OL Trenton Brown, Future Hall Of Fame Right Tackle

I don't know about HOF....while he played well at times in SF, he's basically got one very good season that resulted in a SB ring in NE. So, for me it depends on what he does in Oakland before I'd even consider him for the HOF. He could surprise me, but I'm leaning toward him regressing from how he played in NE, surrounded by hungry, experienced vets led by Brady.

Originally posted by CorvaNinerFan:
I don't know about HOF....while he played well at times in SF, he's basically got one very good season that resulted in a SB ring in NE. So, for me it depends on what he does in Oakland before I'd even consider him for the HOF. He could surprise me, but I'm leaning toward him regressing from how he played in NE, surrounded by hungry, experienced vets led by Brady.

Not even close to HOF. He wasn't the best lineman on the Pats last year and was far from the best tackle in the league. If he goes to the HOF it will be witha paid admission.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:

-He beat out a retired, unmotivated, fat (your words not mine) AD. Awesome.
-Pats never had any intention of resigning him . If they did and valued him as much as you value him, he'd be locked up right now and getting ready to protect Brady.. But it's good to see the stuff they have their media guys leak out is working. They tried hard lol
-I didn't see anyone else breaking down the door for him, just the Raiders.
-the fact he's now on his 3rd team in 5 years tells me I'm not in the minority

OK, now you're just being stubborn.

that's the name of my game ...that and boredom

Amen to thay. That's why our wives love us so...haha.

Originally posted by CatchMaster80:

Originally posted by CorvaNinerFan:
I don't know about HOF....while he played well at times in SF, he's basically got one very good season that resulted in a SB ring in NE. So, for me it depends on what he does in Oakland before I'd even consider him for the HOF. He could surprise me, but I'm leaning toward him regressing from how he played in NE, surrounded by hungry, experienced vets led by Brady.

Not even close to HOF. He wasn't the best lineman on the Pats last year and was far from the best tackle in the league. If he goes to the HOF it will be witha paid admission.

He wasn't even the best offensive tackle on the Patriots last season. That distinction goes to Marcus Cannon.

He wasn't even the best offensive tackle in the league with a first name of Trenton. That distinction goes to Trenton (AKA Trent) Williams.

Trent Brown is the greatest Football player/T in the history of NFL. He will be first ballot HOF when his career ends 20 years and all will see his greatness Thunderous TrenTON Brown

Originally posted by oldninerdude:

Originally posted by Jeepzilla:

Originally posted by oldninerdude:

Originally posted by Jeepzilla:

Dude WTF has Garnett done?
This was a Garnett vs. Brown Convo with people throwing unwavering support to Garnett and bashing on Brown, and you keep jumping on that same ride.
And I've read both your posts and you've missed the point in both.

Then maybe you need to go back and reread a couple of the previous pages of posts.

NC started bashing Garnett for having his weight go up and down. "Yo-yoing." I just asked him where he got that impression, b/c I'd followed his weight LOSS and rehab, but never saw anything about him regaining weight.

I did question how a guy who once played so well in college that he won the Outland could be said to "still suck," rather than "now sucks." Meaning that he wasn't always so bad--and raising the question whether he can or will return to that level of play. Seems that YOU missed the point.
,
This is, and always has been the Trent Brown thread. Not the Garnett vs Brown thread. Try to keep up--or get your facts straight--before you jump in with asinine accusations.

Abe Lincoln once said: "Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt."

BTW I have represented Ridezilla guys in court, so your little "jeep" handle doesn't impress me much.

Lol
Take your own advice because you missed the point

"Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt."

You start with your post 6258 laughing at a comment someone made that Garnett sucks..
You didn't "raise the question why he sucks"
Nice how you changed your stance and make it personal..

WTF!
My "little"....
You trying to sound cool with that statement or jump off topic because your lost again
I'll go with the lost again

Go grab a cup of coffee before you MORE personal. You have Absolutely zero clue so enjoy your day.

Okay, I'll try to be more polite. so. . . sorry if I hurt your feelings.

Not trying to sound cool--I'm a bit past that stage. You think "zilla" is cool?? The name of one of the seven most dangerous prison/street gangs in California? Not so much. Perhaps you should consider a change of moniker.

As to my post #6258--you don't appear to understand. I was belittling the suggestion that Garnett "STILL sucks" meaning that he continues, as he has in the past, to play poorly. But he hasn't always played poorly (sucked), which is why he won a prestigious award as a Senior and was drafted in the First Round.

Which naturally raises the question, for anyone thinking about it, WHY does he suck now? And will he, or can he, ever return to his previous high quality of play?

Questioning his PRESENT quality of play, and CONTRASTING it with his previous level of play is a way of actually criticizing his play--and, to me, seems more meaningful than some juvenile name-calling.

Did I explain it better, now?

And thank-you, but I've already had my coffee. Perhaps some other time.

Originally posted by oldninerdude:

So in rereading this post I see better what you were trying to say.

So please excuse my confusion (I stand by my contention that relying just on stats can be misleading at times) and I'm happy to see that my belief that you are not a dishonest troll is justified.

100% understand. No biggie at all. And yes, I am definitely not a dishonest troll. But that did make me

To quote John Oliver:

Why is this (thread) still a thong?

Originally posted by HERN:

Originally posted by oldninerdude:

Originally posted by Jeepzilla:

Originally posted by oldninerdude:

Originally posted by Jeepzilla:
Dude WTF has Garnett done?
This was a Garnett vs. Brown Convo with people throwing unwavering support to Garnett and bashing on Brown, and you keep jumping on that same ride.
And I've read both your posts and you've missed the point in both.

Then maybe you need to go back and reread a couple of the previous pages of posts.

NC started bashing Garnett for having his weight go up and down. "Yo-yoing." I just asked him where he got that impression, b/c I'd followed his weight LOSS and rehab, but never saw anything about him regaining weight.

I did question how a guy who once played so well in college that he won the Outland could be said to "still suck," rather than "now sucks." Meaning that he wasn't always so bad--and raising the question whether he can or will return to that level of play. Seems that YOU missed the point.
,
This is, and always has been the Trent Brown thread. Not the Garnett vs Brown thread. Try to keep up--or get your facts straight--before you jump in with asinine accusations.

Abe Lincoln once said: "Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt."

BTW I have represented Ridezilla guys in court, so your little "jeep" handle doesn't impress me much.

Lol
Take your own advice because you missed the point

"Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt."

You start with your post 6258 laughing at a comment someone made that Garnett sucks..
You didn't "raise the question why he sucks"
Nice how you changed your stance and make it personal..

WTF!
My "little"....
You trying to sound cool with that statement or jump off topic because your lost again
I'll go with the lost again

Go grab a cup of coffee before you MORE personal. You have Absolutely zero clue so enjoy your day.

Okay, I'll try to be more polite. so. . . sorry if I hurt your feelings.

Not trying to sound cool--I'm a bit past that stage. You think "zilla" is cool?? The name of one of the seven most dangerous prison/street gangs in California? Not so much. Perhaps you should consider a change of moniker.

As to my post #6258--you don't appear to understand. I was belittling the suggestion that Garnett "STILL sucks" meaning that he continues, as he has in the past, to play poorly. But he hasn't always played poorly (sucked), which is why he won a prestigious award as a Senior and was drafted in the First Round.

Which naturally raises the question, for anyone thinking about it, WHY does he suck now? And will he, or can he, ever return to his previous high quality of play?

Questioning his PRESENT quality of play, and CONTRASTING it with his previous level of play is a way of actually criticizing his play--and, to me, seems more meaningful than some juvenile name-calling.

Did I explain it better, now?

And thank-you, but I've already had my coffee. Perhaps some other time.

Oldninerdude post #6280 in your response to NCommand wherein he used the now infamous "1900 snaps" referring to Trent Brown's good snaps and then you went into a long monologue on how it couldn't have been that many snaps…you TOTALLY MISSED and misunderstood the relevance of the "1900 snaps".

As you say, "numbers can be deceiving"…to which I will add, especially when YOU misunderstood them. Another of your statements, "thank you for posting, 1900 HIGH quality snaps, last season" . Obviously you completely misunderstood the overall snaps while Trent was here, were the snaps NC was referring to, yet you managed to take him to task for misstating the #...and it was done sarcastically, and your remarks were snide.

You continued with single mindedly denigrating how Brown played here, which you determined was not well… an opinion which was biased.
Again, "those who parrot your views" was snide. "Please don't let your support for Brown damage your credibility on the webzone" … a statement both insulting and sarcastic.

Later, "glad you read it . If you actually read my post, instead of counting words, you'd have a better grip of what was said." Again, this written by a guy, who totally misunderstood the issue (1900 snaps) that you were insulting NC with.

Your quote of Abe Lincoln, "better keeping silent and be thot a fool, than opening your mouth and remove all doubt" was perfect. You were describing yourself while sarcastically insulting others.

"Try to keep up or get your facts straight…before you jump in with asinine accusations" . Again, OND , you were meeting Mr. Lincoln's parameters perfectly, while attacking others.

Then later, "BTW, I have represented Ridezilla in court, so your little "Jeep" handle doesn't impress me much" . Well terrific and congrats, OND. I had always thot that "jeepzilla" meant a tough little jeep with Godzilla-like overpowering guts, speed and power. Until your post I had never heard of the notorious Ridezilla gang , nor of their criminality. Nor did I know you were an atty. Once again, these comments were sarcastic and personal where no personal animus was needed. They were about the poster, not the post.

Your snide comments seen regularly appear in your posts for anyone you disagree with.

English was spot on when he noted after your wrongly headed tirade (1900 snaps) that things were getting way too personal. I certainly agree with that.

In Post # 6291, NC laid out a Trent Brown history/summary that was truly spot on. Brown was a stud here and protected our QBs. Once gone, our QBs got mauled…and that is a fact. When we had a dearth of talent, especially on the OL, one of Kyle's main efforts was to get a "fat guy" who can't Zone Block off the team and and replace him with a new RT. A more reasonable approach would have been to keep Trent one more yr, sign McG(a terrific choice, BTW), and keep both guys on OL, one at RG for one more yr to help protect our QBs. Kyle could have easily worked around one player not able to Zone block and fit his scheme to the players he had. But nope, he wanted Trent gone, and consequently our QBs suffered from obscene # of hits and "beatdowns".

At Trent's new home, Brady remained virtually untouched. NCommand was just stating facts as they happened, even if they don't fit your opinion. Still, it is what happened and you like facts. How about 126 QB hits with TBrown gone.? That was just a hurried , emotional move by Kyle, getting rid of an OL blocker we desperately could have used last yr. Instead we lost one of the only two OLs we had who could pass protect. We didn't have to resign Trent in 2019, but we sure could have used him in 2018. Instead he went to PATS who did want him en route to their Super bowl win..

In post # 6298, you posted , "Then, did I explain it better now? Using emojis to counter sarcastic , snide remarks just doesn't cut it. Sarcastic is sarcastic. Adding an emoji or happy face basically is just a further insult.

Finally, in post #6303 you "got" what the rest of us understood some 3 pages before…you at last understood what the "1900 snaps" referred to . As they say, better late than never. Meantime you insulted NCommand, Jeep and others….and then added your reasons why TB got traded.

Well, Oldninerdude, remember Mr. Lincoln and his comment about "fool and his foot in mouth". The complaints about you come down to your overly sarcastic attitude and comments. If someone's post disagrees with yours, you sarcastically insult them, and then add an emoji.

This isn't adding a timeout nor penalty to you. It is merely a warning. More sarcasm, especially with emojis and you will get a warning and penalty. A suggestion would be "just be nice". You are a knowledgeable poster and have a lot to offer. How about trying without sarcasm. Just be pleasant, nice. No need to insult NCommand, Jeep, or anyone else.

This post was intended for anyone else who also uses sarcasm. It is unnecessary, and uncivil. This is an enjoyable website we all use for pleasure. Going forward, let's do so without sarcasm which is both personal and unwanted here. It was, however, directed at OND, and has been ongoing way before I was asked to be a moderator.

Disclaimer: I remain a huge Trent Brown fan, my favorite player while here, but now across the Bay where I still follow him. The trade with the PATS was great for Trent, but bad for our QBs. It was why I liked him so much…protected our Qbs. Like NCommand, I thot it foolish to get rid of him with a full yr left on his contract. Our Qbs would have suffered a lot fewer hits had he been here with Joe S, and McG. Also any runs requiring power or man blocking would have been extremely useful on 3rd downs and in RZ. Kyle could have schemed around Trent, but chose not to. Last yr we only had Joe S and McG for pass pro. We could have really used Trent. I would not have paid him for 2019 with the astounding contract he received. But one more yr of protecting our QBs? That would have been very welcome.

Originally posted by pasodoc9er:

Originally posted by HERN:

Originally posted by oldninerdude:

Originally posted by Jeepzilla:

Originally posted by oldninerdude:

Originally posted by Jeepzilla:
Dude WTF has Garnett done?
This was a Garnett vs. Brown Convo with people throwing unwavering support to Garnett and bashing on Brown, and you keep jumping on that same ride.
And I've read both your posts and you've missed the point in both.

Then maybe you need to go back and reread a couple of the previous pages of posts.

NC started bashing Garnett for having his weight go up and down. "Yo-yoing." I just asked him where he got that impression, b/c I'd followed his weight LOSS and rehab, but never saw anything about him regaining weight.

I did question how a guy who once played so well in college that he won the Outland could be said to "still suck," rather than "now sucks." Meaning that he wasn't always so bad--and raising the question whether he can or will return to that level of play. Seems that YOU missed the point.
,
This is, and always has been the Trent Brown thread. Not the Garnett vs Brown thread. Try to keep up--or get your facts straight--before you jump in with asinine accusations.

Abe Lincoln once said: "Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt."

BTW I have represented Ridezilla guys in court, so your little "jeep" handle doesn't impress me much.

Lol
Take your own advice because you missed the point

"Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt."

You start with your post 6258 laughing at a comment someone made that Garnett sucks..
You didn't "raise the question why he sucks"
Nice how you changed your stance and make it personal..

WTF!
My "little"....
You trying to sound cool with that statement or jump off topic because your lost again
I'll go with the lost again

Go grab a cup of coffee before you MORE personal. You have Absolutely zero clue so enjoy your day.

Okay, I'll try to be more polite. so. . . sorry if I hurt your feelings.

Not trying to sound cool--I'm a bit past that stage. You think "zilla" is cool?? The name of one of the seven most dangerous prison/street gangs in California? Not so much. Perhaps you should consider a change of moniker.

As to my post #6258--you don't appear to understand. I was belittling the suggestion that Garnett "STILL sucks" meaning that he continues, as he has in the past, to play poorly. But he hasn't always played poorly (sucked), which is why he won a prestigious award as a Senior and was drafted in the First Round.

Which naturally raises the question, for anyone thinking about it, WHY does he suck now? And will he, or can he, ever return to his previous high quality of play?

Questioning his PRESENT quality of play, and CONTRASTING it with his previous level of play is a way of actually criticizing his play--and, to me, seems more meaningful than some juvenile name-calling.

Did I explain it better, now?

And thank-you, but I've already had my coffee. Perhaps some other time.

Oldninerdude post #6280 in your response to NCommand wherein he used the now infamous "1900 snaps" referring to Trent Brown's good snaps and then you went into a long monologue on how it couldn't have been that many snaps…you TOTALLY MISSED and misunderstood the relevance of the "1900 snaps".

As you say, "numbers can be deceiving"…to which I will add, especially when YOU misunderstood them. Another of your statements, "thank you for posting, 1900 HIGH quality snaps, last season" . Obviously you completely misunderstood the overall snaps while Trent was here, were the snaps NC was referring to, yet you managed to take him to task for misstating the #...and it was done sarcastically, and your remarks were snide.

You continued with single mindedly denigrating how Brown played here, which you determined was not well… an opinion which was biased.
Again, "those who parrot your views" was snide. "Please don't let your support for Brown damage your credibility on the webzone" … a statement both insulting and sarcastic.

Later, "glad you read it . If you actually read my post, instead of counting words, you'd have a better grip of what was said." Again, this written by a guy, who totally misunderstood the issue (1900 snaps) that you were insulting NC with.

