Ok, guys. Frank has stopped drinking and is serious about this season. I can’t stop drinking for more than 8hrs at a time so Clark’s abstinence is notable and impressive. He and Andy had a heart to heart, shared some cheeseburgers (Frank is probably now also vegan and went Impossible Burger), chugged some Mr. Pibb, and came to an understanding.
Watch his presser from today. It’s probably one of the most real and honest things I’ve seen from a player. If you’re rooting against Frank Clark after that you’re probably either repressing some demons in your life or are related to Red Dawg.
This is a safe space to celebrate Frank Clark this season. 8 sack minimum. Let’s build this guy up rather than choosing to spend the season breaking him down.
Join me on the Shark bandwagon. There’s blood in the water.
And the obligatory: keep doubting Frank fucking Clark. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
You can't be THAT familiar with the beginning if your statement was "he doesn't fall down at all..." Unless you knew full well what happened at the beginning of that play and were just being disinguous as hell about it.
You do realize the implication from your initial post was that his falling down had a direct impact on his causing the fumble. As if he fell down in the act of it. That’s what I was disagreeing with.
If you want to claim that his falling down had some impact on the evolution of the play, sure, I acknowledge that. Things happen on every play that alter the course of how things may or may not go.
Do the Chiefs win that game if Clark isn’t on the field for that snap? I don’t think so. [Reply]
Originally Posted by TwistedChief:
I guess the difference here is you seem to view strip sacks as just a normal play that’s easily made. Anyone can do it. It came to him and he was expected to do that when Mills broke from the pocket.
Right.
It's not a strip sack. At all.
Guys 5 yards past the LOS and has Frank Clark in his dust.
A strip sack would require Frank Clark actually get upfield on a rush - something that he doesn't demonstrate an ability to do with any regularity at all. That MIGHT have been worth giving him credit for. Instead he just got smoked by the LT and beat to the corner by a statue.
If Willie Gay doesn't turn Mills inside, Clark's toasted. By Davis !@#$ing Mills.
Clark was the beneficiary of his teammates salvaging another of his shitty reps after Master Edge Setter got beat so badly he left the corner wide open for Mike Vick 2.0 to get outside of the pocket and into the open field.
And you're sitting here acting like we should be lighting candles in his honor. [Reply]
Originally Posted by TwistedChief:
You do realize the implication from your initial post was that his falling down had a direct impact on his causing the fumble. As if he fell down in the act of it. That’s what I was disagreeing with.
If you want to claim that his falling down had some impact on the evolution of the play, sure, I acknowledge that. Things happen on every play that alter the course of how things may or may not go.
Do the Chiefs win that game if Clark isn’t on the field for that snap? I don’t think so.
If Frank Clark wasn't so bad at football that he'd been fired into the earth's core by Tunsil, they might not win that game.
What's that have to do with Clark's ability as a football player? WAY TO SUCK, FRANK!! Couldn't have done it without ya, bud. Please don't ever improve.
His shittyness had more than a 'direct impact' on the play - it was the play's determining factor. So? Daniel Sorensen made a few plays where he was simply beaten like a rented mule so he was there to punch a football away - doesn't mean he wasn't a bad football player.
Originally Posted by Hammock Parties:
DJ in this thread every week. :-)
In my defense, I've gotten fairly subdued in this thread until the "Do you guys even football, bro!" shit starts.
The thread becomes an empty chair interview when guys congratulate themselves for how right they are about the re-emergent greatness of Frank Clark and then start sucking their own dicks about it.
I hadn't posted in this thread in about a month. And for the most part haven't said anything since before his suspension. But the bullshit was getting piled up just a little too deep in here... [Reply]
Frank is complete dogshit. He’s trying to time snaps these days because he can’t beat any LT off the snap with a quick first step. And he’s too light and soft to win a hand battle.
Until I went and rewatched that play I didn’t realize he got beat so badly initially on the play. Tunsil took pity on him by not burying him right there. [Reply]
If he presents a credible threat on that play, Tunsil finishes his block. But because he is shitty like a fox, Tunsil treated him like a non-factor and BOOM - blood. in. the. water.
You simply don't football enough. If you did, you'd understand that Clark being terrible is an asset. [Reply]
Originally Posted by KCUnited:
Lulls them to sleep with that clinch walk then BOOM the edge is set
Look at you out here playing checkers while Cassius is playing 4D chess.
Setting the edge is for suckers. Clark gets DEMOLISHED on the edge so he can go out there and force game-altering turnovers, brah.
You really don't understand how this works. Obi Clarknobi is out here Jedi Mind-Tricking LTs into taking plays off. "I'm not the Pro Bowler you're looking for..." [Reply]
Originally Posted by Reroka:
He still sucks but better than last year and for a much better price. If he wants to stay here he needs to take a major pay cut.
If he wants to stay here, are you fucking kidding… [Reply]
Originally Posted by Titty Meat:
Clark could get injured tomorrow and it would have 0 impact on the defense
I'm going to have to disagree with you here. That means George, Dunlap, Danna and CJ probably take more snaps at DE thus we get more production. [Reply]
