Predictions: Week 10 – Philadelphia Eagles at Green Bay Packers

209 64
Philadelphia Eagles quarterback Nick Foles

Philadelphia Eagles quarterback Nick Foles

Shawn: Some could say that the Green Bay Packers are fortunate that Aaron Rodgers went down, obviously if first assuming that he HAD to go down, during an easier part of the schedule. I would say the opposite. These games at Lambeau Field against the Bears and Eagles were two games that I believe the Packers rather easily win simply by rolling Rodgers and the Packers offense out there. With Rodgers under center, I think the Packers score 38-45 points in each game against two of the worst defenses in the NFL, and they would have simply out-sprinted two good offenses instead of relying on their defense to slow those offenses down much.

Well, that is no longer the case. Now the Packers need their defense to do exactly that, and it remains to be seen if they are capable.

The Eagles in many ways are similar to the Bears. They both have backup QBs running the show who are playing well. They have elite running backs who are just as good out of the backfield as they are in it. And they are both more than willing to simply spread you out and throw the football all game long.

The Eagles run a fast-paced style that will force the Packers to play their nickel defense for the vast majority of the game. Matt Forte found the Packers’ nickel much softer against the run than their base, and LeSean McCoy may find the same.

One of the consequences of the fast-track style that the Eagles play is that it tires out the pass rush. The Packers are especially susceptible to this since, if Nick Perry remains out, then Clay Matthews, Mike Neal and Nate Palmer are the only outside linebackers the Packers have, and Neal is dealing with a sore knee and Matthews has been in street clothes the past month.

Of course, the Packers offense can help prevent all this by holding onto the football, and likely, the bulk of the work for the offense will be put on the running game. Again, can Mike McCarthy be creative enough to keep the defense off balance even while mostly running the football?

Even if the running game is working, the Packers will still need Seneca Wallace to convert third and shorts in order to keep drives alive. Absolutely the biggest wild card in this game is whether a full week of work will show a noticeable difference for Wallace, like it did for Matt Flynn against New England in 2010. If Wallace can just be serviceable, then I would still consider the Packers to be the favorite in this game.

Regardless, I don’t see the Packers offense scoring in the 30s, which means the Packers defense will need to either get stops or get turnovers. If they can’t, I don’t see the Packers offense keeping up.

The Packers have to find a way to win this game. Lose this one, and I see no reason to think the Packers can win a game without Rodgers. If they can’t do that, then their season is likely lost.

Still keeping the faith.

Packers 24, Eagles 20

Monty: The Philadelphia Eagles are coming off a game where quarterback Nick Foles threw seven touchdown passes. That came against the Oakland Raiders, though.

I expect Foles to duplicate that feat again… never. In fact, I’d wager he never comes close to throwing seven touchdowns in a game again in his career.

I expect to see something closer to the Nick Foles who lost to Dallas 17-3 three weeks ago. That guy went 11-of-29 for 80 yards and no touchdowns.

But let’s throw out the Eagles for a second. They’re a mediocre team at best. Some, including me, would say they’re a bad team. All of the questions in this game are on the Green Bay Packers side.

Can the offense function without Aaron Rodgers? With a full week of preparation and a game plan tailored to the strengths of the guys on the field, I would say yes. We’ve seen this before. As Shawn pointed out, the Packers went through this with Matt Flynn heading into New England in 2010. They were well-prepared, had a game plan that suited the personnel on the field and they played tough in a hostile environment against one of the best in the league. Ultimately, the Packers dropped that game by four, but were in it until the end.

These Eagles are not those Patriots. On top of that, this game is at home. So, while it’s doubtful the Packers will score like they do with Rodgers on the field, the offense should be just fine.

You can look to Thursday night’s Oregon-Stanford game as the recipe for success in this game. Eagles coach Chip Kelly coached Oregon last year and they still run his system. Stanford dominated the game by punching Oregon in the mouth behind their running game. That kept the vaunted Oregon offense off the field and out of sync.

