to throw one down.

I may ruffle some feathers when I post, for certain individuals. I never intend to attack someone, but I will go after their argument, if it is weak.

I'd like to change the subject matter back to the topic, and have someone who disagrees with my premise, that "Hill is not an automatic to be above Battle on the depth chart" on these questions. They are legitimate:
1) Who was higher on the 2008 depth chart: Battle or Hill?
2) Who was more productive the first half of the season before Battle's injury?
3) Who is the professional who has a record of consistent play over the years, instead of potential, which may, or may not, be actualized?
4) If Hill was a lock to be a major contributor for this organization, and a lock to make the squad, why did the team go out and sign a free agent WR, draft a WR in the first round, and allow both Bruce and Battle to return (the leading receivers in the first and second half of the 2009 season)
5) Why is Hill not even discussed as one of the first four WR's on this roster? The discussion right now is: Bruce, Morgan, Jones, and Crabtree. The next tier of players discussed are Hill, Battle and Zeigler. So why would anyone assume that Hill is an automatic at this point?

P.S. Since I do admit to being sidetracked when attacked, and since you know what that feels like, feel free to yank me back in the right direction, on the topic at hand, and feel free to kick around the guy who likes to attack me.
[ Edited by MadDog49er on May 15, 2009 at 6:52 PM ]
Originally posted by MadDog49er:
Originally posted by oldman9er:
Even though I agree with your stance on Battle, MD? You are still coming off as an egotistical fellow. As was pretty much alluded to, you are really no more important on here than anyone, including myself. I say this not to "attack" you at all. As I said, I agree with your point of view on this topic. However, even you can read back and see that your post drips of unwarranted arrogance. ... and then you may very well get the appreciation you clearly seek.

I only come down on those who follow around attacking me. If you can point out an instance where you feel I have stepped on someone else's shoes, who was not attacking me, I'd be happy to apologize.

So, if someone wants to join in with the punk who follows me around the board, attempting to pick a fight, they are fair game as well. "PWNED!!!" Argh! I are a funnnee guiy!

The bottom line is that the drumbeat to kick Battle off this team for three years running now by many on the board is really, really old. It is the same old, old recycled thread. We spent all of the offseason in 2006 and 2007 and 2008 arguing about how Battle should be removed from this team.

The clock is ticking for the next anti-Battle thread. Somebody rally and post a new one soon.

Cheers.


Wow, can anyone be more full of themself? Following you around? What does that mean? Does it mean I only reply to your posts only? Or does that mean all 1000+ of my posts are directed at yours?

As I am writing this, I think I am starting to understand your frame of mind. Here is a paraphrase of your latest post:


"Stop being mean to me Kronik. You know that I truly wish to be known as the guru of this website and you're not helping my cause. Everytime you make me look stupid, I lose a few noobie fans on those board. That really hurts my feelings and my reputation as an angry dog."

"Who cares that Hill is young and is just getting his career started. In my opinion, only Battle deserves a right to develop. So what if Hill's first 2 years has been better than my favorite WR's first 2 years. Since Battle is older and has been with the team longer, he has seniority. So what if the cutthroat NFL cuts and trades away injury plagued players all the time, Arnaz Battle should be excempt. Why? Because I love him so much. It doesn't matter that he isn't getting any better year after year, I still yearn and dream about him as a 49er."


I think that about sums it up. After writing this out, I kinda feel sorry for you and since my replies to yours are so hurtful, I'll try to refrain from making you look silly again.

