Brunell vs. Bledsoe

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by Huddle

You didn't make an argument. You made a claim about a player that you cannot prove. Nor can you prove that you have any valid way of comparing one player to another using statistics.

he most definately DID make an arguement and you have absolutely no way of disproving it. Nice try, but it works both ways. There's no magic Huddle immunity, and yet you don't see this is exactly what you've been saying the entire time. "Your wrong, I'm right, and its true cause i said so." That just doesn't work.

As for filtering out co-variances, that's been covered and played out. It can be done, its done all the time, and just cause you might be lazy or unwilling to pursue such endeavors most certainly does not mean it cannot be done. Logic and math specific to such study (engineering and statistics) go into these things in great detail.

You can take it any way you like, but it doesn't work that way in debate and this isn't a legal issue.

so now you not only get the benefit of one way arguement (your opinions are evidence, others' opinions are just opinions), you also get to frame the rules on the fly to suit your needs as well? convenient.

Nah. Luckily, outside of the courtroom, logic prevails. It is simply illogical to say that you can't prove me wrong, therefore I'm right.

you've been proven wrong on every point, yet you still continue. I'd definately say there's something illogical alright.