That’s what the Packers will have to do in this game. If the defense is on the field for extended periods, the Packers are cooked. The Eagles offense doesn’t allow many substitutions because of their pace and we’ve seen what happens when the Packers defense gets tired. No pass rush and lots of missed tackles.

The Packers play Stanford football and work Eddie Lacy and James Starks. Seneca Wallace makes just enough plays (and doesn’t make any stupid ones).

Packers 24, Eagles 17

About The Author

Shawn Neuser attended UWGB and lives and works in Green Bay. He enjoys long walks on the beach and being intimate with game film.

64 Comments on "Predictions: Week 10 – Philadelphia Eagles at Green Bay Packers"

  1. E. Wolf

    I hope you guys are right, and that I am wrong. A dish of crow has never looked so good. But I really do not see how we can with that backup. I just don’t see it.

    • K.L.

      Ah, there you are. I was wondering where you went with your “OH MY GOD THE SEASON IS OVER GUYS WE SHOULD JUST GIVE UP NOW” bullshit.

  2. guysocke

    I’m making my annual pilgrimage tomorrow from Chicago, with an Eagles fan. Not the contest we had in mind, but I still like the Packers chances. Hoping to at least see Lacy truck a few people live.

    Hey E. Wolfe, eat a dick.

  3. PF4L

    The Eagles have speed and talent on offense. If the defense doesn’t show up, could be a long game. As far as Seneca Wallace….No comment.

  4. Savage57

    If the Eagles offense plays exactly like they did last week, I have supreme confidence that Dom Capers will have the Packers D dialed in with a spot on game plan.

    However, if they do anything different or make any unexpected in-game adjustments, I suspect that we’ll be treated to an afternoon of the guys in Green and Gold running around like chickens with their heads cut off and camera shots of Capers looking like he just shit himself, right before he nods off to sleep.

  5. Vijay

    One thing is for certain, the Packers probably had one of their most focused weeks of practice this week realizing they needed all hands on deck. The key will be the defense bouncing back from a lackluster performance and the continual progression of the run game with play action off of that.

    I think the Pack ekes this one out in a low scoring affair…

  6. Deepsky

    Capers history has been poor performance against unknown QBs, poor performance in the final two minutes, and poor performance against top running backs. The Eagles are going to score at least 40 points against the Packers at Lambeau. Wallace, who hasn’t won a game in over 3 years and has only won something like once in his last 10 outings has zero chance of winning this game.

  7. Mike

    This is where The Packers upper management FINALLY sees just how poor Capers has become at NFL defensive coaching, with this thought I will say, Man I hope I am wrong about Dom Capers! I would love to see him pick it up and win this game!

  8. PF4L

    Ted Thompsons hand picked back-up QB had a passer rating of 53.4 last Monday. Only way to go is up, but will it be enough?

  9. PF4L

    Nick Foles (back-up) 13 tds- 0 picks = 127 passer rating………….5′ 4″ Seneca Wallace (back-up) 0 tds 1 pick = 53 passer rating. In Ted we trust.

    • E. Wolf

      This is such a crock of shit. The League is starved of quality quarterbacks. Half of the teams do not have a decent start. Very few have good serviceable backups.
      All in all Ted Thompson has done yeoman’s work. Don’t believe me? Look at the Steelers just 2 and a half years after the Super Bowl.

    • Phatgzus

      If you want to use backup (not “back-up” as your brilliant mind thinks) success as a metric for GM success that’s pretty ridiculous to begin with; however, assuming it’s not, you need to also include the other TT backups (I.e. Aaron Rodgers and Matt Flynn) in the argument, elsewise it is illogical, therefore untenable and, ultimately, invalid.

      Furthermore, Foles is a backup in much same manner that Rodgers was-he will be the Eagles starter next year; Hell, numerous Eagles players have publicly stated they have 2 starting-caliber QBs, and you don’t potentially self-induce a QB controversy for shit’s and giggles.

  10. PF4L

    That’s ironically funny…Because as I watched Seneca Wallace play..I was thinking “What a crock of shit this guy is.” In Ted we trust.

