as with most of these "reporters," this clown doesn't waste him time looking for facts. rather, he simply spouts the same old tired cliches, and the idiot sheeple eat it up.
<div> </div>
<div>in the above "report," i find
at least 3 easily-refuted factual errors.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>
false statement #1: "Garcon has more talent and upside ..." </div>
<div>
the truth: Gonzalez at the same height is slightly faster, significantly more agile, and can jump higher than Garcon, and drops fewer passes, but is slightly less strong and has been hampered by injuries and thus has missed a lot of practice/game time. one might think that those factors would indicate Gonzalez is, in fact, more talented and potentially has more upside than Garcon. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>Austin Collie, while not as fast in a straight line at the same size as Garcon has superior agility and quickness, has better hands (as shown by his more receptions with fewer drops), and is just a rookie. one might think that Collie, while not as impressive on a stop watch is equally talented (as shown by how difficult he is to cover) on the football field, and since he's only played one year that he might have superior upside.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>
false statement #2: "Gonzalez and Collie are reliable, move the chain type receivers, who are not the most talented ... "</div>
<div>
the truth: as shown in my explanation above, Gonzalez is a superior athlete to Garcon judging by the exact same standards as the "reporter" uses to cite Garcon's talent. so how is it possible that Gonzalez isn't more talented? this is obvious anti-White bias. Collie isn't as fast in a straight line, nor can he jump as high, as Garcon, yet he is quicker, more agile, and drops fewer balls. it would seem like each of these players is talented, albeit in different areas.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>on the field, Garcon only managed 4 catches and averaged a mere 5.8 yards-per-catch as a rookie, and had 0 touchdowns, yet he has "upside." as rookies, Gonzalez had 37 catches, averaged 15.6 yards-per, and snared 3 touchdowns, and Collie had 60 catches, averaged 11.3 yards-per, and 7 touchdowns ... yet these two players are apparently over-achievers. how exactly does that work?</div>
<div> </div>
<div>
false statement #3: "Collie ... with youth on his side ... "</div>
<div>
the truth: Collie is actually 9 months older than Garcon. i mean, do these "reporter" guys get
anything right? they manage to screw up even innocuous information like this. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>with that obvious fact, how can anyone expect them to get the difficult ideas and stories correct?
</div>