Your quote of Abe Lincoln, "better keeping silent and be thot a fool, than opening your mouth and remove all doubt" was perfect. You were describing yourself while sarcastically insulting others.

"Try to keep up or get your facts straight…before you jump in with asinine accusations" . Again, OND , you were meeting Mr. Lincoln's parameters perfectly, while attacking others.

Then later, "BTW, I have represented Ridezilla in court, so your little "Jeep" handle doesn't impress me much" . Well terrific and congrats, OND. I had always thot that "jeepzilla" meant a tough little jeep with Godzilla-like overpowering guts, speed and power. Until your post I had never heard of the notorious Ridezilla gang , nor of their criminality. Nor did I know you were an atty. Once again, these comments were sarcastic and personal where no personal animus was needed. They were about the poster, not the post.

Your snide comments seen regularly appear in your posts for anyone you disagree with.

English was spot on when he noted after your wrongly headed tirade (1900 snaps) that things were getting way too personal. I certainly agree with that.

In Post # 6291, NC laid out a Trent Brown history/summary that was truly spot on. Brown was a stud here and protected our QBs. Once gone, our QBs got mauled…and that is a fact. When we had a dearth of talent, especially on the OL, one of Kyle's main efforts was to get a "fat guy" who can't Zone Block off the team and and replace him with a new RT. A more reasonable approach would have been to keep Trent one more yr, sign McG(a terrific choice, BTW), and keep both guys on OL, one at RG for one more yr to help protect our QBs. Kyle could have easily worked around one player not able to Zone block and fit his scheme to the players he had. But nope, he wanted Trent gone, and consequently our QBs suffered from obscene # of hits and "beatdowns".

At Trent's new home, Brady remained virtually untouched. NCommand was just stating facts as they happened, even if they don't fit your opinion. Still, it is what happened and you like facts. How about 126 QB hits with TBrown gone.? That was just a hurried , emotional move by Kyle, getting rid of an OL blocker we desperately could have used last yr. Instead we lost one of the only two OLs we had who could pass protect. We didn't have to resign Trent in 2019, but we sure could have used him in 2018. Instead he went to PATS who did want him en route to their Super bowl win..

In post # 6298, you posted , "Then, did I explain it better now? Using emojis to counter sarcastic , snide remarks just doesn't cut it. Sarcastic is sarcastic. Adding an emoji or happy face basically is just a further insult.

Finally, in post #6303 you "got" what the rest of us understood some 3 pages before…you at last understood what the "1900 snaps" referred to . As they say, better late than never. Meantime you insulted NCommand, Jeep and others….and then added your reasons why TB got traded.

Well, Oldninerdude, remember Mr. Lincoln and his comment about "fool and his foot in mouth". The complaints about you come down to your overly sarcastic attitude and comments. If someone's post disagrees with yours, you sarcastically insult them, and then add an emoji.

This isn't adding a timeout nor penalty to you. It is merely a warning. More sarcasm, especially with emojis and you will get a warning and penalty. A suggestion would be "just be nice". You are a knowledgeable poster and have a lot to offer. How about trying without sarcasm. Just be pleasant, nice. No need to insult NCommand, Jeep, or anyone else.

This post was intended for anyone else who also uses sarcasm. It is unnecessary, and uncivil. This is an enjoyable website we all use for pleasure. Going forward, let's do so without sarcasm which is both personal and unwanted here. It was, however, directed at OND, and has been ongoing way before I was asked to be a moderator.

Disclaimer: I remain a huge Trent Brown fan, my favorite player while here, but now across the Bay where I still follow him. The trade with the PATS was great for Trent, but bad for our QBs. It was why I liked him so much…protected our Qbs. Like NCommand, I thot it foolish to get rid of him with a full yr left on his contract. Our Qbs would have suffered a lot fewer hits had he been here with Joe S, and McG. Also any runs requiring power or man blocking would have been extremely useful on 3rd downs and in RZ. Kyle could have schemed around Trent, but chose not to. Last yr we only had Joe S and McG for pass pro. We could have really used Trent. I would not have paid him for 2019 with the astounding contract he received. But one more yr of protecting our QBs? That would have been very welcome.

So your first act as a mod is to repost NC's and my ongoing discussion, side completely with him--cause he agrees with your assessment of Brown--and completely ignore that part of his original post which caused my confusion about what he said.

He didn't just say Brown gave "1,900 snaps." He said "1,900 HIGH QUALITY snaps."

Then he said that Brown cost "$1.6M" and "a 3rd round pick."

Well, the Niners never gave up a 3rd round pick for Brown, and no matter how many snaps he actually played for them, no one, even his most ardent supporters, could consider each and every snap he played for the Niners to be "high quality." Too many gaffes, too many missed assignments just in 2017.

His play for the Pats,on the other hand, especially in the playoffs and SB, could be considered relatively "high quality." So I mistook NC's meaning and took him to task- in my post--about his tendency to rely too much on stats at the cost of sometimes overlooking other issues and concerns that are not always measureable in stats.

My bad and I both admitted my mistake and apologized to NC.

So apparently that wasn't good enough for you and you chose to exercise your new-found powers as a mod to censure me publicly and give me a warning--the very first warning I have ever received in the more than a decade I've been a member here.

No sarcasm allowed. Is this the new standard? Will you be enforcing it uniformly and across the board. There are some--sus, chaz, val. and others--who should take note. Sometimes sarcasm is necessary--and humorous--and the only way to challenge a post without making a personal attack.