      • PF4L

        E Wolf, Ted Thompson isn’t without fault. he’s not sinless. You want me to look at his whole body of work? OK….Maybe he will have the Packer’s O line pass blocking well for Aaron Rodgers next year. I hope in 4 years he could solve that problem. It should be noted, that as much as Rodgers has been pummeled behind that O line the last few years, it’s a wonder that Rodgers stayed on the field as long as he has. Now E Wolf, go ahead and refute that after you take TT’s dick out of your mouth. In Ted we trust.

        • E. Wolf

          Oh yeah its Ted’s fault that Bulaga went down with an ACL tear, And no one foresaw what would become of Sherrod. Everyone gave kudos to that.
          Beyond that, David Bakthari, BITCH!
          As for allusions to male on male fellatio, that is your fixation, not mine.

          • PF4L

            E. Wolf..Do you know when you’re getting played. When someone is pulling your strings, just to watch you go into little bitch mode? You silly puppet.

  11. PF4L

    Now for the good news. The Eagles pass defense is dead last in pass defense. So it wouldn’t surprise me if Wallace throws for 7 tds to tie the NFL record. In Ted we Trust.

  12. PackAttack

    Sorry to say it but the Pack are a bottom 10 team in the NFL without Rodgers. Dom Capers D still can’t generate a pass rush, Thompson’s 1st round golden boy’s have been busts. That O-line is a continued source of jokes —- Jordy, Jones (whoever the hell is actually healthy) are irrelevant when you don’t have someone who can get them the ball.

    Without Rodgers we suck. Sorry but it’s the hard, cold truth.

    • E. Wolf

      Bulaga is a good tackle. I like Land and Sitton as guards. Dietrich Smith is still developing. And then there is that certain 4th round pick.

      • PackAttack

        Bulga is out and not proven at LT. It’s Lang not Land, EDS is fringe AVG compared to other NFL centers and will never be elite. This O-line has been one of the worst in the NFL over the last 4 years and Thompson has yet to establish solid depth and protect his franchise player.

        At some point you’ve got to hold someone accountable for all these injuries.

        • E. Wolf

          I do hold someone accountable for these injuries, the medical and training staff. NOT TED.
          Forgive me for an obvious typo re Lang.

          • PackAttack

            He drafted them, he’s responsible for providing organizational depth, he’s responsible for the training staff, he’s responsible for drafting pussys and not players. No other team in the NFL gets hurt more than the Pack, it’s not even close. Either this team is jinxed or they’ve got a plethora of soft pussys with no spine.

            Either way the team is flat out a joke without Rodgers. Bottom feeder in the NFL. Can’t win without him.

  13. PF4L

    Now lets be careful what we say about the Pack and TT…We don’t want E. Wolf to suffer any more meltdowns people. That is all……GO TOLZIEN GO!!!

      • Spiccoli

        Wolfina, you are like one of those homer bears fans that won’t shut up about 1985… Give up your defense of the bullshit we saw on the field today. The packers have no depth at QB and that is somehow not tight wad Teddy’s fault? They aren’t even competitive without A Rod.. I hope you and your butt buddy TT have a lovely evening tonight. If he is such a good drafter, then why are the pack shit without one player? Other teams find a way to win a couple games without their stars, but our answer is Scott Tolzien and Seneca “Uncle Rico” Wallace? Good god, you are an idiot.. I bet they pay you tons to write that blog for your 6 or 7 readers..

  14. E. Wolf

    He drafted them, he’s responsible for providing organizational depth, he’s responsible for the training staff, he’s responsible for drafting pussys and not players. No other team in the NFL gets hurt more than the Pack, it’s not even close. Either this team is jinxed or they’ve got a plethora of soft pussys with no spine.

    Either way the team is flat out a joke without Rodgers. Bottom feeder in the NFL. Can’t win without him.


    He has added incredible depth to this team, but you can only do so much. Your comment abotu the players is really shocking. Nick Collins is a pussy? What about Rodgers?
    You people are unbelievable.

    • E. Wolf

      Season is over man

      That is what I have said since it all went down, and am taking a lot of friendly for it.
      God I hate humanity. I think Dr. Peters from 12 Monkeys had the right idea. Exterminate humanity by way of virus. Every last man woman and child.

