Reply With Quote
I didn't say that, but you probably have trouble reading.
What I did say, though, was that his celebration was "funny but funny doesn't win games."
If you need help breaking that down, let me know.
Steve Smith is probably more skilled than Chad Johnson, but there is one reason why I would take Johnson over Smith... because hes taller, and that makes him a bigger threat instantly.
I didn't say that, but you probably have trouble reading.
What I did say, though, was that his celebration was "funny but funny doesn't win games."
If you need help breaking that down, let me know.
I'll go ahead and word this for someone with the intelligence level of a fifth grader. After all, I'm dealing with someone who thought Hayden Christiansen's portrayal of Anakin was genius.
Johnson's celebrations are funny. Johnson celebrates after touchdowns.
Unless you've got the genius take that touchdowns don't help win games, then Johnson's celebrations in effect do help his team win. It means he's getting into the end zone.
His two touchdowns and the ensuing celebrations have nothing to do with the Bengals losing and everything to do with helping the team have a better shot at winning.
The more Johnson brings the funny, the better the Bengals will be this year.
Hey genius, he brought the funny and the Bengals still weren't any better.
That's just a stupid statement.
But, then again, it's you making it.
He brought the funny and the Bengals scored 45 points. He's not responsible for the defense giving up 51.
But, did they win??
Go ahead, answer the question.
doesn't matter if they win or not.
you said Johnson bringing the funny doesn't help his team win. And unless you're trying to tell me that scoring touchdowns doesn't help his team win, then you're wrong. thanks.
Johnson and TO bring the funny. Their teams are a combined 3-1 right now.
I have a question for anyone here that might know. What are the specific rules regarding penalties for celebrations? From what I heard TO got the 15 yd penalty (which is a hinderance to winning) because he used the goal post as a prop. Does that mean that he could have just gone to the corner of the endzone, lied down like he was sneaking around, and have done the exact same camera motion with the ball and not get the penalty?
I'm not sure about the rule either but if I remember, he got flagged for the "nap" celebration when he used the ball as a pillow last year. So maybe the ball can be considered a prop too? I think anything besides ing the ball and doing a little dance will get you the penalty.
Moron, read what I wrote.
I wrote that funny doesn't help you win games.
I never said touchdowns don't help you win games.
You, little moron, said Chad being funny helps make his team better.
He brought the funny on Sunday.
I asked if the Bengals won.
And, you still haven't answered.
Did Chad bringing the funny help his team win??
Answer the question.
When does Chad Johnson bring the funny?
Answer the question.
P.S. - since you're too stupid to figure this out, I'll explain again. "Helping your team" and "Making your team better" does not always mean your team will win, it just means that they will win more games than they would if they didn't have you.
I'll answer your question because I can man up, unlike you.
Yes, Chad brings the "funny" when he scores touchdowns. But, that really doesn't fortify your point. He can easily score touchdowns without the funny and it will still be the same effect . . . 6 points.
You, on the other hand, claimed that it makes his team better. Yet, they still lost. So, how does being funny help your team (or make them better) when he broght the "funny" and his team still lost??
I'll ask the question again:
Did Chad bringing the funny help his team win?
thank you
You're a ing moron.
Does Marvin Harrison bring the funny after a touchdown?
Does Reggie Wayne bring the funny after a touchdown?
Does Andre Johnson bring the funny after a touchdown?
And yet, they are all 2-0 at this point.
So, did they need the "funny"?
1 win, 1 loss.
Yea, it's a great help bringing the funny.
The Colts are 2-0, without the funny.
Hmmm, I can really see how effective bringing the funny is.
Has any of their defenses given up 51 points?
Cowboys are 2-0. bringing the funny works when your defense doesn't give up 51 points.
I can see how effective touchdowns are.
No, cuz then there would be no funny. Different effect, same benefits to the team tho.
You're welcome.
Now, are you man enough to answer the question I've given you.
Na, you're gonna punk out like the little you are.
So you theory is conditional on the teams defense?
Yes, Chad Johnson brought the funny and the Bengals have a win. Happy? Get back to me when the tears dry up.
No one's arguing that, but that's okay.
LaDainian Tomlinson doesn't bring the funny and his team is 1-1. McNabb doesn't bring the funny and he's 0-2. In fact, there are more 0-2 teams with players who don't bring the funny.
So is your theory on not bringing funny conditional on team defense as well?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions