Marcus Spears or Michael Huff interested or not

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from mississippipatfan. Show mississippipatfan's posts

    Marcus Spears or Michael Huff interested or not

    Ravens have released both.  What you guys think?

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from NoMorePensionLooting. Show NoMorePensionLooting's posts

    Re: Marcus Spears or Michael Huff interested or not

    I'll kick the tires on anybody...why not...

    Huff can play at CB or Safety..

    I wanted the Pats to get Spears from Dallas....

    Likely both were available yesterday so no takers...

    They are done or Baltimore is going nowhere fast?

     

     

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Quagmire3. Show Quagmire3's posts

    Re: Marcus Spears or Michael Huff interested or not

    Yes, can I please have an order of Huff, with a side of Spears. If I dont like them I will just let them go and be right back where I started from.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from 49Patriots. Show 49Patriots's posts

    Re: Marcus Spears or Michael Huff interested or not

    Neither.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Eldunker. Show Eldunker's posts

    Re: Marcus Spears or Michael Huff interested or not

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Neither. I warned RKrap Huff sucked which was why Oakland walked from him.  RKrap was on here saying BB blew it by not targeting Huff.

    LMAO

    I believe he also was saying BB blew it with Spears.  RKrap caught again.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Troll much?

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bungalow-Bill. Show Bungalow-Bill's posts

    Re: Marcus Spears or Michael Huff interested or not

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Eldunker's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Neither. I warned RKrap Huff sucked which was why Oakland walked from him.  RKrap was on here saying BB blew it by not targeting Huff.

    LMAO

    I believe he also was saying BB blew it with Spears.  RKrap caught again.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Troll much?

    [/QUOTE]

    I am troll for being mocked when I was right again with my original premise, troll boy? Get back to the lame NBA boring Celts board.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Its better than this one. You don't post there.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bungalow-Bill. Show Bungalow-Bill's posts

    Re: Marcus Spears or Michael Huff interested or not

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Neither. I warned RKrap Huff sucked which was why Oakland walked from him.  RKrap was on here saying BB blew it by not targeting Huff.

    LMAO

    I believe he also was saying BB blew it with Spears.  RKrap caught again.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Ya, every time a team walks from someone its because the player sucks. Except when BB does it because he's one step ahead of the curve. LMAO @ U.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from rkarp. Show rkarp's posts

    Re: Marcus Spears or Michael Huff interested or not

    I never commented on Spears. I have only seen Spears play a couple of times on TV, but I recall he was a 1 gap DT, quick thru the gap, but not capable of playing 2 gap, meaning he isnt for this style of defense

    I did think Huff was a better option than AWilson. Remember him? He didnt make it to the first game.

     

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from rkarp. Show rkarp's posts

    Re: Marcus Spears or Michael Huff interested or not

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to rkarp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I never commented on Spears. I have only seen Spears play a couple of times on TV, but I recall he was a 1 gap DT, quick thru the gap, but not capable of playing 2 gap, meaning he isnt for this style of defense

    I did think Huff was a better option than AWilson. Remember him? He didnt make it to the first game.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I would rather have still gone after Wilson than Huff. To compare the two is embarrassing. Wilfork got hurt, Mayo got hurt. Stuff happens.  Guys lost a step, get hurt, etc. You have to get them in camp before you can judge.

    Good news is, in spot duty as a rookie, Harmon looks comfortable. That's a good sign.

    The point of this isn't what happens, but fit and the money. Wilson was a better player, option and much better value.

    How do you think the Texans feel with Ed Reed lumbering around on a bad hip and leg at 6 mil per? Stupid move.

    When Reed got 6, I said "go to get Wilson". It didn't work, but WIlson was clearly a better choice than Mike Freaking Huff whom Raiders fans could not stand.

    Finally, you did start whining about some DTs like Branch in Buffalo and others, where I believe Spears was mentioned by you.

    This was at the time you were drooling over every player signed by any AFC rival AFTER BB made any move. Remember?

    At the end of the day, I kept telling you the picture may not be complete. I'd rather have Sopoanga than Spears, Branch, etc.

    Main reason being he's better in the 3-4 than either.  And, he's now cheaper since half the season is gone. Thanks, BB.

    Anyway you slice it, you lost.  You and the MT Hurl dorks like to feel secure under a blanket with what BB does in FA in March and the summer.  You don't have to go shopping all at once.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I never wanted Reed, always thought he was a dirty player and bad guy. Never wanted AWilson, thought he slowed down too much. Had interest in Huff at the right price. Still do, at the right price he would be a good 3rd S. I am not impressed so far with Harmon, takes very poor angles, step too slow.  is more a SS than FS type imo.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from rkarp. Show rkarp's posts

    Re: Marcus Spears or Michael Huff interested or not

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Finally, RKrap...Here is the dead giveaway you are trolling as a troll:

    1. Mike Huff played with the Raiders. You admitted not watching much football outside of NE, not knowing who Tommy Kelly was which is why you whined when BB went after him.

    So, how could you know Huff's game enough to original analyze why Huff was a better move for us at Safety?

    We needed a SS type, not a FS, too.

    So, it's very suspicious that you thought Huff was a better option. Or, was it just an opportunity for you to use the anti-BB GM agenda to prop up Ozzie and his desperation moves you saw as trendy moves, as a way to troll?

    Hmmm?

    [/QUOTE]

    well, I never said I didnt know who Kelly was. You said I did, but I never said that. I have not seen much of the Raiders on TV...but listening to people whose job it is to know these things (not you), it was pretty clear Wilson was washed up. Huff still has his speed, but is not suited to play Ravens/Raiders gamble and press defense...he is much better suited for bend but do not break. Pretty good insurance for McCourty at the right price imo...I do not see a S on the team with the speed to sub in for McCourty 

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from TripleOG. Show TripleOG's posts

    Re: Marcus Spears or Michael Huff interested or not

     

    Good news is, in spot duty as a rookie, Harmon looks comfortable. That's a good sign.

     

    Is It really though Rusty? Last years rookie Tavon Wilson looked even better getting 4 INTs and playing a much bigger role and he has been buried on the bench this year and hasnt even logged a special teams tackle in half a season!  LMAO!  Sounds promising!

    Now to be clear. I like Ryan and Harmon has looked ok but Im not gonna use that to say its a good sign. He could completely S*ck next year like  a lot of Dbs here in year 2. McCourty, Bodden, Ellis Hobbs, Meriweather,etc. Sorry , bad example

     

    and this gem...

     

    Chris Jones has outproduced Sheldon Richardson, for example..

     

    Lol,. Really! we know you hate the jets but cmon buddy. This is trolling by YOUR definiton.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Muzwell. Show Muzwell's posts

    Re: Marcus Spears or Michael Huff interested or not

    Twice as many sacks for Jones in about half the playing time. I'd say that's better.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from TripleOG. Show TripleOG's posts

    Re: Marcus Spears or Michael Huff interested or not

    In response to Muzwell's comment:

     

    Twice as many sacks for Jones in about half the playing time. I'd say that's better.

     




    How is he vs the run?

     

    Its nice when teams want to pass but d lineman need to stop the run. He gets pushed around in that regard and last I checked we were last in the league in run defense. Yea I'll take Richardson over C.J.?  Take off the glasses muz

     

    C.J. has been doubled a lot lately which has freed up C.Jones to make plays but you cant ignore him being pushed 5 yards back on running plays. A team will never look to pass if they run all day on you.

    I dont know stats of other teams,.I know we lost to the Jets and they were all over brady. I know The Jets have 3 Very Good D lineman and that someone else could be making plays based on Richardson getting attention. Who knows. So yes C.Jones may have been more productive in numbers but lots of variables in that. I know what player I would take. Lets ask the scouts

     

    Jets Are #1 vs the Run. Thats his value.

    Does C.Jones have the Pats at # 1 vs the pass??

    NOPE!  Case closed

     

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from rkarp. Show rkarp's posts

    Re: Marcus Spears or Michael Huff interested or not

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to rkarp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Finally, RKrap...Here is the dead giveaway you are trolling as a troll:

    1. Mike Huff played with the Raiders. You admitted not watching much football outside of NE, not knowing who Tommy Kelly was which is why you whined when BB went after him.

    So, how could you know Huff's game enough to original analyze why Huff was a better move for us at Safety?

    We needed a SS type, not a FS, too.

    So, it's very suspicious that you thought Huff was a better option. Or, was it just an opportunity for you to use the anti-BB GM agenda to prop up Ozzie and his desperation moves you saw as trendy moves, as a way to troll?

    Hmmm?

    [/QUOTE]

    well, I never said I didnt know who Kelly was. You said I did, but I never said that. I have not seen much of the Raiders on TV...but listening to people whose job it is to know these things (not you), it was pretty clear Wilson was washed up. Huff still has his speed, but is not suited to play Ravens/Raiders gamble and press defense...he is much better suited for bend but do not break. Pretty good insurance for McCourty at the right price imo...I do not see a S on the team with the speed to sub in for McCourty 

    [/QUOTE]

    Name your sources.  I could out-debate any one of your sources in milliseconds . Your sources suck and and have always sucked.  They're freaking terrible. 

    Chris Jones has outproduced Sheldon Richardson, for example. He wasn't even in our camp and has played fewer games. That is one example. Another one is you saying "I am hearing Kelly might be put on IR".

    Then, a week later, you become exposed after your troll work. Kelly is practicing. Mind you, this is WEEKS after BB could have put Kelly on IR if he had a tear. You're a liar and/or your trolling, anti-BB sources blow.

    In a reduced role, Wilson would have been a very good fit here.  It appears he was beaten out in camp. Let the chips fall where they may, is what I say. A draft pick like Harmon, someone who people whined about on the heels of Logan Ryan, showing strong signs in camp as a cheaper player, is fine by me.

    I want whatever works for the team now and in the future.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    My source on Huff is Ray Lewis

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from rkarp. Show rkarp's posts

    Re: Marcus Spears or Michael Huff interested or not

    Droy-1 and 1A-Alonso and Richardson

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsLifer. Show PatsLifer's posts

    Re: Marcus Spears or Michael Huff interested or not

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Umm, 5 sacks in 5 games, Shizzles? Hmm? That's better than Richardson.

    26 tackles and more tackles for loss than Richardson.

    Case closed. Yes, he is outproducing Richardson and in fewer games. Shizzles exposed not doing his homework and listening to pro Jets ESPN hype instead. lmao

     

    http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/stats/_/id/15955/chris-jones

    http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/stats/_/id/15811/sheldon-richardson

    [/QUOTE]

    I posted on another thread jones vs Richardson. If we use stats alone, Russ is correct. Jones has more tackles and sacks than Richardson When you normalize the stats for games played. 

    I know dt's are asked to do different things/assignments so hard to say which one is better? Vw didn't get many sacks but I would love to have him right about now. 

     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. This post has been removed.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share