  15. E. Wolf

    Do you know when you’re getting played. When someone is pulling your strings, just to watch you go into little bitch mode? You silly puppet.

    That’s called trolling, and you are trolling someone wearing the same fucking colors. And you are the ultimate little bitch talking big from beyond a keyboard.

    • PackAttack

      ok guy, whatever you say. tough guy talk on the boards — good stuff. gotta get your entertainment value in someway, sure as shit ain’t getting it watching Nick Foles torch Teddy T’s boys today.

        • kluck a luck

          Wolfina, you get so cranky when people talk about your butt buddy TT. How can you defend their QB situation? They aren’t even competitive without A-Rod… Thompson is plain and simply lucky that he got Rodgers in the draft…otherwise he and Jerry Glanville have the same football knowledge. Don’t give me this Clay Matthews stuff either – gotta be healthy to make a difference.

  16. Mike

    These fuck tard homers cannot handle the truth! They are the pussies when you question their demi-god coaches! This team is 2nd tier at BEST with these fucking coaches! No game plan on D at all!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  17. PackAttack

    Season over. Team can’t win without Rodgers. If anything this just shows how bad this team actually is without him. The D is fucking awful (fairly obvious before but for whatever reason it was ignored), Lacy is a different runner, the WR are AVG. You can’t replace the best player in the NFL with anyone.

    Face it. This team just ain’t very fucking good. We found out what Greg Jennings is without Rodgers, now the rest of the this team see’s what they are without him. Shit-TAY!

  18. Mike

    I have been screaming this for the last two years that they are under-coached, overblown and get by because of Rodgers! This defense is the most FUKING POROUS “D” in the league! And when CMIII plays, the team (defense that is!) appears to take a step backwards.

  19. Phatgzus

    Wow, what a surprise to see all the haters coming out of the woodwork who’d have guessed it? Why don’t you guys show up after a win and congratulate the same people you hate on? Could it possibly because you don’t have the integrity or self-reaped to do so?

    BTW, the nearly full-health Colts (yeah they’re missing Reggie Wayne) just got owned by tge Rams, I guess their entire organization is absolute
    garbage as well.

    • PackAttack

      Actually they are. That Trent Richardson trade might be the worst move I’ve seen since drafting Justin Harrell #1 overall by………ehhhhhhhh, ahhhhhhhhhh — ooooooh!!

      • Phatgzus

        Steerike 1) Harrell was a first-round draft pick not THE 1st pick.

        Steerike 2) Falcons trading away 5 picks including first-rounders for 2 or 3 years for Julio Jones (who Jordy Nelson is just as good as) who’s played one full season was worse.

        Steerike 3) Jumping the gun again, Richardson may be
        injured but his career is nowhere near over.

  20. icebowl

    Tolzien did well, way better than Wallace would’be.
    280 yds in his first start is commendable…
    The secondary is a huge liability… #12 strength was that he could score to make up for that problem.
    Hayward dropping out didn’t help….
    They were clueless on the two long TDs by Foles…
    At least get an effing pass interference…
    Let wood go way too soon….
    Detroit Calvin’s looking tough….
    Facing fact that this ain’t our year…

    • PackAttack

      Tolzien did well, way better than Wallace would’be.
      280 yds in his first start is commendable…


      • PF4L

        Funny how everyone said Wallace’s poor play last Monday was because he didn’t get reps….Gee….Tolzien didn’t get reps and threw for 280. I guess Tolzien doesn’t need an excuse. Go home Seneca, we found our #2.

  21. PF4L

    From what I could see..Tolzien should have been the #2, and Wallace should have been the one on the practice squad (or still sitting at home). But what do I know, TT is the great talent evaluator. Want to see Dom Capers get interviewed? Answer questions in the media room?…don’t count on it. Some people in the Packers organization don’t need to be accountable apparently, to the fans of the Green and Gold.