If poster "DebbieDowner posts: 'Twent Bwown cannot be a gweat Tackle. I have seen all 2,000 of his plays that he's played and NEVER seen him make a single tackle or even an assist. 0 for 2,000 proves, STATISTICALLY, that he's not a gweat, good, or even so-so Tackle.'"

So new poster Pnewbie responds: "Whatta dumbass post frum a stoopid poster. Did yer mother have any children that lived?" THAT'S a personal attack. But if he says, sarcastically, "Yeah, sure. Great post!" That's also NOT allowed because it uses "uncivil' sarcasm, and--gasp--AN EMOJI!--even though there's no personal attack, only a reference to her post.

This new standard of yours is gonna make the WZ a far less entertaining place, where only those who agree, politely, are welcome. Too bad.

Reminds me of what Ralph Waldo Emerson, the great American author, once said: "A petty consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds." Everyone better agree, politely, all the time about even petty issues, or the mods will have to intervene.

Originally posted by oldninerdude:

Originally posted by pasodoc9er:

Originally posted by HERN:

Originally posted by oldninerdude:

Originally posted by Jeepzilla:

Originally posted by oldninerdude:

Originally posted by Jeepzilla:

Dude WTF has Garnett done?
This was a Garnett vs. Brown Convo with people throwing unwavering support to Garnett and bashing on Brown, and you keep jumping on that same ride.
And I've read both your posts and you've missed the point in both.

Then maybe you need to go back and reread a couple of the previous pages of posts.

NC started bashing Garnett for having his weight go up and down. "Yo-yoing." I just asked him where he got that impression, b/c I'd followed his weight LOSS and rehab, but never saw anything about him regaining weight.

I did question how a guy who once played so well in college that he won the Outland could be said to "still suck," rather than "now sucks." Meaning that he wasn't always so bad--and raising the question whether he can or will return to that level of play. Seems that YOU missed the point.
,
This is, and always has been the Trent Brown thread. Not the Garnett vs Brown thread. Try to keep up--or get your facts straight--before you jump in with asinine accusations.

Abe Lincoln once said: "Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt."

BTW I have represented Ridezilla guys in court, so your little "jeep" handle doesn't impress me much.

Lol
Take your own advice because you missed the point

"Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt."

You start with your post 6258 laughing at a comment someone made that Garnett sucks..
You didn't "raise the question why he sucks"
Nice how you changed your stance and make it personal..

WTF!
My "little"....
You trying to sound cool with that statement or jump off topic because your lost again
I'll go with the lost again

Go grab a cup of coffee before you MORE personal. You have Absolutely zero clue so enjoy your day.

Okay, I'll try to be more polite. so. . . sorry if I hurt your feelings.

Not trying to sound cool--I'm a bit past that stage. You think "zilla" is cool?? The name of one of the seven most dangerous prison/street gangs in California? Not so much. Perhaps you should consider a change of moniker.

As to my post #6258--you don't appear to understand. I was belittling the suggestion that Garnett "STILL sucks" meaning that he continues, as he has in the past, to play poorly. But he hasn't always played poorly (sucked), which is why he won a prestigious award as a Senior and was drafted in the First Round.

Which naturally raises the question, for anyone thinking about it, WHY does he suck now? And will he, or can he, ever return to his previous high quality of play?

Questioning his PRESENT quality of play, and CONTRASTING it with his previous level of play is a way of actually criticizing his play--and, to me, seems more meaningful than some juvenile name-calling.

Did I explain it better, now?

And thank-you, but I've already had my coffee. Perhaps some other time.

Oldninerdude post #6280 in your response to NCommand wherein he used the now infamous "1900 snaps" referring to Trent Brown's good snaps and then you went into a long monologue on how it couldn't have been that many snaps…you TOTALLY MISSED and misunderstood the relevance of the "1900 snaps".

As you say, "numbers can be deceiving"…to which I will add, especially when YOU misunderstood them. Another of your statements, "thank you for posting, 1900 HIGH quality snaps, last season" . Obviously you completely misunderstood the overall snaps while Trent was here, were the snaps NC was referring to, yet you managed to take him to task for misstating the #...and it was done sarcastically, and your remarks were snide.

You continued with single mindedly denigrating how Brown played here, which you determined was not well… an opinion which was biased.
Again, "those who parrot your views" was snide. "Please don't let your support for Brown damage your credibility on the webzone" … a statement both insulting and sarcastic.

Later, "glad you read it . If you actually read my post, instead of counting words, you'd have a better grip of what was said." Again, this written by a guy, who totally misunderstood the issue (1900 snaps) that you were insulting NC with.

Your quote of Abe Lincoln, "better keeping silent and be thot a fool, than opening your mouth and remove all doubt" was perfect. You were describing yourself while sarcastically insulting others.

"Try to keep up or get your facts straight…before you jump in with asinine accusations" . Again, OND , you were meeting Mr. Lincoln's parameters perfectly, while attacking others.

Then later, "BTW, I have represented Ridezilla in court, so your little "Jeep" handle doesn't impress me much" . Well terrific and congrats, OND. I had always thot that "jeepzilla" meant a tough little jeep with Godzilla-like overpowering guts, speed and power. Until your post I had never heard of the notorious Ridezilla gang , nor of their criminality. Nor did I know you were an atty. Once again, these comments were sarcastic and personal where no personal animus was needed. They were about the poster, not the post.

Your snide comments seen regularly appear in your posts for anyone you disagree with.

