SimpleJack
Registered User
- Jul 25, 2013
- 6,415
- 4,044
Look I’m gonna be blunt here…the one thing I can’t stand is this relentless need by certain posters with a clear and obvious agenda to point out that before being drafted Bedard was overhyped and wrongfully compared to McDavid/Crosby by certain analysts/pundits. I just can’t believe how many times this has to be said. No matter how much good he does, no matter what promise he shows, it’s always the same response: “But what about pre draft when those random other people said he would be even better? As good as McDavid and generational??” And it’s always the same usual suspects repeating it with the same amount of snark.
For example, If you can’t tell by now that Whiskey has an agenda against Bedard then you’ve got the IQ of a mosquito.
I’ll break it down for those of you that are a little slow(I know, ironic coming from someone with my username, right?):
There’s a lot of posts here, and naturally some of them are at least somewhat incorrect either in favor of or against Bedard(both those praising and those bashing him). In return you then have the replies to those posts that correct the initial poster and/or present evidence to refute someone’s BS. Whiskey has liked I’m pretty sure literally every single one of the replies to those posts that were praising him too much/incorrectly. And how many of the replies to posts that were wrongfully calling Bedard out/bashing Bedard has Whiskey liked?? Look for yourself. I haven’t seen one yet. Not one. Unless he reads this and then goes back and likes some for cover, which I wouldn’t put past him.
Anyways…it’s beyond obvious, and it’s sad really. He makes a lot of good points and is correct in many cases when he’s pointing out that Bedard hasn’t been on a generational/McDavid-caliber level. But he’s not neutral like he pretends to be. Not in a million years. If he was then we’d see that same sound logic being used to defend Bedard, at least once or twice, given his level of overall participation in the general Bedard discussion. And THAT is what bothers the hell out of me. And to think all of it is just because he’s salty that Bedard is better than Jack Hughes….SMH.
For example, If you can’t tell by now that Whiskey has an agenda against Bedard then you’ve got the IQ of a mosquito.
I’ll break it down for those of you that are a little slow(I know, ironic coming from someone with my username, right?):
There’s a lot of posts here, and naturally some of them are at least somewhat incorrect either in favor of or against Bedard(both those praising and those bashing him). In return you then have the replies to those posts that correct the initial poster and/or present evidence to refute someone’s BS. Whiskey has liked I’m pretty sure literally every single one of the replies to those posts that were praising him too much/incorrectly. And how many of the replies to posts that were wrongfully calling Bedard out/bashing Bedard has Whiskey liked?? Look for yourself. I haven’t seen one yet. Not one. Unless he reads this and then goes back and likes some for cover, which I wouldn’t put past him.
Anyways…it’s beyond obvious, and it’s sad really. He makes a lot of good points and is correct in many cases when he’s pointing out that Bedard hasn’t been on a generational/McDavid-caliber level. But he’s not neutral like he pretends to be. Not in a million years. If he was then we’d see that same sound logic being used to defend Bedard, at least once or twice, given his level of overall participation in the general Bedard discussion. And THAT is what bothers the hell out of me. And to think all of it is just because he’s salty that Bedard is better than Jack Hughes….SMH.