    • PackAttack

      Should just have Phatgzus be interviewed. He could talk about how great Thompson’s dick tatstes and how great this team is with Scott Tolzien as the starting QB and how great all the draft picks Thompson has made.

      On a side note. Is Dantone Jones still on the roster? I haven’t seen him yet.

      • Phatgzus

        He got his 2nd sack in 2 games, obviously you pay attention to the games so your opinion is so very valuable. Then again you’ve already established your lack of intelligence when speaking on Rodgers’ injury-you are the poster child for eugenics advocates.

        Nope, not all of TT’s draft picks have been successes, no GM’s are: Harrell and Brohm are two shining examples, Hawk even (but at least he’s playing, no less a starter, and yes he could start for other NFL teams). However, if you’re going to criticize you also have to extol, or else run the risk of losing credibility, though it’s readily apparent you don’t give shit one about that.

        Nice homophobic ad hominem attack. Is it supposed to be insulting because you believe me to be homosexual or straight? Either way, big ol’ fail homie. You may want to figure out your own sexual preferences instead of assaulting others, just a thought.

        FYI, you have my pity.

  22. Mike

    @Phatgzus ! I bash their inconsistencies week in and week out! no matter if they win or lose! What you fail to see is that I have been saying this for years! and I take quite a bit of shit for it from homers like you who rationalize all of this teams weaknesses, and just accept it for what you want it to be! Well dreamland is OK for some, duplicitous banter from the Pack, and blind homer fence riding are not my scene! Dom Capers may be a great person, but he sucks as a D coordinator! Realize this! MM may be a great person, but he is not a great play caller! Realize this! Slocum may be a great guy, but he is not a great ST coach! Realize this! The strength and conditioning coaches may be nice guys! but suck at getting these guys safe and sound onto the field! Realize this! M. Trgovac and J. Campen may be great guys! but they lack in preparation! Realize this! When you look at the field when Green Bay is on D, and you see wide open routes for the opposing “O” every week, do you not wonder? When you see our “O” out there, and our QB bull rushed every game, and how we have to thread the needle nearly every time, do you not wonder? HAMSTRINGS! HAMSTRINGS! HAMSTRINGS! Do you not wonder? Eight yards deep in the end zone, and we run it out, and get to the fifteen! Do you not wonder? Mason Crosby missing VERY CRUCIAL KICKS again! do you not wonder? Well, I wonder about people like you! sheeple . . . cognitive dissonance does not help you! fixing problems does help!

    • PackAttack

      GOD DAMN AMEN!!!! Someone finally fucking says it!!! Props to you old Mike!

      Sorry boys but he’s 100% right. The defense, special teams, running game, play calling, coaching it all gets masked by winning and this team wins with Rodgers — and without him all the negatives are exposed.

      Mike is right, these problems have been prevalent before but now without Rodgers they are painstakingly obvious in so many ways.

    • Phatgzus

      Oh, I’m very well aware of your continual bitchin about the coaching staff, and your eternal focus on the negatives even when incredible positives are glaringly obvious (that’s a form of denial very similar to rationalization).

      Furthermore, my dear fellow, I’m afraid you don’t have a concrete grasp on the exact nature of rationalization. There is no debate that I am a Capers and TT apologist, however, my arguments are based on truthful premises, and my
      conclusions are derived logically and are not only valid, but sound. I do not blindly defend Capers, MM, TT, and associated personnel; I have voiced my frustrations in the past (e.g. I was screaming at Capers to blitz the ILBs vs. Tge Bears, then he did so on a number of plays, no one git home and the Pack allowed multiple bi plays) and will continue to
      do so moving forward.

      As for Campen, his o-line (provided by TT) has produced massive holes for Eddy Lacy, James Starks (2 TD rushes over 30 yards without being touched), and Jonathan Franklin en route to the number 3 rushing O; yeah, Lacy’s a huge part of it, but Campen and the o-line deserve credit as well. Vis a vis today’s performance, two words: Marshall Newhouse.

      Since you’re so inclined to throw psychological diagnoses about, here’s one for ya: your incessant anger directed towards the coaching and personnel staffs is likely an honest indicator of pathological projection. Here’s some advice for ya: deal with your own shit and stop attacking others.