Oh yea, funny you brought up my warning level. It was at 0% until a certain someone attacked me unprovoked for creating a poll of which WR to keep, Battle vs. B Johnson. That certain someone literally CRIED and PLEADED the mods to ban and punish me. How dare I even bring up the possibility of releasing Arnaz Battle in a online forum.
Who is this crybaby you ask? MadDog aka angry chihuahua
[ Edited by kronik on May 16, 2009 at 12:35 AM ]
I think this could become a moot point...because there's a fairly high probability neither will make the 53-man roster. I like Battle as a player...but, his injury history isn't in his favor, nor are Bruce, Morgan, Hill, Crabtree, and Jones who're arguably ahead of him on the depth chart. Zeigler will likely end up on the PS again.
Originally posted by kronik:
Originally posted by MadDog49er:
Originally posted by oldman9er:
Even though I agree with your stance on Battle, MD? You are still coming off as an egotistical fellow. As was pretty much alluded to, you are really no more important on here than anyone, including myself. I say this not to "attack" you at all. As I said, I agree with your point of view on this topic. However, even you can read back and see that your post drips of unwarranted arrogance. ... and then you may very well get the appreciation you clearly seek.

I only come down on those who follow around attacking me. If you can point out an instance where you feel I have stepped on someone else's shoes, who was not attacking me, I'd be happy to apologize.

So, if someone wants to join in with the punk who follows me around the board, attempting to pick a fight, they are fair game as well. "PWNED!!!" Argh! I are a funnnee guiy!

The bottom line is that the drumbeat to kick Battle off this team for three years running now by many on the board is really, really old. It is the same old, old recycled thread. We spent all of the offseason in 2006 and 2007 and 2008 arguing about how Battle should be removed from this team.

The clock is ticking for the next anti-Battle thread. Somebody rally and post a new one soon.

Cheers.


Wow, can anyone be more full of themself? Following you around? What does that mean? Does it mean I only reply to your posts only? Or does that mean all 1000+ of my posts are directed at yours?

As I am writing this, I think I am starting to understand your frame of mind. Here is a paraphrase of your latest post:


"Stop being mean to me Kronik. You know that I truly wish to be known as the guru of this website and you're not helping my cause. Everytime you make me look stupid, I lose a few noobie fans on those board. That really hurts my feelings and my reputation as an angry dog."

"Who cares that Hill is young and is just getting his career started. In my opinion, only Battle deserves a right to develop. So what if Hill's first 2 years has been better than my favorite WR's first 2 years. Since Battle is older and has been with the team longer, he has seniority. So what if the cutthroat NFL cuts and trades away injury plagued players all the time, Arnaz Battle should be excempt. Why? Because I love him so much. It doesn't matter that he isn't getting any better year after year, I still yearn and dream about him as a 49er."


I think that about sums it up. After writing this out, I kinda feel sorry for you and since my replies to yours are so hurtful, I'll try to refrain from making you look silly again.

Oh yea, funny you brought up my warning level. It was at 0% until a certain someone attacked me unprovoked for creating a poll of which WR to keep, Battle vs. B Johnson. That certain someone literally CRIED and PLEADED the mods to ban and punish me. How dare I even bring up the possibility of releasing Arnaz Battle in a online forum.
Who is this crybaby you ask? MadDog aka angry chihuahua


Let's set the record straight for the board. The poll you set up on Battle vs. Johnson had a whole set of factually incorrect data, in order to put down Battle and elavate Johnson. It had three major errors (underlined below), including games played, dropped balls by Battle, and drops by Johnson.

Here was your original post on the Battle vs. Johnson argument:
Originally posted by kronik:
In the last few years, alot of posters have mad love for Arnaz Battle. Every year, they say things like "Battle is solid" , "the team keeps trying to get rid of him but he manages to stick"

This is my opinion , in the last few years, he has done nothing. Well, he did lead our team in drops the same year Darrell Jackson was here. Oh yeah, he has led the WR's core in missed games as well.

I am an open minded person, for the many Arnaz Battle supporters, please convince me why we should keep him and not resign Bryant Johnson. Johnson is bigger, younger faster and did NOT drop a single ball last year. Please explain this to me.

Peace out!