English was spot on when he noted after your wrongly headed tirade (1900 snaps) that things were getting way too personal. I certainly agree with that.

In Post # 6291, NC laid out a Trent Brown history/summary that was truly spot on. Brown was a stud here and protected our QBs. Once gone, our QBs got mauled…and that is a fact. When we had a dearth of talent, especially on the OL, one of Kyle's main efforts was to get a "fat guy" who can't Zone Block off the team and and replace him with a new RT. A more reasonable approach would have been to keep Trent one more yr, sign McG(a terrific choice, BTW), and keep both guys on OL, one at RG for one more yr to help protect our QBs. Kyle could have easily worked around one player not able to Zone block and fit his scheme to the players he had. But nope, he wanted Trent gone, and consequently our QBs suffered from obscene # of hits and "beatdowns".

At Trent's new home, Brady remained virtually untouched. NCommand was just stating facts as they happened, even if they don't fit your opinion. Still, it is what happened and you like facts. How about 126 QB hits with TBrown gone.? That was just a hurried , emotional move by Kyle, getting rid of an OL blocker we desperately could have used last yr. Instead we lost one of the only two OLs we had who could pass protect. We didn't have to resign Trent in 2019, but we sure could have used him in 2018. Instead he went to PATS who did want him en route to their Super bowl win..

In post # 6298, you posted , "Then, did I explain it better now? Using emojis to counter sarcastic , snide remarks just doesn't cut it. Sarcastic is sarcastic. Adding an emoji or happy face basically is just a further insult.

Finally, in post #6303 you "got" what the rest of us understood some 3 pages before…you at last understood what the "1900 snaps" referred to . As they say, better late than never. Meantime you insulted NCommand, Jeep and others….and then added your reasons why TB got traded.

Well, Oldninerdude, remember Mr. Lincoln and his comment about "fool and his foot in mouth". The complaints about you come down to your overly sarcastic attitude and comments. If someone's post disagrees with yours, you sarcastically insult them, and then add an emoji.

This isn't adding a timeout nor penalty to you. It is merely a warning. More sarcasm, especially with emojis and you will get a warning and penalty. A suggestion would be "just be nice". You are a knowledgeable poster and have a lot to offer. How about trying without sarcasm. Just be pleasant, nice. No need to insult NCommand, Jeep, or anyone else.

This post was intended for anyone else who also uses sarcasm. It is unnecessary, and uncivil. This is an enjoyable website we all use for pleasure. Going forward, let's do so without sarcasm which is both personal and unwanted here. It was, however, directed at OND, and has been ongoing way before I was asked to be a moderator.

Disclaimer: I remain a huge Trent Brown fan, my favorite player while here, but now across the Bay where I still follow him. The trade with the PATS was great for Trent, but bad for our QBs. It was why I liked him so much…protected our Qbs. Like NCommand, I thot it foolish to get rid of him with a full yr left on his contract. Our Qbs would have suffered a lot fewer hits had he been here with Joe S, and McG. Also any runs requiring power or man blocking would have been extremely useful on 3rd downs and in RZ. Kyle could have schemed around Trent, but chose not to. Last yr we only had Joe S and McG for pass pro. We could have really used Trent. I would not have paid him for 2019 with the astounding contract he received. But one more yr of protecting our QBs? That would have been very welcome.

So your first act as a mod is to repost NC's and my ongoing discussion, side completely with him--cause he agrees with your assessment of Brown--and completely ignore that part of his original post which caused my confusion about what he said.

He didn't just say Brown gave "1,900 snaps." He said "1,900 HIGH QUALITY snaps."

Then he said that Brown cost "$1.6M" and "a 3rd round pick."

Well, the Niners never gave up a 3rd round pick for Brown, and no matter how many snaps he actually played for them, no one, even his most ardent supporters, could consider each and every snap he played for the Niners to be "high quality." Too many gaffes, too many missed assignments just in 2017.

His play for the Pats,on the other hand, especially in the playoffs and SB, could be considered relatively "high quality." So I mistook NC's meaning and took him to task- in my post--about his tendency to rely too much on stats at the cost of sometimes overlooking other issues and concerns that are not always measureable in stats.

My bad and I both admitted my mistake and apologized to NC.

So apparently that wasn't good enough for you and you chose to exercise your new-found powers as a mod to censure me publicly and give me a warning--the very first warning I have ever received in the more than a decade I've been a member here.

No sarcasm allowed. Is this the new standard? Will you be enforcing it uniformly and across the board. There are some--sus, chaz, val. and others--who should take note. Sometimes sarcasm is necessary--and humorous--and the only way to challenge a post without making a personal attack.

If poster "DebbieDowner posts: 'Twent Bwown cannot be a gweat Tackle. I have seen all 2,000 of his plays that he's played and NEVER seen him make a single tackle or even an assist. 0 for 2,000 proves, STATISTICALLY, that he's not a gweat, good, or even so-so Tackle.'"

So new poster Pnewbie responds: "Whatta dumbass post frum a stoopid poster. Did yer mother have any children that lived?" THAT'S a personal attack. But if he says, sarcastically, "Yeah, sure. Great post!" That's also NOT allowed because it uses "uncivil' sarcasm, and--gasp--AN EMOJI!--even though there's no personal attack, only a reference to her post.

This new standard of yours is gonna make the WZ a far less entertaining place, where only those who agree, politely, are welcome. Too bad.

Reminds me of what Ralph Waldo Emerson, the great American author, once said: "A petty consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds." Everyone better agree, politely, all the time about even petty issues, or the mods will have to intervene.

Originally posted by oldninerdude:

Originally posted by pasodoc9er:

Originally posted by HERN:

Originally posted by oldninerdude:

Originally posted by Jeepzilla:

Originally posted by oldninerdude:

Originally posted by Jeepzilla:

Dude WTF has Garnett done?
This was a Garnett vs. Brown Convo with people throwing unwavering support to Garnett and bashing on Brown, and you keep jumping on that same ride.
And I've read both your posts and you've missed the point in both.

Then maybe you need to go back and reread a couple of the previous pages of posts.

NC started bashing Garnett for having his weight go up and down. "Yo-yoing." I just asked him where he got that impression, b/c I'd followed his weight LOSS and rehab, but never saw anything about him regaining weight.

I did question how a guy who once played so well in college that he won the Outland could be said to "still suck," rather than "now sucks." Meaning that he wasn't always so bad--and raising the question whether he can or will return to that level of play. Seems that YOU missed the point.
,
This is, and always has been the Trent Brown thread. Not the Garnett vs Brown thread. Try to keep up--or get your facts straight--before you jump in with asinine accusations.

Abe Lincoln once said: "Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt."

BTW I have represented Ridezilla guys in court, so your little "jeep" handle doesn't impress me much.

Lol
Take your own advice because you missed the point

"Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt."

You start with your post 6258 laughing at a comment someone made that Garnett sucks..
You didn't "raise the question why he sucks"
Nice how you changed your stance and make it personal..

WTF!
My "little"....
You trying to sound cool with that statement or jump off topic because your lost again
I'll go with the lost again

Go grab a cup of coffee before you MORE personal. You have Absolutely zero clue so enjoy your day.

Okay, I'll try to be more polite. so. . . sorry if I hurt your feelings.

Not trying to sound cool--I'm a bit past that stage. You think "zilla" is cool?? The name of one of the seven most dangerous prison/street gangs in California? Not so much. Perhaps you should consider a change of moniker.

As to my post #6258--you don't appear to understand. I was belittling the suggestion that Garnett "STILL sucks" meaning that he continues, as he has in the past, to play poorly. But he hasn't always played poorly (sucked), which is why he won a prestigious award as a Senior and was drafted in the First Round.

Which naturally raises the question, for anyone thinking about it, WHY does he suck now? And will he, or can he, ever return to his previous high quality of play?

Questioning his PRESENT quality of play, and CONTRASTING it with his previous level of play is a way of actually criticizing his play--and, to me, seems more meaningful than some juvenile name-calling.

Did I explain it better, now?

And thank-you, but I've already had my coffee. Perhaps some other time.

Oldninerdude post #6280 in your response to NCommand wherein he used the now infamous "1900 snaps" referring to Trent Brown's good snaps and then you went into a long monologue on how it couldn't have been that many snaps…you TOTALLY MISSED and misunderstood the relevance of the "1900 snaps".

As you say, "numbers can be deceiving"…to which I will add, especially when YOU misunderstood them. Another of your statements, "thank you for posting, 1900 HIGH quality snaps, last season" . Obviously you completely misunderstood the overall snaps while Trent was here, were the snaps NC was referring to, yet you managed to take him to task for misstating the #...and it was done sarcastically, and your remarks were snide.

You continued with single mindedly denigrating how Brown played here, which you determined was not well… an opinion which was biased.
Again, "those who parrot your views" was snide. "Please don't let your support for Brown damage your credibility on the webzone" … a statement both insulting and sarcastic.

Later, "glad you read it . If you actually read my post, instead of counting words, you'd have a better grip of what was said." Again, this written by a guy, who totally misunderstood the issue (1900 snaps) that you were insulting NC with.

Your quote of Abe Lincoln, "better keeping silent and be thot a fool, than opening your mouth and remove all doubt" was perfect. You were describing yourself while sarcastically insulting others.

"Try to keep up or get your facts straight…before you jump in with asinine accusations" . Again, OND , you were meeting Mr. Lincoln's parameters perfectly, while attacking others.

Then later, "BTW, I have represented Ridezilla in court, so your little "Jeep" handle doesn't impress me much" . Well terrific and congrats, OND. I had always thot that "jeepzilla" meant a tough little jeep with Godzilla-like overpowering guts, speed and power. Until your post I had never heard of the notorious Ridezilla gang , nor of their criminality. Nor did I know you were an atty. Once again, these comments were sarcastic and personal where no personal animus was needed. They were about the poster, not the post.

Your snide comments seen regularly appear in your posts for anyone you disagree with.

English was spot on when he noted after your wrongly headed tirade (1900 snaps) that things were getting way too personal. I certainly agree with that.

In Post # 6291, NC laid out a Trent Brown history/summary that was truly spot on. Brown was a stud here and protected our QBs. Once gone, our QBs got mauled…and that is a fact. When we had a dearth of talent, especially on the OL, one of Kyle's main efforts was to get a "fat guy" who can't Zone Block off the team and and replace him with a new RT. A more reasonable approach would have been to keep Trent one more yr, sign McG(a terrific choice, BTW), and keep both guys on OL, one at RG for one more yr to help protect our QBs. Kyle could have easily worked around one player not able to Zone block and fit his scheme to the players he had. But nope, he wanted Trent gone, and consequently our QBs suffered from obscene # of hits and "beatdowns".

At Trent's new home, Brady remained virtually untouched. NCommand was just stating facts as they happened, even if they don't fit your opinion. Still, it is what happened and you like facts. How about 126 QB hits with TBrown gone.? That was just a hurried , emotional move by Kyle, getting rid of an OL blocker we desperately could have used last yr. Instead we lost one of the only two OLs we had who could pass protect. We didn't have to resign Trent in 2019, but we sure could have used him in 2018. Instead he went to PATS who did want him en route to their Super bowl win..

In post # 6298, you posted , "Then, did I explain it better now? Using emojis to counter sarcastic , snide remarks just doesn't cut it. Sarcastic is sarcastic. Adding an emoji or happy face basically is just a further insult.

Finally, in post #6303 you "got" what the rest of us understood some 3 pages before…you at last understood what the "1900 snaps" referred to . As they say, better late than never. Meantime you insulted NCommand, Jeep and others….and then added your reasons why TB got traded.

Well, Oldninerdude, remember Mr. Lincoln and his comment about "fool and his foot in mouth". The complaints about you come down to your overly sarcastic attitude and comments. If someone's post disagrees with yours, you sarcastically insult them, and then add an emoji.

This isn't adding a timeout nor penalty to you. It is merely a warning. More sarcasm, especially with emojis and you will get a warning and penalty. A suggestion would be "just be nice". You are a knowledgeable poster and have a lot to offer. How about trying without sarcasm. Just be pleasant, nice. No need to insult NCommand, Jeep, or anyone else.

This post was intended for anyone else who also uses sarcasm. It is unnecessary, and uncivil. This is an enjoyable website we all use for pleasure. Going forward, let's do so without sarcasm which is both personal and unwanted here. It was, however, directed at OND, and has been ongoing way before I was asked to be a moderator.

Disclaimer: I remain a huge Trent Brown fan, my favorite player while here, but now across the Bay where I still follow him. The trade with the PATS was great for Trent, but bad for our QBs. It was why I liked him so much…protected our Qbs. Like NCommand, I thot it foolish to get rid of him with a full yr left on his contract. Our Qbs would have suffered a lot fewer hits had he been here with Joe S, and McG. Also any runs requiring power or man blocking would have been extremely useful on 3rd downs and in RZ. Kyle could have schemed around Trent, but chose not to. Last yr we only had Joe S and McG for pass pro. We could have really used Trent. I would not have paid him for 2019 with the astounding contract he received. But one more yr of protecting our QBs? That would have been very welcome.

So your first act as a mod is to repost NC's and my ongoing discussion, side completely with him--cause he agrees with your assessment of Brown--and completely ignore that part of his original post which caused my confusion about what he said.

He didn't just say Brown gave "1,900 snaps." He said "1,900 HIGH QUALITY snaps."

Then he said that Brown cost "$1.6M" and "a 3rd round pick."

Well, the Niners never gave up a 3rd round pick for Brown, and no matter how many snaps he actually played for them, no one, even his most ardent supporters, could consider each and every snap he played for the Niners to be "high quality." Too many gaffes, too many missed assignments just in 2017.

His play for the Pats,on the other hand, especially in the playoffs and SB, could be considered relatively "high quality." So I mistook NC's meaning and took him to task- in my post--about his tendency to rely too much on stats at the cost of sometimes overlooking other issues and concerns that are not always measureable in stats.

My bad and I both admitted my mistake and apologized to NC.

So apparently that wasn't good enough for you and you chose to exercise your new-found powers as a mod to censure me publicly and give me a warning--the very first warning I have ever received in the more than a decade I've been a member here.

No sarcasm allowed. Is this the new standard? Will you be enforcing it uniformly and across the board. There are some--sus, chaz, val. and others--who should take note. Sometimes sarcasm is necessary--and humorous--and the only way to challenge a post without making a personal attack.

If poster "DebbieDowner posts: 'Twent Bwown cannot be a gweat Tackle. I have seen all 2,000 of his plays that he's played and NEVER seen him make a single tackle or even an assist. 0 for 2,000 proves, STATISTICALLY, that he's not a gweat, good, or even so-so Tackle.'"

So new poster Pnewbie responds: "Whatta dumbass post frum a stoopid poster. Did yer mother have any children that lived?" THAT'S a personal attack. But if he says, sarcastically, "Yeah, sure. Great post!" That's also NOT allowed because it uses "uncivil' sarcasm, and--gasp--AN EMOJI!--even though there's no personal attack, only a reference to her post.

This new standard of yours is gonna make the WZ a far less entertaining place, where only those who agree, politely, are welcome. Too bad.

Reminds me of what Ralph Waldo Emerson, the great American author, once said: "A petty consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds." Everyone better agree, politely, all the time about even petty issues, or the mods will have to intervene.

Let's take this conversation offline.

I'm not going to quote that novel lol, but saying the QBs got mauled when he left is complete nonsense. They got mauled when he was here as well and the bulk of the mauling this last season came from the interior, not from their OTs.

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:

I'm not going to quote that novel lol, but saying the QBs got mauled when he left is complete nonsense. They got mauled when he was here as well and the bulk of the mauling this last season came from the interior, not from their OTs.

I agree. The interior has been the hot mess for as long as I can remember.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:

I'm not going to quote that novel lol, but saying the QBs got mauled when he left is complete nonsense. They got mauled when he was here as well and the bulk of the mauling this last season came from the interior, not from their OTs.

I agree. The interior has been the hot mess for as long as I can remember.

Really hope Richburg can get healthy. That will go a long way in helping out the interior . Also hope they invest in an OT this draft for when Staley retires. Preferably someone who could initially play inside