  23. @Phatgzuz

    Really? So what you are telling me via your quasi rhetorical way, is that it is OK for you to bash , not so OK for me to bash? With that being said, what say ye to the valid points that I brought forward? Can you answer them? or do you find it hard to face a mirror of yourself (me) without some petulant knee jerk aimed at an alleged angry man. Props to your pathological projection obfuscation to dash away the truths . .

  24. tedtomato

    One of the biggest issues is signing these undrafted guys..and expecting them to playlike starters when theyre thrown into the fire. Most of those guys werent even the best players on their college team.

  25. Mike

    Really? So what you are telling me via your quasi rhetorical way, is that it is OK for you to bash , not so OK for me to bash? Incessant anger? lol! When have I displayed that? Do you find it hard to face a mirror of yourself (perhaps me) without some petulant knee jerk aimed at an alleged angry man. Props to your pathological projection obfuscation to dash away the truths . . .

    • Phatgzus

      1) There is no such entity as “quasi-rhetoric”, either your discourse was influential or it was not. Now if you are using “rhetoric” to imply that I am purposely employing spurious techniques to confuse others into agreement, then you are gravely mistaken. I don’t believe in lies, half-truths, or withholdings. If you believe something strongly enough to voice it, then have the respect for yourself and others to voice that opinion honestly. There is no prevarication.

      2) The simple fact that you believe your opinions to be unassailable truths is quite telling. Perhaps megalomania, or the projection of as a means to mask an inferiority complex; just some possibilities. Lol, dude, you are in no way a mirror of myself, you are my antithesis. You do not anger me, nor even frustrate me, for i understand the ridiculousness of of your logic. Additionally, I do not project myself onto others, I have no need to do so.

      3) You have misconstrued my point. It was not that you don’t deserve to voice an opinion because it is different than mine, I am not a dictator, I believe in the First Ammenent. Rather, my point is that your opinion is not a viable one because it is not based in logic. You may very well be correct, however, your agenda to validate your opinion at all costs has resulted in biased, and logically invalid and unsound argument.

      4) When have you displayed incessant anger? Lol, you can’t be serious. How about in every single post? Everyone of your comments teams with vulgarity and personal attacks, that is not the discourse of an individual at peace with himself or the world.

      In summation, I am not attacking your person as you are attacking me, nor am I attacking your opinion (not truth); I am
      attacking your desolation of logic. Is that right or proper? Probably not? Will it alter how you view the world? Highly unlikely. Is it worth an attempt at least once? Yeah.

      I’m not trying to tell you WHAT to think, Mike, I’m just trying to help you think logically and unemotionally, so that you may view the world without the blinders of subjectivity (again I am not saying your opinion is incorrect, just incomplete, and logically invalid and unsound as a result of being informed by personal bias).

  26. @Phatgzuz

    @ Phatgzuz, everything else aside, you have to be one of the biggest blowhards that I have ever encountered on blogs lol! And furthermore, my vitriol has always been in answer to someone that understands vitriol (when in Rome . . .) just because someone uses big words, other than common vulgarities, it is still an attack, and you seem to relish in this arena! lol! wow! Come down out of your self imposed rare air and realize that we are all Packer fans regardless of opinions good or bad. In regards to megalomania, I suggest that you rethink who may be the megalomaniac! (my wife nearly wet her pants laughing at that one!) anytime you want to go through the motions of critical thinking (via the trivium etc,) I’ll not mince words with you, your rhetoric, nor your attempts at logic.

    • Phatgzus

      We all understand vitriol here, it’s purpose to debase and demoralize, usually as an attempt to “win” an argument by affecting the mental integrity of the target and/or as a pathological form of catharsis. My point was not who your vitriol was directed at (which is anyone who disagrees with you, i.e. “fucktard pussies”) but that your use of vitriol to make ad hominem attacks directed at any who disagree with you subverts the logical validity of any argument you could make (as argumenta ad hominem are common logical fallacies). BTW, if you think that is the nature of this blog, sorry Dorothea but you’re not in Rome (musta taken a wrong turn at Islamabad): Monty may use profanity but he doesn’t direct it at his readers, but sources of ire for all Packers fans.
      He uses it as levity not abuse, to great muthafuckin’ effect (Uh-oh, did I do that? I feel so cool now, like I did in third grade).