When I did the legwork, and debunked each one of these errors by showing you, and the board, the truthful information, documenting it for all to see, and then further blasted you for not owning up to your errors throughout the thread (you attempted to dodge them by making personal attacks), and refusing to own up to your bias (the "mad love" comment seemed to give it away), you were clearly embarrassed (you should have been more embarrassed by the comment that your were "open-minded"). Instead of owning up to your errors (including an additional one on fumbles by Battle....the fun never ends), which I stated is you responsibility as a poster, for shoddy, biased information, you began to attack me for the rest of that long and painful thread. You could not argue the points since I documented your errors for all to see. From that moment, you made it your mission to follow me around the board and attack my posts. It took more than 200 responses, and heaps of embarrassment, before you finally went back to the original post to alter it. Those are the facts. Anyone can find this thread through a simple search in the search bar.

In this current thread, the board may take note at post number 50, which is copied below. You clearly set out to instigate a problem with this unprovoked statement:
"Let's see your mindless unintelligent response to this one."

You first posted on this thread as the 4th post. I did not attack you, or even respond to any of your posts. You were the one who provoked this problem. You were the instigator. And, it is very clear to everyone on this board that you have become nothing more than a stalker, hence the same old, worn-out "angry chihuahua" comment that I see almost weekly. And that does nothing to improve the discourse. I am going to ask you politely to address the topic at hand, and not revert to name calling. None of this would have transpired if your number 50 post did not exist.

P.S. If you wish to have a civil discourse with me, then please address the questions I have listed on post 108. Otherwise, go bother someone else. Your actions in following me around and attacking me to provoke a response is old for everyone on the board, and only derails the topic at hand.
[ Edited by MadDog49er on May 16, 2009 at 6:04 AM ]
Interesting take on the WR Corps from Scout.com . . . Link

Quote:
Arnaz Battle was the team's top wide receiver and leader in receptions among wideouts in both 2006 and 2007. But he finds himself in a battle for playing time and a roster spot in the final year of his contract this year.

The 49ers added two receivers in the offseason. Veteran Brandon Jones signed a $15 million contract despite the fact he was never a full-time starter with the Tennessee Titans. Jones plays the slot, where Battle excels.

There are those with the 49ers who believe Battle is a better option than Jones, but because of Jones' contract, the club has to get him on the field. Also, the 49ers selected Michael Crabtree with the No. 10 overall pick in the draft.

The 49ers – who in recent seasons featured arguably the NFL’s worst receiver corps – now have a deep group of wide receivers. Veteran Isaac Bruce returns as the teams' leading pass-catcher from a year ago. Crabtree and promising Josh Morgan line up at split end.

The team also has Jones, Battle, Jason Hill and Dominique Zeigler, the latter two youngsters


Like the article suggests, I think Battle's roster slot is in doubt this year due to his relative contract status and age as opposed to his past performance. We know who the first four WR's will be. If we keep six WR's Battle probably sticks. If we keep five . . . do we jettison yet another third round WR pick in favor of Battle? I don't think so.
Originally posted by MadDog49er:
Originally posted by kronik:
Originally posted by MadDog49er:
Originally posted by oldman9er:
Even though I agree with your stance on Battle, MD? You are still coming off as an egotistical fellow. As was pretty much alluded to, you are really no more important on here than anyone, including myself. I say this not to "attack" you at all. As I said, I agree with your point of view on this topic. However, even you can read back and see that your post drips of unwarranted arrogance. ... and then you may very well get the appreciation you clearly seek.

I only come down on those who follow around attacking me. If you can point out an instance where you feel I have stepped on someone else's shoes, who was not attacking me, I'd be happy to apologize.

So, if someone wants to join in with the punk who follows me around the board, attempting to pick a fight, they are fair game as well. "PWNED!!!" Argh! I are a funnnee guiy!

The bottom line is that the drumbeat to kick Battle off this team for three years running now by many on the board is really, really old. It is the same old, old recycled thread. We spent all of the offseason in 2006 and 2007 and 2008 arguing about how Battle should be removed from this team.

The clock is ticking for the next anti-Battle thread. Somebody rally and post a new one soon.

Cheers.


Wow, can anyone be more full of themself? Following you around? What does that mean? Does it mean I only reply to your posts only? Or does that mean all 1000+ of my posts are directed at yours?

As I am writing this, I think I am starting to understand your frame of mind. Here is a paraphrase of your latest post:


"Stop being mean to me Kronik. You know that I truly wish to be known as the guru of this website and you're not helping my cause. Everytime you make me look stupid, I lose a few noobie fans on those board. That really hurts my feelings and my reputation as an angry dog."

"Who cares that Hill is young and is just getting his career started. In my opinion, only Battle deserves a right to develop. So what if Hill's first 2 years has been better than my favorite WR's first 2 years. Since Battle is older and has been with the team longer, he has seniority. So what if the cutthroat NFL cuts and trades away injury plagued players all the time, Arnaz Battle should be excempt. Why? Because I love him so much. It doesn't matter that he isn't getting any better year after year, I still yearn and dream about him as a 49er."


I think that about sums it up. After writing this out, I kinda feel sorry for you and since my replies to yours are so hurtful, I'll try to refrain from making you look silly again.

Oh yea, funny you brought up my warning level. It was at 0% until a certain someone attacked me unprovoked for creating a poll of which WR to keep, Battle vs. B Johnson. That certain someone literally CRIED and PLEADED the mods to ban and punish me. How dare I even bring up the possibility of releasing Arnaz Battle in a online forum.
Who is this crybaby you ask? MadDog aka angry chihuahua


Let's set the record straight for the board. The poll you set up on Battle vs. Johnson had a whole set of factually incorrect data, in order to put down Battle and elavate Johnson. It had three major errors (underlined below), including games played, dropped balls by Battle, and drops by Johnson.

Here was your original post on the Battle vs. Johnson argument:
Originally posted by kronik:
In the last few years, alot of posters have mad love for Arnaz Battle. Every year, they say things like "Battle is solid" , "the team keeps trying to get rid of him but he manages to stick"

This is my opinion , in the last few years, he has done nothing. Well, he did lead our team in drops the same year Darrell Jackson was here. Oh yeah, he has led the WR's core in missed games as well.

I am an open minded person, for the many Arnaz Battle supporters, please convince me why we should keep him and not resign Bryant Johnson. Johnson is bigger, younger faster and did NOT drop a single ball last year. Please explain this to me.

Peace out!


When I did the legwork, and debunked each one of these errors by showing you, and the board, the truthful information, documenting it for all to see, and then further blasted you for not owning up to your errors throughout the thread (you attempted to dodge them by making personal attacks), and refusing to own up to your bias (the "mad love" comment seemed to give it away), you were clearly embarrassed (you should have been more embarrassed by the comment that your were "open-minded"). Instead of owning up to your errors (including an additional one on fumbles by Battle....the fun never ends), which I stated is you responsibility as a poster, for shoddy, biased information, you began to attack me for the rest of that long and painful thread. You could not argue the points since I documented your errors for all to see. From that moment, you made it your mission to follow me around the board and attack my posts. It took more than 200 responses, and heaps of embarrassment, before you finally went back to the original post to alter it. Those are the facts. Anyone can find this thread through a simple search in the search bar.

In this current thread, the board may take note at post number 50, which is copied below. You clearly set out to instigate a problem with this unprovoked statement:
"Let's see your mindless unintelligent response to this one."

You first posted on this thread as the 4th post. I did not attack you, or even respond to any of your posts. You were the one who provoked this problem. You were the instigator. And, it is very clear to everyone on this board that you have become nothing more than a stalker, hence the same old, worn-out "angry chihuahua" comment that I see almost weekly. And that does nothing to improve the discourse. I am going to ask you politely to address the topic at hand, and not revert to name calling. None of this would have transpired if your number 50 post did not exist.

P.S. If you wish to have a civil discourse with me, then please address the questions I have listed on post 108. Otherwise, go bother someone else. Your actions in following me around and attacking me to provoke a response is old for everyone on the board, and only derails the topic at hand.

Funny how you conveniently left out the part where you begged the mods to ban me. I wonder why?

As for a civil debate, that is not a problem except you have yet to show yourself as open minded. I have been open minded in the past in regards to the facts that Battle is a good blocker. I have also agreed that Battle does not suck, just not very good. I have also agreed I made mistakes using Yahoo as my source of information and have corrected my errors.

Now how about you? You have yet to apologize for the unprovoked attacked and the unprovoked plea to the mods to ban me. You just said I instigated this problem and this argument would not have existed if I didn't attack you first in this thread. Well, this WHOLE problem would have never existed if you didn't cry to the mods to ban me unprovoked in the Battle vs Johnson poll. At that time, I had a 0% warning level. Since then, I have called you a few names to earn my position at 65%. None of this would have happened if you didn't act like a power hungry hall monitor in high school. So please don't act like you are an innocent bystander in this. I have always treated people with respect IF they treat me the same way. Obviously, you do not live by the same rules.

As for the Hill vs Battle argument. I can easily start over and debate civally. Yes, I acknowledge that Battle has done more. Hell, Hill has only been in the league for 2 years. Are you arguing that seniority should be the rule when constructing an NFL roster? Is Hill not entitled time to develop the same way Battle was given time when he was young?

As for Battle, you may be able to selectively pull a portion of Battle's career where he had a streak of games played. But if you were open minded enough to look at his career as a whole, you will see he has missed 25% of his games. You would also be open minded to the fact that he has missed more practice time, OTA's than any receiver on our roster. Can you also admit Battle's age and salary are NOT in his favor when competing against the younger WR's?
[ Edited by kronik on May 16, 2009 at 1:52 PM ]
Good. We are back on subject.
I'd like to respond to the issues you bring up:
"I acknowledge that Battle has done more. Hell, Hill has only been in the league for 2 years. Are you arguing that seniority should be the rule when constructing an NFL roster? Is Hill not entitled time to develop the same way Battle was given time when he was young?

As for Battle, you may be able to selectively pull a portion of Battle's career where he had a streak of games played. But if you were open minded enough to look at his career as a whole, you will see he has missed 25% of his games. You would also be open minded to the fact that he has missed more practice time, OTA's than any receiver on our roster. Can you also admit Battle's age and salary are NOT in his favor when competing against the younger WR's?"


I agree that Hill has every right to develop. However, as a third year player now, if another player beats him out of a spot, he is beat out of that spot. The Niners cannot continue to wait for Hill to actualize his potential if he is constantly surpassed on the depth chart.

The Niners had no problem dumping a previous third rounder, Brandon Williams, because he couldn't rise high enough on the depth chart. So, that tells me Hill is not automatically safe, as many assume. He has to beat out some guys. Otherwise, he will be the 6th WR, and either cut or relegated to the inactive list.

My contention throughout this thread is not that Battle will make the team. It is, that neither Zeigler, Battle, or Hill is automatically safe. One note: If Zeigler's last name was Brown, nobody would discuss him twice. He's a nice kid, but come on people. He's not in Battle's class.

As for the injured games, you continue to calculate Battle's non-participation in games from 5 years ago, early in his career, as a strike against him. The reality is that, although he misses practice time, he showed up and played for over 2 1/2 straight years without a missed game. So, his injury history from 5-6 years ago means nothing in 2009. I have continued to debunked the "Battle is always injured" tag, which is unfair. If so, he would not have played in, and been our leader in receptions for a period of 40+ games, stretching from 2006, 2007 and midway through 2008. His injuries in 2003 and 2004 have no relation to his production and depth chart status of 2009. You are very fixated on games missed from 5 years ago, but it is not a strong argument in 2009.

For some those on the board who continue to be skeptical about Battle: Here was a 6th round, converted WR, who became one of the better blocking WR's in the NFC, has been tremendously valuable for the team on the field and in the locker room, has been challenged every year with new guys who should have supplanted him as the leaders at WR: A. Bryant, D. Jackson, A. Lelie, B. Johnson. And yet, every year, he continues to beat out these guys. Why? He's a good player and very determined.

As a final note: Battle was the number 3 WR for the Niners in 2008, and yet still led the team in receptions through the first half of the season. I'm not quite sure why this fact is summarily dismissed as irrelevant by many in the argument.

Hill was a backup role player behind Battle. So, to automatically assume that Battle has gone south, become a bad player, or cannot come back from injury, or passed on the depth chart by Hill would be naive by any that doubt him.

He continues to prove doubters wrong, and until he does lose a step, or become injured to the point where he cannot beat out other players, I will never dismiss the guy as an afterthought. He's proven tons of people to be foolish in this regard over and over again.

P.S. Haven't we been down this road before with the previously listed group of WR's who were going to displace Battle, notably Team Lelie in Summer 2007 and 2008?
[ Edited by MadDog49er on May 16, 2009 at 4:03 PM ]
  • GORO
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 1,832
If Alex Smith is to win the job, then Arnaz Battle should make the team. They have chemistry already. Zeigler is a young talent that may never be develop now that Crabtree is on the team.
Battle has proven himself to be a solid player for the team year in and year ouy. What has Zeigler done?
Originally posted by MadDog49er:
Good. We are back on subject.
I'd like to respond to the issues you bring up:
"I acknowledge that Battle has done more. Hell, Hill has only been in the league for 2 years. Are you arguing that seniority should be the rule when constructing an NFL roster? Is Hill not entitled time to develop the same way Battle was given time when he was young?

As for Battle, you may be able to selectively pull a portion of Battle's career where he had a streak of games played. But if you were open minded enough to look at his career as a whole, you will see he has missed 25% of his games. You would also be open minded to the fact that he has missed more practice time, OTA's than any receiver on our roster. Can you also admit Battle's age and salary are NOT in his favor when competing against the younger WR's?"


I agree that Hill has every right to develop. However, as a third year player now, if another player beats him out of a spot, he is beat out of that spot. The Niners cannot continue to wait for Hill to actualize his potential if he is constantly surpassed on the depth chart.

The Niners had no problem dumping a previous third rounder, Brandon Williams, because he couldn't rise high enough on the depth chart. So, that tells me Hill is not automatically safe, as many assume. He has to beat out some guys. Otherwise, he will be the 6th WR, and either cut or relegated to the inactive list.

My contention throughout this thread is not that Battle will make the team. It is, that neither Zeigler, Battle, or Hill is automatically safe. One note: If Zeigler's last name was Brown, nobody would discuss him twice. He's a nice kid, but come on people. He's not in Battle's class.

As for the injured games, you continue to calculate Battle's non-participation in games from 5 years ago, early in his career, as a strike against him. The reality is that, although he misses practice time, he showed up and played for over 2 1/2 straight years without a missed game. So, his injury history from 5-6 years ago means nothing in 2009. I have continued to debunked the "Battle is always injured" tag, which is unfair. If so, he would not have played in, and been our leader in receptions for a period of 40+ games, stretching from 2006, 2007 and midway through 2008. His injuries in 2003 and 2004 have no relation to his production and depth chart status of 2009. You are very fixated on games missed from 5 years ago, but it is not a strong argument in 2009.

For some those on the board who continue to be skeptical about Battle: Here was a 6th round, converted WR, who became one of the better blocking WR's in the NFC, has been tremendously valuable for the team on the field and in the locker room, has been challenged every year with new guys who should have supplanted him as the leaders at WR: A. Bryant, D. Jackson, A. Lelie, B. Johnson. And yet, every year, he continues to beat out these guys. Why? He's a good player and very determined.

As a final note: Battle was the number 3 WR for the Niners in 2008, and yet still led the team in receptions through the first half of the season. I'm not quite sure why this fact is summarily dismissed as irrelevant by many in the argument.

Hill was a backup role player behind Battle. So, to automatically assume that Battle has gone south, become a bad player, or cannot come back from injury, or passed on the depth chart by Hill would be naive by any that doubt him.

He continues to prove doubters wrong, and until he does lose a step, or become injured to the point where he cannot beat out other players, I will never dismiss the guy as an afterthought. He's proven tons of people to be foolish in this regard over and over again.

P.S. Haven't we been down this road before with the previously listed group of WR's who were going to displace Battle, notably Team Lelie in Summer 2007 and 2008?

For you to continue to say Battle has beat out Antonio Bryant and Bryant Johnson is flat out wrong. You even acknowledged Battle was the #3 receiver last year before injury. How did he beat out Bryant Johnson. Explain that to me. Was it because he started when Bryant Johnson was sidelined with an injury?

How did he beat out Antonio Bryant. Bryant was clearly our #1 receiver and only left due to character issues. Just because he has stayed on this team longer does not mean he beat out those other players.

As for beating out Lelie, big deal. You weren't the only one that could see that (although I admit there were a handful of posters that seemed to think that way, I was not one of them). While Battle has beatened the odds throughout the years, you clearly do not see his lingering knee problems which he has had over the last few years. IT'S THE SAME KNEE PROBLEM that he has yet to comeback 100% from. It has to be continually drained of fluids and unfortunately for him, his knee will never be the same.

As for you continually bringing up the fact that Battle led our team in receptions in the 1st 9 games, was his numbers (24 receptions, 0 TD's over 9 games) so mind-boggling that it's impossible to be replaced? When Hill was given a chance, I see that Hill caught 30 receptions and 2 TD's also over 9 games:

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/players/8330/gamelog;_ylt=ArsIqOeQEW7iYIVdoNDOLrH.uLYF

Maybe this is why your "fact" is dismissed so often.

One thing we both might be agreeing on is I don't see Ziegler beating out Battle either. He is too skinny and just doesn't seem to offer anything different or special to our team. This is why I feel the 9ers will keep only 5 WR's and both Ziegler and Battle aren't within the 5. This may be a good thing for Battle, since I also agree he does not deserve to be a #5 or #6 receiver. By releasing him now, he may have an opportunity to catch on with another team as a #3 or #4. That is IF he can overcome his continuing knee issues.

The issue that I see with you (and other pro-Battle supporters) is you choose to ignore his negatives, which are age, continuing knee problems, and his salary is too high to be a 5th or 6th WR. I know we are only human but it seems you favor sentimental value over these negatives. Releasing or trading Battle is not a death sentence and is NOT disrespecting Battle in any way. Players that have been much more successful than him have been released or traded away before and it will continue whether we like it or not. But you are allowing your fandom of Battle blind you. It becomes a very touchy subject to you anytime a poster predicts he may finally be an ex-49er and you get angry and defensive about it. Am I wrong on this?

Let me ask you this hypothetical question. If I made a poll on Shawnte Spencer vs. Walt Harris and I made errors in a post about one of them, would you had exploded with anger, attacked my intelligence and integrity and cried to the mods to ban me? My guess is NO, because you don't care about either of these players the way you feel about Battle. Again, am I wrong on this?
[ Edited by kronik on May 16, 2009 at 9:31 PM ]
Originally posted by backontop:
Battle has proven himself to be a solid player for the team year in and year ouy. What has Zeigler done?

Since Crabtree hasn't done anything yet either, let's cut him too so that Battle can stay.
[ Edited by kronik on May 16, 2009 at 5:09 PM ]
It's strange why people keep mentioning Arnaz Battle's KNEE... when it was his FOOT that sidelined him later in the year.