      I’ll say it again, I have not attacked you personally, neither your morality nor your intelligence. I have merely attacked the logic (or lack thereof) of your argument. I haven’t called you a sinner or a dolt, and I never will, because I don’t jump to such conclusions, and will not form an absolute opinion of someone whithout having associated with them in person for an extended period of time or revealing circumstance. With that in mind, my “diagnoses” were not made in earnest, but were a rhetorical technique (have you noticed that I am, to an extent, mirroring your argument structure?) intended to display the ridiculousness of your diagnoses. Again, I would not make a judgement of an individual without ever having met and observed them at some depth/length, that is illogical; this is especially true of any psychological determination as I have nothing but the utmost respect for the “pseudo”science and it’s incredibly abstract and convoluted focus, the mind.

      One does not think critically by USING the Trivium, critical thinking is PART OF the Trivium (Logic).

      Why am I a blowhard? Because I use “big” words? Many of them are actually under 8 letters in length, they’re more recherché than “big”, but even then, the majority are taught in high school English courses. I’m sorry that I have a natural curiosity about many aspects of the most incredible phenomenon, life, and the universe that gave rise to it. I choose to use the words I do because I like them, they’re fun to say, it’s an enjoyable challenge to remember them (a challenge that allows mento continuously strengthen my brain at least one faculty), they magnify various linguistic abilities, etc. I do not use these words to make myself feel good (not in the Schadenfreudian sense at least) or to win an argument by confusing an opponent into submission (your use of invective). Rather, if someone doesn’t understand a word I use, I’d expect them to take the requisite 3 minutes to look it up and understand it (and learn something new), because
      that is my MO when I encounter such a situation. Would it not be more supercilious of me to expect my opponent to be of a lower intellect, and thusly patronize them by speaking simplistically?

      You’re damn right I enjoy this! There’s few exercises that i find more relaxing than antagonizing an antagonist, putting them on the defensive (perhaps drinking a cold porter after a hard day’s work). So keep arguing with me please, I’ll be all over you like a hagfish on a distended whale carcass, keep making assinine assertions (look, simple alliteration and prefix repetition, a result of an augmented vocabulary) and I’ll be right there, one step behind ya each time, making you expend the energy doing something you don’t enjoy, all the while your increasingly futile and illogical attempts to attack my person will only fuel my drive, like candy-coated amphetamines for formatives. I’ll be your Huckleberry, muthafuckhaaaa. I’ll be your Dexter. I’ll be “the one who
      knocks”, and I’ll relish every last second of it.

      Come at me bro, gimme your best shot, or are you too much of a fucktard pussy?

  27. Mike

    I retract my last assessment of you. I was lax with it. You are by far the most annoying blowhard that I’ve ever met on the web. As far as the trivium comment, I made a mistake, I “assumed” you understood my base in calling it out as part of critical thought and it’s process(es).
    As far as your last few paragraphs, you wax poetically all you want! as far as I am concerned, your some weak sister misanthrope somewhere in the woods! Perhaps the uni-bombers twin? lol! When I have used fucktard it has been as a retort. If not , please forgive me oh great one! lol! You see, I may possess many things, eidetic memory is not one of them, no excuse implied!. So if you are calling me out, I will say this, you have an obvious need to be top dog in some fashion. Perhaps through injury, insecurity, bad childhood? I give up! What I am saying is that I want no part of a mean spirited mental dalliance with someone who revels at negative debate. So Huckleberry, in a fashion that you might understand easier; I prefer to engage with the reality of my surroundings, not mince words with another wordsmith on the web to waste more of my personal time. If you consider this a win, Great! kudos to you Huckleberry! By the way, your weakness is your arrogance! lol! touché! No further communication will be made towards you from me! You are delusional . . .

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *